R v Zonneveld

[2019] ACTSC 122

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v Zonneveld

Citation:

[2019] ACTSC 122

Hearing Date:

9 May 2019

DecisionDate:

9 May 2019

Before:

Elkaim J

Decision:

See [20]

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – conspire to commit bestiality

Legislation: 

Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 48

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 63A

Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) ss 6, 7, 10, 33

Cases cited:

R v Lee [2019] ACTSC 14

Zonneveld v The Queen (No 2) [2018] ACTCA 31

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

Mark Zonneveld (Offender)

Representation:

Counsel

Ms S Beaumont (Crown)

Mr S Whybrow (Offender)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

Aulich Criminal Law (Offender)

File Number:

SCC 286 of 2016

ELKAIM J:

1. On 4 February 2018, the offender pleaded guilty to a single charge of conspiring to commit bestiality contrary to s 63A of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), by virtue of s 48 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT). The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years’ imprisonment.

1. On 7 February 2019, I sentenced the offender’s co-conspirator, Jeffrey Lee, to imprisonment for 2 years for his role in this offence. I should note however that there was a vast array of other offences for which Mr Lee was also sentenced (R v Lee [2019] ACTSC 14 (Lee)).

1. This is what I said about this offence when sentencing Mr Lee, [19]:

The brief facts of this offence involved the offender and another man who met on an internet site called Adult Match Maker which is commonly used for people interested in engaging in sexual activity with each other. The accused and the other man both had an interest in cross dressing and bestiality. They exchanged many messages and photographs of a pornographic nature of each other including photographs involving a dog. There were also a number of video files depicting bestiality. This specific offence is made up of the two men conspiring to carry out sexual activity with a dog called Buddy. The plans that were discussed concerning Buddy included the performance of oral sex upon the dog. Once again the specific details are in the Statement of Facts. I see no reason to repeat them but observe that they dig down to the very depths of depravity. I do however, note that the acts which were proposed to take place before 17 March 2011 were not then illegal.

1. I note that this offender’s case is that he did not have an interest in bestiality but rather in the assistance it would provide in the pursuit of Mr Lee. I will return to this below.

1. At first sight the offender’s plea of guilty does not appear to have been made at a very early stage. However I note that the Crown is not entirely without blame in this regard and that prior to the present indictment there was a long history of delay on the part of the Crown (Zonneveld…