Regina v BR - [2009] NSWDC 116

CITATION: Regina v BR [2009] NSWDC 116

JUDGMENT DATE:
8 April 2009

JURISDICTION: District Court of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Cogswell SC DCJ

DECISION: Overall sentence of 18 years with non-parole period of 13 years.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - child sexual assault - victims part of offender's family - letter of apology - psychological report - protective custody - victim impact statement -matters relevant to objective seriousness

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900 s66A
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

CASES CITED: Regina v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575
Regina v Davis [1999] NSWCCA 15
Regina v Dent (unreported NSWCCA 14 March 1991)
Regina v Hibberd [2009] NSWCCA 20
Regina v Skinner (1993) 72 A Crim R 151

PARTIES: R
BR

FILE NUMBER(S): 2008/12667

COUNSEL: Mr Hancock (def)

SOLICITORS: Ms Gray (NSW DPP)

JUDGMENT

1. I have the task now of sentencing BR for a series of shocking and appalling sexual offences committed against young children. The young children were part of his family. One of the children was in fact his own son.

2. The place to start is to briefly tell the court what BR did to bring about the charges that I am sentencing him for. In about 2002 BR commenced a relationship with a woman whom I will refer to as KJ. I refer to her by initials only because of the law that provides that the victims of sexual offences should not be identified. KJ, when they commenced their relationship, already had four children. One was a girl, LH; she is now aged eleven. The other three were boys, DH now ten, LH now nine and RJS now six. During their relationship a child was born to them both; he is BRJ and is now three. During their relationship BR and KJ lived at various places around Sydney. The offences were committed by BR against all of the children that I have referred to.

3. Exhibit A contains a summary of what happened which is agreed between the prosecution and the defence. The first offence occurred in the first half of 2006. The victim was LH. She was eight or nine at the time. Her mother KJ was either at work or asleep. What BR did to eight or nine year old LH was to remove the clothing from the lower part of her body and then proceed to have sexual intercourse with her. That sexual intercourse was full penile vaginal intercourse. Next were two more offences committed by BR against LH. The first of those occurred in January 2006. KJ’s half brother, a person I will refer to as WH, visited BR’s home. BR asked WH what he would do if the girl LH sucked him off. BR then directed LH, still aged eight or nine, to suck his penis which she proceeded to do. About two or three months later WH again visited the family. BR showed all of the children in the house a pornographic film and they masturbated.…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Regina v BR

Details

AGLC: Regina v BR [2009] NSWDC 116
Case: [2009] NSWDC 116
Decision Date: 8 April 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Regina v BR, the offender was sentenced for multiple counts of child sexual assault against his step-daughters. The High Court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for these serious and heinous crimes. The case involved complex considerations surrounding the offender's relationship to the victims, the impact of the crimes on the victims, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

The court was required to weigh various factors, including the nature of the offences, the offender's lack of remorse as evidenced by his letter of apology, the psychological impact on the victims, and the objective seriousness of the crimes. Additionally, the court considered the protective measures that should be put in place to ensure the safety of the victims and the community. The offender's offending history, his potential for rehabilitation, and the impact of the crimes on the victims and their families were also taken into account.

The court held that the crimes were of an extremely serious nature, given the offender's position of trust and the vulnerability of the victims. The court noted the lack of remorse shown by the offender, which was further evidenced by his inadequate letter of apology. The psychological impact on the victims was significant, as reflected in their victim impact statements. The court determined that a substantial sentence was necessary to reflect the gravity of the offences, to provide deterrence, and to protect the community. The overall sentence was set at 18 years, with a non-parole period of 13 years, to ensure that the offender serves a significant period of time before being considered for release.

Orders

Orders of the court

Overall sentence of 18 years with non-parole period of 13 years.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Regina v BR [2009] NSWDC 116
JUDGMENT DATE:	8 April 2009
JURISDICTION:	District Court of New South Wales
JUDGMENT OF:	Cogswell SC DCJ
DECISION:	Overall sentence of 18 years with non-parole period of 13 years.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - child sexual assault - victims part of offender's family - letter of apology - psychological report - protective custody - victim impact statement -matters relevant to objective seriousness
LEGISLATION CITED:	Crimes Act 1900 s66A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
CASES CITED:	Regina v AJP (2004) 150 A Crim R 575 Regina v Davis [1999] NSWCCA 15 Regina v Dent (unreported NSWCCA 14 March 1991) Regina v Hibberd [2009] NSWCCA 20 Regina v Skinner (1993) 72 A Crim R 151
PARTIES:	R BR
FILE NUMBER(S):	2008/12667
COUNSEL:	Mr Hancock (def)
SOLICITORS:	Ms Gray (NSW DPP)