Schulz v The Queen

The case of Schulz v The Queen involved an appeal against conviction and sentence by the applicant, Schulz, against the respondent, the Crown. The applicant was convicted of grooming, sexual penetration of a child under 16, indecent acts with a child under 16, and possession of child pornography. The trial judge found that the child was under Schulz's care and supervision, and he was aware of her vulnerability. The Court of Appeal was required to consider the admissibility of certain evidence, the safety of the verdicts, and the length of the sentence imposed.

The court examined the admissibility of Facebook messages and copies of pornographic material under the Evidence Act 2008. The court considered whether the probative value of the evidence outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice. The court found that the evidence was properly admitted as it was relevant to the charges and the probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The court also found that the verdicts were reasonably open on the evidence.

The Court of Appeal considered whether the sentence was manifestly excessive. The court noted that the child was under Schulz's care and supervision, and he was aware of her vulnerability. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the seriousness of the offences and the breach of trust. The court did, however, allow the appeal in part with respect to the sentence on one charge, following a concession by the Crown.

The final orders of the Court of Appeal were that the convictions were upheld, but the sentence was varied in part. The non-parole period for the charge of sexual penetration of a child under 16 was reduced to 6 years. The appeal against conviction was otherwise dismissed, and leave to appeal to the High Court was refused.