TH v The Queen
Case
•
[2019] NSWCCA 184
•14 August 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
TH v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 184
[2019] NSWCCA 184
14 August 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of TH v The Queen involved an appeal against a sentence imposed by a sentencing judge. The applicant, TH, was convicted of one count of aggravated indecent assault of a child under the age of 16 years. The complainant was TH's granddaughter, who stayed at his home and slept in his bed. The applicant was found to have pulled down the complainant's pants while pressed against her, and the sentencing judge determined that TH had an erection and had ejaculated during the assault. TH claimed that he had an incontinence problem and had unintentionally urinated on the complainant. This claim was relevant to the assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending. The issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge's finding of fact was consistent with the jury's verdict, given that the veracity of TH's alleged incontinence was cast into doubt by the evidence presented.
The court considered whether the sentencing judge's finding was the only rational inference from the facts. The court determined that the finding was indeed the only rational inference, and that it was made beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the evidence supported the conclusion that TH had ejaculated during the assault, and that his claim of incontinence was not credible. The court found that the sentencing judge's finding was consistent with the jury's verdict, and that there was no basis for the appeal to succeed.
The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence imposed by the sentencing judge was upheld. The court found that the sentencing judge's assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending was appropriate, given the circumstances of the case. The court noted that the aggravated indecent assault of a child was a serious offence, and that the sentence imposed reflected the gravity of the offending. The court concluded that the appeal was without merit, and that the original sentence was appropriate. The orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed, and that the original sentence be upheld.
The court considered whether the sentencing judge's finding was the only rational inference from the facts. The court determined that the finding was indeed the only rational inference, and that it was made beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the evidence supported the conclusion that TH had ejaculated during the assault, and that his claim of incontinence was not credible. The court found that the sentencing judge's finding was consistent with the jury's verdict, and that there was no basis for the appeal to succeed.
The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence imposed by the sentencing judge was upheld. The court found that the sentencing judge's assessment of the objective seriousness of the offending was appropriate, given the circumstances of the case. The court noted that the aggravated indecent assault of a child was a serious offence, and that the sentence imposed reflected the gravity of the offending. The court concluded that the appeal was without merit, and that the original sentence was appropriate. The orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed, and that the original sentence be upheld.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Criminal Liability
-
Appeal
-
Sentencing
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
TH v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 184
Most Recent Citation
Ninyette v The State of Western Australia [2025] WASCA 52
Cases Citing This Decision
12
R v BH
[2023] NSWDC 276
Taufa v R; Siola'a v R
[2020] NSWCCA 264
Azzopardi v R
[2019] NSWCCA 306
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
1
Hordern v R
[2019] NSWCCA 138
Aoun v R
[2011] NSWCCA 284
Peters v R
[2013] NSWCCA 324