Towse v R

Towse appealed against his sentence for offences committed against his nine-year-old stepdaughter. The crimes included multiple instances of sexual touching and intercourse, committed over a week, and were prosecuted under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The sentencing judge acknowledged the serious breach of trust involved in the crimes but determined that the objective seriousness placed the offending below the mid-range, but above the low range. The court was required to decide whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, considering the 35% discount for early plea and assistance to authorities, and to compare it to similar cases.

The court examined comparable cases, including Burr v R, Eacott v R, Mills v R, and GP v R, to assess whether the starting point for sentencing was beyond the usual range. The court considered that Towse's intellectual capabilities and the likelihood of rehabilitation might affect the relevance of general deterrence. The court found that the sentencing judge had properly assessed the discount and the overall severity of the crimes, taking into account all relevant factors.

The appeal was dismissed as the court found no error in the sentencing judge's approach. The sentence imposed was deemed appropriate, reflecting the gravity of the offences while considering the offender's characteristics and the circumstances of the case. The court concluded that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, and the discount applied was reasonable.

The court made no orders altering the sentence. The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence stood affirmed.