R v Ashby
[2019] NZHC 2156
•30 August 2019
NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT(S) PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE
CRI-2017-092-12270 CRI-2016-092-8555
[2019] NZHC 2156
THE QUEEN v
HEMI ASHBY
Hearing: 30 August 2019 Appearances:
M Williams for Crown T Darby for Defendant
Sentence:
30 August 2019
SENTENCING NOTES OF WALKER J
R v ASHBY [2019] NZHC 2156 [30 August 2019]
Summary
[1] Mr Hemi Ashby, you appear for sentencing on charges against three different victims as follows:
(a)On 6 November 2017, you pleaded guilty to an indecent act on a child under 12 years old (representative),1 and indecent communication with a young person under 16 (representative),2 relating to the first victim;
(b)On 30 January 2018, you pleaded guilty to one count of an indecent act on a child under 12 years old (representative), and one count of an indecent act on a child under 12 years old, relating to the second victim;3
(c)On 21 February 2019, you pleaded guilty to three counts of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection against the third victim.4
[2] The charges span a period between 2012 to 2016. The three victims were aged between seven (7) and nine (9) years old at the time of the offending.
Agreed summary of facts
[3] It is regrettably necessary to describe your offending to provide context, as sentencing is a public event. I will not in these remarks refer to the victims by name. This is solely to protect their identity. In adopting this course, I intend no disrespect to the victims or their families, nor to depersonalise the offending or treat them as anything but innocent victims of criminal wrongdoing.
First Victim - K
[4] K was an eight or nine-year-old at the time of your offending. You were 25 or 26 years of age. She was the younger step-sister of your girlfriend. She lived with
1 Crimes Act 1961, s 132(3). The maximum penalty is 10 years’ imprisonment.
2 Crimes Act 1961, s 124A. The maximum penalty is three years’ imprisonment.
3 Crimes Act 1961, s 132(3). The maximum penalty is 10 years’ imprisonment.
4 Crimes Act 1961, ss 128 and 128B. The maximum penalty is 20 years’ imprisonment.
her mother and siblings at her mother’s house. You also lived there between November or December 2014 and January 2016. You indecently assaulted K a number of times: attempting to pull down her pants (succeeding on one occasion); kissing her; touching her thigh; touching her vagina (on at least two occasions). Some of these incidents occurred in K’s bedroom; others occurred in the lounge or elsewhere on the property.
[5] Between November 2015 and January 2016, you sent K text messages. Many were sexually explicit. I do not propose to spell out the content, suffice to say they graphically described sexual acts you wanted to carry out on her and asked her to expose her genitalia and “Bluetooth” the images to you. You repeatedly told K to make sure she deleted your messages to her.
[6] In January 2016, your girlfriend found some of the messages. K told her mother some of your indecent acts. Her mother confronted you. You said K made the allegations up to hide the fact you caught her smoking. When the police spoke to you, you admitted touching K on her vagina over her underwear on one occasion. You admitted sending her a number of “stupid” text messages.
Victim Two - N
[7] N was another younger step-sister of your girlfriend. She was a seven or eight- year-old living at the same house. You indecently assaulted N a number of times; on one occasion touching her around her bottom and vagina (without actually touching her vagina) and on multiple occasions, touching or attempting to touch her vagina.
Victim Three - T
[8] T was about seven to nine years old at the time of the offending. She suffers from learning and hearing difficulties. Her academic age is below her actual age.
[9] The victim’s mother was in a relationship with your stepfather. You lived in the same house as T for periods during 2012 to 2014. On more than one occasion, you went into T’s bedroom while she was sleeping:
(a)On one occasion, you put your penis in T’s anus;
(b)On one occasion, you put your mouth on her genitals;
(c)On multiple occasions, you put your penis in her mouth.
[10] T did not disclose the offending at the time. When she was 12 years old (i.e. some 3–5 years later), she was with her mother watching a television show. It involved a sex scene which her mother tried to “fast forward”. T saw it and began asking questions of her mother. This led to T saying you had put your “thingee” in her “bum bum”. T reported that her anus was sore afterwards.
[11] You said that in general you could not really remember anything from that period of your life because you were drunk and stoned all the time
Victim impact statements
[12] The Court has been provided with the victim impact statement from K and N’s mother, and today a statement was made on behalf of victim, T. They make for very sad reading. The impact is immense. They speak of mental anguish on the whole family, the breach of trust and emotional damage to a young victim can never be underestimated.
Provision of Advice to the Court
[13] Two pre-sentence reports (9 April 2019 and 19 April 2018) have been prepared by the Department of Corrections. In the 2019 report it is recommended you be assessed for, engage in, and complete the Child Sex Offending Programme at Te Piriti, in Auckland Prison, and attend programmes to address your addiction issues. Aspects of those reports are concerning insofar as you were said to be “ambivalent about the extent of the offending, not wanting to admit to it all”. You even at one time suggested it had been exaggerated.
[14] I note, however, that this report is a significant improvement from the 2018 report in which you were assessed as lacking insight into your harmful behaviour, with low remorse based on responses lacking depth and empathy.
[15] Both reports assessed you to be high-risk of reoffending at this time given your young age and extensive criminal history. You are assessed as high-risk of harm given your criminal history. The report writers both recommended a sentence of imprisonment.
[16] Two psychiatric reports have been prepared under s 88 of the Sentencing Act 2002. Each assesses the likelihood of you reoffending in the future. One is from Dr Rishi Duggal (20 May 2019) and the other from Dr John Jacques (21 May 2019). Both are consultant psychiatrists from the Mason Clinic.
[17] Dr Duggal also prepared a report (30 August 2019) assessing the type and length of sentence that might be imposed on you. This was ordered under s 38(1)(c) Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003. This report concluded that you met the criteria for: paedophilic disorder; post-traumatic stress disorder; alcohol and drug abuse disorder (although currently in remission because you are on remand) and antisocial personality disorder.
[18] In addition, I note there are a bundle of other psychiatric reports pre-dating the pre-sentence reports to which I will return.
Personal circumstances
[19]You are now 29 years old.
[20] Dr Duggal suggests you were probably exposed to alcohol and drugs in-utero. You had a violent home life. Both your mother and your step-father belonged to a gang. You say you experienced physical abuse at home. You described yourself as a naughty child. Dr Duggal says you presented with hyperactivity, oppositional behaviour and physical aggression. You say you were sexually abused as a child by a male kindergarten teacher, then during early and middle childhood by a 16-year-old female aunt. You were expelled from school and ran away from home at 13. You
lived on the streets. You consumed alcohol, engaged in glue sniffing and smoked cannabis. You say you were further sexually abused by a couple you stayed with during this period of living on the streets.
[21] At 14, you lived with your paternal grandmother. You have described this as a positive living situation. You developed a relationship with a girl but were too anxious to progress the relationship because of your past abuse. You say you were subsequently induced by a female cousin to have sex with her under the influence of alcohol. You engaged in violent behaviour during high school and left school at 16. Your drug use increased. You used party pills, ‘magic’ mushrooms and methamphetamine.
[22] You had lived with a woman when you were 18 to 23 years old. The relationship involved significant conflict and you report that you attempted suicide numerous times. At that stage you were using methamphetamine on a daily basis. In 2006, you assaulted your partner’s five-year-old sister. This offending did not come to light until 2011. In 2011, the victim made a statement that you locked her in a room and lay on top of her, so she could feel your penis against her vagina while you both had clothes on. In August 2012, you were convicted of two counts of assaulting a female under 12 years old and were sentenced to one-year’s imprisonment.
[23] You met the partner you were with at the time of the current offending in 2014, when you were approximately 25 years old. You have a son (living with the partner) and a daughter (informally adopted to another relative).
[24] You have had short-term periods of work in various industries, which you describe as ending because of your angry outbursts at being told what to do, and due to taking drugs and alcohol at work. Following your remand in custody in 2017, you have obtained some NZEA credits.
[25] You have been involved with mental health services since you were 17 or 18. I have read a substantial number of psychiatric reports and reports of other mental health professionals. It is unnecessary to recount the detail of these for today’s
purposes, however they establish a history of trauma and significant mental health issues which I have taken these into account.
[26] Your criminal history is significant, involving convictions for a number of violent offences. You received your first custodial sentence in 2008. At the assessment interview you were not assessed as being remorseful about your prior violent offending, stating that much of it was due to alcohol abuse and your prior traumatic experiences. In summary, your own personal history is marked by trauma, drug and alcohol abuse and disorder. You have suffered disadvantage from an early age.
Other relevant context
[27] I record that there have significant delays in getting this case determined and finalised. You pleaded guilty in respect of the first victim on 6 November 2017; on 30 January 2018 in respect of the second victim, and 21 February 2019 in respect of the third victim. Some delay arose from a question about whether you were fit to plea. The Manukau District Court instructed preparation of a psychiatric report to assess this. The report was prepared on 20 September 2018. The report writer, Dr John Jacques, concluded that you were not unfit to stand trial and were capable of instructing counsel to conduct a defence.
[28] In mid-August 2019, in anticipation of the sentencing date today, your counsel filed a memorandum seeking an adjournment. Mr Darby, on your behalf, advised that you had requested a s 27 Cultural Report, but that report would not be completed by the date of sentencing. According to Mr Darby, that report would not have been available at the earliest until the week commencing 28 October 2019.
[29] Understandably, the Crown opposed that application because of the serial delays, the rights and interests of the victims, the failure to explain the most recent delay in producing that report, and the fact that the Court has the benefit of multiple psychological reports which present a clear picture of your upbringing and disassociation from your cultural roots.
[30] By Minute dated 23 August 2019, Moore J refused the application for further adjournment. The compelling reasons were because of the historic delays, including
that if an adjournment were granted it will have taken more than eight months from your final guilty plea until date of sentencing, and almost five months since the process of obtaining a cultural report commenced; the interests of the victims and their families who are entitled to finality and certainty, the failure to explain the unavailability of the report and the wealth of information already available from alternative sources. Moore J took into account s 27(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 by which the Court is required to hear a person or persons called by an offender unless the Court is satisfied there is some special reason that makes this unnecessary or inappropriate. He concluded that the various reports already received provided sufficient information.
Finite Sentencing
[31] The Crown submits today that a finite sentence is inadequate and that I should impose a sentence of preventive detention with a minimum term. This means, an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment, the purpose of which is to protect the community from those who pose a significant and ongoing risk to the community.5
[32] A minimum term may be imposed under the Act if I am satisfied that the usual parole period is insufficient for any of the following purposes in ordinary sentencing principles.6 The principles are:
(a)holding the offender accountable for the harm to the victims and community as a result of the offending;
(b)denouncing the conduct in which the offender was involved;
(c)deterring the offender or other persons from committing the same or a similar offence; and
(d)protecting the community from the offender.
[33]I intend to approach this sentencing in two stages.
5 R v Hutchison [2007] NZCA 55 at [18].
6 Sentencing Act 2002, s 86.
[34] The first stage is to consider the scope and sufficiency of any finite sentence to determine whether this in fact provides adequate protection for the community.7 I bear in mind that the law requires me to impose the least restrictive outcome appropriate in the circumstances.8
[35] At this first stage, I must consider the purposes and principles of sentencing set out in ss 7 and 8 of the Sentencing Act 2002 (the Act). Of particular relevance to this serious offending is the need to denounce your conduct, to deter others, to protect the community and to hold you accountable for the serious harm you have caused to the young people and their families. I am required to identify a starting point which is consistent with other cases before making adjustment to reflect your culpability, the seriousness of the offending and relevant aggravating or mitigating features personal to you.9
[36] In doing so, I have taken into account the submissions made by the Crown and those made on your behalf of you by your counsel, along with the cases referred to me by both and which are set out in footnotes to my sentencing remarks.10 The case of R v AM is the guideline judgment. It describes bands for sexual offending.11 These bands are not to be applied in any kind of formulaic way but provide guidance to be applied flexibly.12
[37] I first identify aggravating features identify in respect of the lead (or most serious) offending against T. They are:
(a)Scale of the offending: The offending against T was repeated and over a lengthy period. It comprised one incident of anal penetration, one incident of oral/vaginal penetration and multiple occasions of penile penetration of the victim’s mouth. The precise number of occasions is unclear, but what is clear is that it was protracted.
7 Sentencing Act 2002, s 87(4)(e).
8 Sentencing Act 2002, s 8(g).
9 Hessell v R [2010] NZSC 135, [2011] 1 NZLR 607 at [73].
10 R v Gordon [2009] NZCA 145; Ritebono v R [2018] NZCA 598; Nicolson v R [2018] NZCA 352.
11 R v AM (CA27/2009) [2010] NZCA 114; [2010] 2 NZLR 750.
12 R v AM at [36].
(b)Vulnerability of the victim: T’s learning and hearing difficulties increased the vulnerability which is a natural incident of her young age.
(c)Breach of trust: You were living in T’s home at the time of the offending; it took place when you entered her bedroom where she was sleeping. T’s home ought to have been a safe place for her, a place of refuge. Your conduct shattered that and effectively stole her childhood.
(d)Planning and premeditation: The repeated nature of the offending, and the fact it took place when the victim was alone and sleeping in her bedroom, suggest a degree of planning and premeditation. This factor does overlap to a degree with considerations relating to the scale of offending.
(e)Harm to the victim: Victim impact statements have been read. Revisiting the events which occurred many years ago triggers trauma. I have no doubt of the seriousness of the impact on T and her family.
[38] Indeed, I have no doubt that the three children (as they then were) suffered and continue to suffer psychological and emotional harm because of your abuse. Long- term emotional disability is manifestly inherent in offending of this kind.13
[39]There are no mitigating features of the offending.
[40] In my assessment, these factors mean the lead offending falls at the upper end of band two of the guideline case. In my assessment, a starting point of 11 years’ imprisonment is appropriate.
[41] I now consider the impact of the offending against K and N to assess the appropriate uplift to a nominal starting point. I agree with the Crown submission that each case individually should attract a starting point of 18 months. The aggravating features are the same, the abuse of trust, planning and premeditation (seen particularly in the grooming aspect) and vulnerability of the victims. I am not permitted by the law
13 R v AM [2007] NZCA 114, [2010] 2 NZLR 750 at [44].
to add the start points together to reach a cumulative start point, so I take into account the principle of totality. I consider that an uplift of two (2) years is appropriate to reflect the further offending.
[42]This means an overall starting point of 13 years’ imprisonment.
[43] The Crown submits that a further uplift of between three to six months’ imprisonment is available to reflect your previous conviction for similar past offending. The point, which is well made, is that the offending occurred relatively shortly after release from prison. I agree that this is a factor to be taken into account. At that point in time, you should have been more cognisant of your own behaviour and risk profile. I impose an uplift of six months.
[44] I turn now, as I am required to do, to mitigating factors personal to you. There is conflicting evidence on the extent of remorse and appreciation of the harm inflicted on these young people. On the one hand, you have more recently expressed some remorse and a desire for rehabilitation. On the other, there is evidence of constant minimisation and partial denials of the offending.
[45] Your guilty pleas relating to K were entered on the morning of a firm fixture for both victims. The pleas relating to N were entered in respect of those charges on the morning of an adjourned trial. You pleaded guilty to the offending against T in February 2019 (for a trial in March) after the matter had been adjourned from July 2018. These late pleas must have caused significant stress to the victims and their families.
[46] In respect of the late guilty pleas your counsel asks me to take into account fragile mental health and delays resulting from a change of counsel. He urges me to apply a discount of between 15 and 20 percent which is ordinarily reserved for early pleas. As I have said, there is a voluminous bundle of correspondence from mental health professionals. In respect of the timing of entering pleas, I have taken note of the requests by the District Court for reports assessing your fitness to stand trial and capacity to instruct a lawyer. I accept that some delay was attributable to that process but I still regard the pleas as entered late in the day. While a discount is called for to
reflect saving the victims and their families from having to endure a very painful trial, I assess the discount as meriting a 10 percent reduction.
[47] I acknowledge you have expressed some remorse in letters to this Court in which you say, among other things, that what you did was wrong and you are truly sorry and that you are ashamed and disgusted. I am not aware of any such expressions to the victims or their families. I have carefully read both letters provided to me. Aspects of the letter, to my mind, are self-focused, including blaming the offending on alcohol and drug abuse despite also acknowledging that it was no excuse. While I take note of these apologies I do not consider that a separate discount should be offered for remorse in your situation.
[48] Finally, I have read all the reports of your own troubled upbringing and life generally, including addictions, mental health disorders and the possibility of foetal alcohol syndrome as per the report provided to the Court. I do not accept that these factors removed your choices but they must have reduced them. I express hope that you are able to reconnect with your hapū or iwi as part of your rehabilitative efforts. I suspect that would greatly assist your prospects. I therefore discount your sentence by a period of six months to take into account these factors.
Minimum period of imprisonment
[49] The Crown seeks a minimum period of imprisonment of at least 50 percent. The Crown submits that the otherwise appropriate parole period is insufficient for all of the stated purposes. Your counsel submits that no minimum period of imprisonment is appropriate.
[50] The Court of Appeal has observed that minimum terms of at least half the determinate sentence were “very routine” in cases involving child sex offending.14 There may be cases where no minimum term is required, such as where the offender’s insight, desire to rehabilitate and low likelihood of reoffending informs the exercise. That situation can be distinguished because you have a very similar previous
14 R v AM (CA27/2009) [2010] NZCA 114; [2010] 2 NZLR 750 at [47].
conviction, you offended against three victims and you currently have a high risk of reoffending.
[51] I have reached the view that a minimum period of imprisonment of 50 percent of the term is warranted.
Preventive detention
[52]I come then to the Crown’s submission that I ought to impose a term of
preventive detention.
[53] Section 87 of the Act sets out when the Court may impose a sentence of preventive detention. The offender is imprisoned indefinitely, with the minimum term imposed by the Court at time of sentence and the offender’s actual date of release determined thereafter at the discretion of the Parole Board. Preventive detention has a protective and not a punitive purpose.15 A sentence of preventive detention is not a sentence of last resort.16
[54] The first two preconditions to preventive detention are met, as you have been convicted of a qualifying offence and you were over 18 at the time of the offending.17 The third precondition is that the Court must be satisfied that you are likely to commit another qualifying offence if you are released at the end of your sentence.18
[55] Once the statutory pre-conditions are established, the decision whether to impose a sentence of preventive detention is a discretionary one requiring me to balance numerous and often conflicting considerations.19
[56] In accordance with the requirements of s 88 of the Act, the Court has been provided reports from two health assessors discussing the likelihood of you committing a further qualifying offence.20
15 R v Johnson [2004] 3 NZLR 29; (2003) 21 CRNZ 196 (CA) at [24].
16 R v C (CA 249/02) [2003] 1 NZLR 30 (CA).
17 Sentencing Act 2002, ss 87(2)(a) and (b).
18 Sentencing Act 2002, ss 87(2)(c).
19 M (CA 236/15) v R [2016] NZCA 77 at [28].
20 Report of Dr Rishi Duggal dated 20 May 2019 and report of Dr John Jacques dated 21 May 2019.
[57] “To be satisfied” does not involve any legal test or special onus; I must simply “make up my mind” one way or another. In the light of the length of any finite sentence I consider appropriate, that requires me to look a long way into the future.
[58] I am entitled to rely on the experts’ reports the Court receives but they do not govern the necessary assessment. The reports are both provided by experienced and senior practitioners, there are common observations in them about risk. Certainly, they both conclude that you present a high-risk if you were released into the community now; neither of them is able to say what the level of risk is in the distant future if you receive appropriate rehabilitative treatment. Indeed, Dr Duggal expresses the same disquiet I do about predicting the level of risk into the distant future.
[59]I turn to the mandated factors in s 87(4), of which there are five:
(a)Any pattern of serious offending disclosed by your history – I consider there is such a pattern;
(b)The seriousness of the harm to the community caused by your offending – this is a given in this type of offending against children;
(c)Information indicating a tendency to commit serious offences in future – on this issue I have reviewed and considered all the reports made available;
(d)The absence of, or failure of, efforts by you to address the cause or causes of your offending; and
(e)The principle that a lengthy determinate sentence is preferable if this provides adequate protection for society.
[60] The Crown’s position is that all these factors are engaged. Your counsel submits that the Crown’s view does not have sufficient regard to the remedial options referred to in the reports and is too pessimistic about the effectiveness of the rehabilitation options.
[61]To my mind, there are concerning indications of increased risk, including:
(a)PTSD symptoms arising from your own childhood trauma, combined with your emotional dysregulation and related relationship and employment problems;
(b)Substance abuse and ‘self-medication’, which has a disinhibiting effect in relation to offending.
(c)Your patterns of behaviour: developing relationships with the victims’ older family members, the grooming activity reflected in your indecent communications and your exploitation of physical and age vulnerabilities;
(d)The frequency and duration of your offending, and the fact it occurred soon after your release in 2012 from a sentence for other sexual offending. This indicates a serious disregard for consequences; and
(e)On occasions, minimisation and denial.
[62] On the other hand, there are some positive factors identified by the experts such as a willingness to engage in treatment, a greater commitment than previously shown to engaging with support, seemingly more emotional stability in presentation during interview, and a seemingly more supportive apparent relationship with your whanau.
[63] In terms of the principle that a lengthy determinate sentence is preferable if this provides adequate protection for society, (s 87(4)(e)), I note that I can consider the potential for the Department of Corrections to apply for an extended supervision order (ESO) with conditions imposed by the Parole Board for up to 10 years.
[64] Weighing all the factors and features supporting a sentence of preventive detention, I have decided that the other factors taken together would make this the wrong sentence. In short, I am not satisfied that you are likely to commit further
offences of this type after a lengthy period of imprisonment and a sexual offending treatment programme. My reasons are these:
(a)You have indicated that you want to undertake a substantial therapeutic sex offenders course. At times your commitment has been expressed in more equivocal terms than is desirable and there are inconsistencies, but the more recent reports say that you are interested in being helped and have expressed a desire to be rehabilitated;
(b)Both reports suggest that a substantive sexual offender treatment program could assist you to address the issues which are potential barriers to rehabilitation;
(c)You have not had the opportunity and benefit of a substantial therapeutic sex offenders course in the past;
(d)Analysing the range of reports prepared following interview with you, I discern some improvement in attitude and realisation of the impact of the offending. While I am mindful that a looming sentencing date can impact displayed attitude, I do see some signs of positive progress;
(e)There is the likelihood of extended supervision orders when you come to be released, which I strongly recommend. These will control where you are, who you associate with, including monitoring for over seven years past your statutory release date. Other conditions may require attendance in programmes designed to prevent a relapse into offending. Such orders can greatly reduce risk;
(f)Your relative youth. A sentence of preventive detention at 29 years old is a young age to sentence someone to prison for the rest of their life potentially;
(g)The factors that indicate that you are at risk of similarly offending in the future are balanced by the absence of insurmountable obstacles such as extreme personality pathology or serious mental illness;
(h)You have also engaged in counselling for your own childhood trauma; such counselling seems to coincide with more insight into the harm to your victims and to assist to manage any minimisation of impact and to develop empathy for your victims;
(i)The finite sentence and minimum parole period I have settled on will be long enough for suitable treatment to take effect.
Sentencing conclusion
[65]Mr Ashby, please stand.
(a)on the three representative charges in respect of T of Sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection;
(b)on the two representative charges in respect of K and N of indecent act on a child under 12 years; and
(c)on the representative charge of indecent communication with a child under 12 years in respect of K and an indecent act on a child under 12 years in respect of N,
I sentence you to 11 years and 8 months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 5 years and 9 months.
Register
[66] You have committed a qualifying offence under the Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Government Agency registration) Act 2016 and are classified as a registrable offender. Accordingly, your name will be entered on the Child Sex
Offender Register as soon as is practicable. I understand that a three-strikes warning has already been given, on 21 February 2019.
[67]Mr Hemi Ashby, you may stand down.
ADDENDUM
[68] I propose to add an addendum to my Sentencing Notes in order to specify the period of imprisonment imposed for each of the individual charges as follows:
(a)On the three representative charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection in respect of T, you are sentenced to 11 years and 8 months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 5 years and 9 months.
(b)On each of the two representative charges of indecent act on a child under 12 years there is to be a concurrent sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment.
(c)On the representative charge of indecent communication with a child under 12 years in respect of K there is to be a concurrent sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment.
(d)On the charge of an indecent act on a child under 12 years there is to be a concurrent sentence of 18 month’s imprisonment.
.........................................................
Walker J
[69] Offender Register as soon as is practicable. I understand that a three-strikes warning has already been given, on 21 February 2019.
[70]Mr Hemi Ashby, you may stand down.
ADDENDUM
[71] I record that my Sentencing Notes omitted to specify the sentence in respect of the individual charges. The period of imprisonment for the individual charges is:
(a)On the three representative charges of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection in respect of T, you are sentenced to 11 years and 8 months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 5 years and 9 months.
(b)On each of the two representative charges of indecent act on a child under 12 years you are sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.
(c)On the representative charge of indecent communication with a child under 12 years in respect of K you are sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.
(d)On the charge of an indecent act on a child under 12 years you are sentenced to 18 month’s imprisonment.
[72]All terms are to be served concurrently.
[73] The total sentence is 11 years and 8 months’ imprisonment, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 5 years and 9 months.
.........................................................
Walker J
0
3
0