R v Cant

In the case of R v Cant, the defendant, George Darren Cant, appealed both his conviction and sentence, which were upheld by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Cant was convicted of three sexual offences against Mrs X, and was sentenced to preventive detention with a non-parole period of six years. Cant argued that the trial judge allowed evidence that was inherently prejudicial to him, which may have influenced the jury's decision. This evidence suggested that Cant might have also offended sexually against others. However, the court found that the disclosure was inadvertent and brief, and the trial judge adequately addressed the issue in his summing up, directing the jury to consider the evidence only for contextual purposes and not to weigh it against Cant's guilt.

In terms of the sentence appeal, Cant contended that the sentencing judge did not sufficiently consider whether a finite sentence would have been adequate to protect the community. However, the Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge had properly considered this issue, taking into account Cant's history of past offending and the high risk of him reoffending seriously, either sexually or violently. The judges concluded that a finite sentence, even combined with an extended supervision order, would not have been adequate to protect the community. Therefore, the appeal against both conviction and sentence was dismissed.