Site Logo

R v Khan (No 11) [2019] NSWSC 594

sentence — engaging in a terrorist act offence contrary to s 101.1(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code — offender repeatedly stabbed victim with hunting knife, resulting in physical injury — victim of the offence — s 16A(2)(ea) — victim impact statements — whether ‘victim of the offence’ includes witnesses to stabbing attack — distinguished from R v Nahlous [2013] NSWCCA 90 where the family of a groomed child was not considered a victim of the offence — while effect of offending most profound on victim stabbed, offending had impact on those who witnessed aspects of offending, actively intervened to assist stabbed victim, and felt threat to personal safety as consequence of offending — nature and circumstances of the offence — s 16A(2)(a) — offending not spontaneous, attack planned to be commissioned on or near anniversary of September 11 — offender sought to obtain international recognition of offending — offender’s radicalisation relevant to assessment of objective seriousness — would be wrong in principle to sentence offender by drawing comparison between offence and attempted murder — offender’s religious and ideological motivation, and intention to intimidate government distinguish offender’s acts from offences against the person — fact that offending of greater gravity or with multiple victims may be envisaged, does not mean present offending was not serious — above mid-range of objective seriousness — rehabilitation — s 16A(2)(n) — contrition — s 16A(2)(f) — offender’s prospects of rehabilitation largely dependent upon ‘complete and unconditional abandonment’ of extremist ideology held at time of offending — offender admitted lying to medical practitioners in hope that jury would fine him not guilty on grounds of mental illness — fact that offender’s ideology was the subject of offender’s lies, means little weight can be given to claims that offender has now abandoned ideology — mental condition — s 16A(2)(m) — general deterrence — s 16A(2)(ja) — offender suffers from schizophrenia and/or OCD — no causal connection to offending — fact that offender has mental illness must have some onerous effect on conditions of custody — general deterrence remains relevant and is not significantly moderated by mental health considerations given nature of offending — sentence — offender sentenced to 36 years’ imprisonment with a 27 year non-parole period
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2024 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions

top-arrow