Site Logo

R v Turner [2019] NSWDC 206

sentence — use of carriage service to transmit indecent material to person under age of 16 years offence contrary to s 474.27A(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code guilty plea — offender indicated pleas of guilty at earliest opportunity and should be afforded consideration for facilitating the course of justice taking into account utilitarian value — offender afforded 25% discount for plea of guilty — objective seriousness — victim 15 years of age and offender 35 years of age at time of offending — victim’s age very much towards upper end of age range contemplated by offence — this does not make matter less serious, rather matter would be more serious if victim was younger — while clear there was a sexual motive behind message, sentencing judge could not regard it as grooming type behaviour — pre-planning (obtaining material, retaining it and finding victim on Facebook) and nature of material being video of actual activity rather than “chats” — video seen by two victims in that one of victim’s friends also saw part of the material — matter well within mid-range of seriousness — antecedents — s 16A(2)(m) — while criminal history of offender not particularly extensive, history is such that offender not entitled to any particular leniency — uncontroversial that fact offence committed while offender at conditional liberty is a matter of aggravation — offender has been assaulted on two occasions in response to offending — sentencing judge prepared to find some extra curial punishment however impact on sentence to be imposed is not in any way significant — specific deterrence — s 16A(2)(j) — rehabilitation — s 16A(2)(n) — given offender’s record and breaches of bonds taken with fact that there has already been attempts at rehabilitation, cannot find on balance offender unlikely to re-offend — in all circumstances, noting two previous attempts at rehabilitation and admitted use of illicit substances sentencing judge not prepared to find on balance good prospects of rehabilitation — much will depend on how offender engages with appropriate professionals — SAR assessed as medium risk of reoffending — given this assessment and breach of conditional liberty court cannot conclude on balance offender unlikely to reoffend — contrition — s 16A(2)(f) — offender has good level of insight into trauma and distress offence caused and appears genuine — offender is remorseful and has shown genuine contrition — offender has accepted responsibility for what they did and acknowledges that it was entirely inappropriate — degree to which offender shown contrition is difficult to quantify but in circumstances of case, noting victim was in court at time offender gave evidence, there is little more offender could do — sentence imposed 12 months’ imprisonment — offender to be released on recognizance after 4 months for remaining period of 8 months
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.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions

top-arrow