The double jeopardy principle on a Crown sentence appeal requires only an adequate discount for being sentenced twice; it does not require a sentence at or near the bottom of the range. Section 6E of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) creates a presumption of cumulation for serious sexual offenders that must be given effect, and a sentencing judge who orders concurrent sentences without adequate justification inverts the statutory scheme. Where historical sexual offences are very bad examples of their kind, rehabilitation over the intervening period and a guilty plea, while important mitigating factors, do not justify a sentence that fails to reflect the gravity of the offending.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.