WA v Freemantle

[2008] WASCA 98

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › State appeal against sentence
4. › Principles applicable to prosecution appeals
5. › Whether sentence manifestly inadequate
6. › Whether appellate court may substitute its own opinion
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sexual offences against children
4. › Using electronic communication with intent to expose child to indecent material
5. › Using electronic communication with intent to procure child to engage in sexual activity
6. › Whether immediate imprisonment required
7. › Relevance of personal circumstances of first offender
8. › Criminal Code (WA), s 204B(3)(b)(i), (ii)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sexual offences against children
4. › Internet grooming offences
5. › General and personal deterrence
6. › Whether intensive supervision order manifestly inadequate
7. › Significance of voluntary cessation of offending

Quick Take

An intensive supervision order is manifestly inadequate for offences under s 204B(3)(b) of the Criminal Code (WA) involving sustained sexually explicit communications with a person believed to be a child under 13. Immediate imprisonment is ordinarily required for such offences, and the seriousness of the offending will often outweigh personal circumstances even for first offenders. Voluntary cessation of offending and the absence of an actual meeting may reduce the length of imprisonment but do not justify a non-custodial sentence.