A total effective sentence of 11 years' imprisonment with a 9-year non-parole period for multiple sexual offences against an 8-year-old child, including incest, indecent acts, and child pornography offences committed by a person in a position of trust, was upheld as stern but reasonably open. The Court confirmed that sentencing is an exercise of broad judicial discretion and an appellate court is not entitled to simply substitute its opinion for that of the sentencing judge.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.