A later sentencing judge considering parity is not required to go behind the findings of fact made by the earlier sentencing judge who sentenced a co-offender; the parity assessment must proceed on the basis of the findings made in each case. Where co-offenders are charged with different offences, received different discounts for pleas and assistance, and the earlier sentencing judge made findings of lesser culpability, the parity principle may simply not arise. Where mental illness and drug intoxication both contribute to offending, the sentencing judge must attempt to disentangle their effects, and findings that mental illness made a substantial contribution to offending can justify sentences at the bottom of the range.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 20 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.