A sentence of two years detention for a juvenile offender convicted of digital rape of an adult stranger, involving following the complainant and use of force but no penile penetration and no additional degrading conduct, was manifestly excessive where the sentencing judge erroneously treated R v DAU (which involved more protracted and degrading conduct against a particularly vulnerable complainant) as an apposite comparative. A sentence of 16 months detention with 50 per cent release was appropriate in the circumstances.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.