In sentencing for sexual penetration of a child under 16, observations about the child victim's appearance, demeanour, 'nubility' or sexual maturity are irrelevant and inappropriate, and characterising the offence in terms that shift moral culpability to the victim is inconsistent with the presumption of harm established in [name withheld]. Where a Crown sentence appeal establishes manifest inadequacy but the inadequacy is attributable to the prosecutor's position at the plea hearing, the residual discretion will ordinarily be exercised to dismiss the appeal. The Director is bound by sentencing range submissions made by the prosecutor at first instance and will not ordinarily be permitted to completely change course on appeal.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.