Failure to repay stolen money cannot be treated as a factor in assessing the objective seriousness of theft offences in the ACT; objective seriousness is determined by reference to the nature of the offending, not its after-effects. However, the failure to repay remains relevant as a sentencing consideration under s 33(1)(e) of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) as 'injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence'. Where sentencing error is identified, the appellate court must exercise its discretion afresh but may independently reach the same sentence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 28 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 28 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.