There is no sentencing principle that children charged with serious sexual offences can never escape a full-time custodial sentence; the comparable cases demonstrate considerable flexibility. A sentencing judge must specifically consider and explain the rejection of alternatives to full-time custody where a sentence of less than 2 years is imposed and alternatives are available. A child present at a family function who commits opportunistic offences against younger relatives is not, without more, in a position of trust for sentencing purposes. Inclusion of an offence carrying life imprisonment on a Form 1 contrary to s 33(4)(b) is a fundamental defect that vitiates the sentencing proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 37 later cases that cite this judgment.
15 of the 37 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.