When sentencing a juvenile offender who also suffers from mental or developmental disabilities, the sentencing court must recognise that the factors of youth, autism, and ADHD may compound rather than merely accumulate, and that the considerations applicable to sentencing a juvenile and sentencing a person with a psychiatric disability are different — each affects general deterrence and rehabilitation differently. Expert evidence that offending was a developmental phase now passed, with no paedophilic tendencies, can support a finding that the offender is not an appropriate vehicle for general deterrence. This is an exceptional case and should not be taken as setting a benchmark for sentencing in child sexual offence cases.
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.