A sentencing judge who treats discontinued charges as if they had been proved — whether in assessing specific deterrence, the commencement date of a sentence, or prospects of rehabilitation — commits House v The King error by mistaking the facts. The fact that a character reference author was charged with related offences that were subsequently discontinued is an irrelevant consideration in assessing the weight of the reference, particularly where the Crown did not object to the reference or seek cross-examination.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.