Bradbury v WA

[2020] WASCA 214

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Mitigating factors
4. › Remorse
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in finding appellant not genuinely remorseful
6. › Onus on offender to establish remorse on balance of probabilities
7. › Evaluation of letters of apology and guilty pleas
8. › Criminal Code (WA), ss 301(1), 333, 392
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Mitigating factors
4. › Onerous conditions of incarceration
5. › Whether sentencing judge failed to treat onerous prison conditions as mitigating
6. › Construction of sentencing remarks
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 8(4)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Principles of appellate intervention
4. › Whether express or implied material error of fact or law
5. › Whether miscarriage of justice

Quick Take

The case consolidates the established propositions on remorse as a mitigating factor in Western Australia, confirming that the offender bears the onus of establishing genuine remorse on the balance of probabilities, and that post-offence conduct (actions rather than words) is ordinarily a more reliable guide than the offender's self-serving statements. A sentencing judge's reference to taking onerous prison conditions into account 'in the general sense' will be construed as treating those conditions as mitigating, even without express compliance with s 8(4) of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA).