An offender's FASD deficits form part of the mitigation arising from a deprived background and must be given 'full weight' under Bugmy in every sentencing decision; the mitigating weight of profound childhood deprivation cannot be treated as diminished merely because the offender has continued to offend. However, a sentencing judge is entitled to evaluate an expert FASD report against other evidence including the offender's observable abilities and history, and is not obliged to seek a further expert report before acting on a perceived incongruity between the expert report and other evidence, provided the incongruity is raised with defence counsel during the sentencing hearing.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 16 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.