Where an offender's sexual conduct during professional treatment is inherently sexual, persistent across multiple victims, includes unequivocally sexual acts (such as pressing an erect penis against a client), and the offender's alternative explanation for the conduct has been rejected, the only reasonable inference is that the offending was sexually motivated — a sentencing judge is not entitled to leave motivation as 'uncertain'. Certain deportation of an offender who is an unlawful non-citizen (where deportation is not a consequence of the offending) does not of itself warrant the exercise of the residual discretion to decline to interfere with an inadequate sentence, particularly where the deportation will render conditions of the sentence (such as community service) incapable of completion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.