Prosecution sentence submissions under s 34AA of the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) must include transparent and robust articulation of why each proposed sentence is appropriate, including how totality principles have been applied and what aggravating or mitigating factors have been taken into account for each count; a bare table of proposed terms without explanation is of limited assistance and may be apt to mislead. The youth of an offender and the statutory priority given to rehabilitation under Chapter 8A of the Sentencing Act cannot eclipse the need for denunciation, deterrence and recognition of harm where the offending involves escalating violence. ASD may reduce moral culpability for earlier, less violent sexual offending by a young person but does not significantly mitigate culpability where offending escalates to include depraved physical violence. A higher guilty plea discount may be appropriate where the plea avoids a complainant giving evidence and being cross-examined in a sexual assault trial.
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.