Citation: R v William Kamm [2007] NSWDC 177
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 24 August 2007
Judge(s): Berman SC DCJ
Background
The offender was the leader of a religious community based at Cambewarra, near Nowra on the NSW South Coast. He cultivated among his followers the belief that he could communicate directly with the Virgin Mary, and used this claimed authority to control members of the community. He had also propagated a doctrine that he was destined to become the last pope and would repopulate the earth through children conceived with chosen female followers.
The complainant had moved into the community with her family as a young girl, and her mother was a devoted follower who ultimately consented to the offender having sexual relationships with two of her daughters. The offender used fabricated written "messages" purportedly from the Virgin Mary to manipulate the complainant into a sexual relationship. The court found he did not genuinely hold the beliefs he promoted, and that his manipulation was driven by a desire to have sex with underage girls.
The sole issue at trial was whether the sexual relationship began when the complainant was under sixteen or after she had turned sixteen. The jury found, on strong evidence including a diary entry dated July 1995, that the relationship commenced in 1994 when the complainant was fourteen years old. The offender was convicted of six offences arising from conduct spanning 1994 to 1999.
Legal Issues
- Whether the offender should be sentenced on the basis that the complainant was under sixteen at the commencement of the sexual relationship
- The appropriate sentence for six counts of aggravated sexual offences, including one count of aggravated act of indecency and five counts of aggravated sexual intercourse
- How the principles of totality and concurrency should apply, given the offender was already serving a sentence for other offences
- Whether special circumstances existed to justify departing from the statutory non-parole period ratio
Decision
The court accepted the jury's findings and sentenced the offender on the basis that the sexual relationship began in 1994 when the complainant was fourteen. The court rejected any suggestion these were isolated offences, noting the conduct formed part of an ongoing sexual relationship lasting until 1999, when the complainant became pregnant with the offender's child.
The court was satisfied the offender had deliberately manipulated the complainant's religious beliefs for his own sexual purposes. It found he did not genuinely believe any divine instruction had been received, and that his fabricated religious doctrine was a mechanism to facilitate sexual offending against young girls. The court found this exploitation of followers' sincere religious beliefs deserved no respect and was a significant aggravating feature.
In structuring the sentences, the court applied the principle of totality to reflect both the six offences before it and the existing sentence the offender was serving. The sentences were largely ordered to run concurrently, with only modest accumulation. No special circumstances were submitted or found to justify varying the statutory non-parole period ratio, and the overall sentence structure maintained that ratio.
Orders Made
- Count 1 (aggravated act of indecency): fixed term of 6 months' imprisonment commencing 14 April 2009
- Counts 2 and 3 (aggravated sexual intercourse): 5 years and 6 months' imprisonment commencing 14 April 2009, non-parole period of 3 years
- Count 4 (aggravated sexual intercourse): 5 years and 6 months' imprisonment commencing 14 October 2009, non-parole period of 3 years
- Counts 5 and 6 (aggravated sexual intercourse): 5 years and 6 months' imprisonment commencing 14 April 2010, non-parole period of 3 years each
- Effective non-parole period (including sentences already being served): 7 years and 6 months, with an overall sentence of 10 years; earliest parole eligibility 13 April 2013
Key Takeaways
- The District Court treated the deliberate fabrication of religious authority to manipulate a child complainant into sexual conduct as a serious aggravating feature warranting significant sentences.
- A sustained pattern of offending over multiple years, even where only six specific counts were charged, was held to preclude any suggestion of isolated or opportunistic conduct.
- Where an offender is already serving sentences for similar offences, the principle of totality requires the new sentences to be structured so the combined effect remains proportionate, here achieved through largely concurrent terms with only modest accumulation.
- No special circumstances were established to justify departing from the statutory non-parole period ratio, and the court declined to accept any such submission.
- Fabricated religious doctrine used to secure sexual access to underage complainants attracted no mitigating weight; the court distinguished such manipulation from the legitimate protection afforded to genuine religious belief.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Cases: No cases were cited in the judgment.