AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 28 July 2011

R v Mohammad RAHMAN

[2011] NSWDC 101

Sexual offences
CRIMINAL LAW SENTENCE 17 VICTIMS OFFENDER WAS A MEDICAL PRACTITIONER ALL VICTIMS FEMALE "BREAST FETISH"

Citation: R v Mohammad Rahman [2011] NSWDC 101
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 28 July 2011
Judge(s): Cogswell SC DCJ

Background

The offender was a medical practitioner working at the Dapto Medical Centre. Over a six-month period between September 2009 and March 2010, he committed a series of sexual offences against 17 female patients who attended his surgery for treatment. The victims ranged in age from 14 to 37, and included a 14-year-old girl in her school uniform and a mother whom he offended against in the presence of her foster children.

The offences typically involved the offender conducting fabricated or grossly improper breast examinations, accompanied by inappropriate personal questioning and comments of a sexual nature. The agreed facts recorded that the examinations were carried out for the offender's own personal gratification. Medical specialist evidence confirmed that his conduct deviated from legitimate clinical practice.

The offender was arrested in March 2010, bailed, and entered pleas of guilty at the earliest opportunity. He was taken into custody on 22 July 2011, the date from which his sentence ran.

  • What total sentence was appropriate for 22 charges of indecent assault and one charge of aggravated indecent assault, taking into account additional offences under s 32 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999?
  • Where did the aggravated indecent assault charge fall within the range of objective seriousness, given the applicable standard non-parole period?
  • What weight should be given to mitigating factors including early guilty pleas, the absence of prior criminal history, and prospects of rehabilitation?
  • How should the individual sentences be structured (concurrently or cumulatively) to reflect the totality of the offending across 17 separate victims?

Decision

Cogswell SC DCJ opened with a detailed account of the trust patients must place in doctors and the particular vulnerability that creates. His Honour described the offending as an appalling breach of that trust, sustained over six months and directed at 17 separate victims. The breadth and repetition of the conduct distinguished it sharply from a single isolated lapse.

Each victim's circumstances were addressed individually. The offences ranged from touching victims' breasts over clothing to prolonged fabricated examinations with accompanying sexual commentary. Several victims provided victim impact statements. The charge of aggravated indecent assault, which carries a maximum of 10 years and a standard non-parole period of 8 years under s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act 1900, was assessed as falling within the middle of the range of objective seriousness.

In mitigation, the court accepted that the offender had no prior criminal history, had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and had reasonably good prospects of rehabilitation. However, his prospects of re-offending were described as guarded. These factors moderated the sentence but did not displace the need for a sentence reflecting the gravity of sustained predatory conduct in a position of professional trust.

The individual sentences were partially accumulated. His Honour constructed an overall sentence of nine years, commencing 22 July 2011 and expiring 21 July 2020, with a non-parole period of six years expiring 21 July 2017.

Orders Made

  • 22 individual sentences imposed for indecent assault (s 61L, Crimes Act 1900) and one sentence for aggravated indecent assault (s 61M(2), Crimes Act 1900), partially accumulated.
  • Additional offences in respect of three victims taken into account under s 32 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
  • Overall sentence: 9 years imprisonment, commencing 22 July 2011 and expiring 21 July 2020.
  • Non-parole period: 6 years, commencing 22 July 2011 and expiring 21 July 2017.
  • First eligible parole date: 21 July 2017.

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court treated sustained, repeated sexual offending by a medical practitioner against patients attending for treatment as an aggravating factor of significant weight, reflecting the fundamental breach of the doctor-patient trust relationship.
  • Where an offender commits discrete offences against multiple separate victims over an extended period, partial accumulation of sentences may be appropriate to ensure the overall sentence reflects the full criminality of the conduct rather than treating separate violations as a single episode.
  • An early guilty plea and absence of prior criminal history remain relevant mitigating factors even in cases of serious and prolonged offending, though their effect is limited where the objective gravity of the conduct is high.
  • Under s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act 1900, aggravated indecent assault attracts a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of 8 years, anchoring the sentencing exercise to a statutory benchmark that must be applied where the offence falls within the middle of the range of objective seriousness.
  • Victim impact statements from multiple complainants were received and considered as part of the sentencing process, consistent with the court's obligation to take into account the harm caused to individual victims.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61L and 61M(2)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A and 32

Cases cited: None stated in the judgment.