AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 2 September 2019

R v GS

[2019] NSWDC 605

Sexual offences

Citation: R v GS [2019] NSWDC 605
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 2 September 2019
Judge: Grant DCJ

Background

The offender, a grandfather, pleaded guilty to 14 sexual offences committed against four of his grandchildren: three grandsons (TG, DG, and IS) and one granddaughter (AS). A further seven offences were taken into account on a Form 1 (a document that allows additional offences to be acknowledged at sentencing without separate conviction). The offending occurred over an extended period, with the offender exploiting his familial access to each victim.

The offences ranged in gravity from acts of indecency to sexual intercourse without consent. They included fellatio, masturbation, and an attempted anal penetration. The offender was aged in his early to mid-60s at the time of the offending; the victims were children and young people. Much of the offending took place in family homes and the offender's workplace, often when no other adults were present.

The offender entered guilty pleas at the earliest opportunity in the Local Court, which entitled him to the maximum 25% sentencing discount. The early pleas also spared the victims from having to give evidence at trial.

  • What aggregate sentence was appropriate across 14 sexual offences against four victims, having regard to totality?
  • What weight should be given to the early guilty plea, the breach of familial trust, and the predatory nature of the offending?
  • What individual indicative sentences were appropriate for each offence before the aggregate was determined?
  • How should victim impact and the principles of general deterrence, denunciation, and community protection be applied?

Decision

Grant DCJ assessed the objective seriousness of each offence individually, considering factors including the nature of the conduct, the degree of physical harm, any circumstances of humiliation, the duration of the abuse, and the significant age gap and inequality in the relationship between the offender and each victim. The court found the offending to be predatory in both the lead-up and commission of each offence. The breach of familial trust was treated as an aggravating feature, as was the fact that much of the offending occurred in the victims' own homes or places of trust.

The court applied the principle in EG v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 21, affirming that general deterrence, denunciation, and community protection are central sentencing considerations in cases of intentional and repeated child sexual abuse. Victim impact statements from two of the victims described severe and lasting psychological harm, including anxiety, depression, difficulty with intimacy, and damaged relationships. Grant DCJ endorsed remarks from the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse acknowledging that even conduct sometimes perceived as less serious can have catastrophic and lifelong consequences for victims.

After setting indicative sentences for each individual offence (all discounted by 25% for the early plea), the court applied the totality principle to arrive at an aggregate sentence. The totality principle requires a court to ensure that the combined sentence, when viewed as a whole, is not disproportionate to the overall criminality. The court determined that an aggregate sentence of 12 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of eight years was appropriate.

Orders Made

  • Aggregate sentence of 12 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of eight years.
  • Sentence commences from 4 May 2017.
  • Offender eligible for parole on 3 May 2025.
  • Head sentence expires 3 May 2029.
  • The offender was formally notified that the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 applies, meaning he may be subject to further detention or supervision conditions after the expiry of both the non-parole period and the head sentence, if the court determines it is in the community's interest.

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court treated the offender's position as a grandfather, and his use of that relationship to gain access to victims in their homes, as a significant aggravating factor going to the objective seriousness of the offending.
  • A full 25% discount applied where guilty pleas were entered at the earliest opportunity in the Local Court, consistent with the requirements of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
  • General deterrence and denunciation carry substantial weight in sentencing for repeated, intentional child sexual abuse, as affirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeal in EG v The Queen.
  • Victim impact evidence confirmed severe and lasting psychological harm across multiple victims, reinforcing the court's assessment that such offending has consequences far beyond the immediate conduct.
  • Under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, an offender sentenced for serious sexual offences may face continuing detention or supervision orders even after the full sentence expires, if the community's safety requires it.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61I, 61L, 61M, 61N(1)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A(3)(k), 22, 25AA(3)
- Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW)

Cases
- EG v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 21
- Denham v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 309
- R v Holder; R v Johnson (1983) 3 NSWLR 245
- R v Holyoak (1995) 82 A Crim R 502