Citation: R v Campbell [2021] NSWDC 742
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 11 November 2021
Judge(s): M L Williams SC DCJ
Background
The offender, a 35-year-old Aboriginal woman, pleaded guilty to one count of reckless wounding in company contrary to section 35(3) of the Crimes Act 1900. The offence carries a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of four years.
The events arose from a drug debt dispute in Goulburn. In August 2020, the victim was taken to an address where a co-offender (the offender's uncle) confronted her over a $7,000 debt. During that confrontation, another co-offender stabbed the victim in the left thigh with a kitchen knife. The offender was present in the room at the time but took no physical part in the wounding and did not encourage it.
The victim received five sutures at hospital. The offender was arrested in late September 2020 and had spent one year in custody across two periods by the date of sentencing. Three co-offenders had not yet been sentenced, so no question of parity between co-offenders arose.
Legal Issues
- What was the objective seriousness of the offending, given the offender's passive presence at the scene?
- What weight should be given to the aggravating factor of weapon use and the mitigating factors of non-substantial injury, guilty plea, and remorse?
- Whether special circumstances existed justifying a departure from the standard ratio between the non-parole period and the total sentence
- Whether time already served in custody adequately served the purposes of sentencing under section 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Decision
The District Court assessed the objective seriousness of the offending as just below the mid-range for this type of offence. That assessment reflected the offender's limited role: she was present during the stabbing but played no physical part and did not encourage the attack. Her intoxication from methamphetamine at the time was also noted as a relevant circumstance.
The court identified weapon use as an aggravating factor. Mitigating factors included the non-substantial nature of the injury, the guilty plea (attracting a 25% discount on sentence), and the offender's genuine remorse. Her prior criminal history was minimal, consisting of minor offences dealt with by bonds in 2005 and a community release order in 2021.
A comprehensive psychological report, accepted by both parties, described the offender's Aboriginality, deprived background, drug addiction, mental illness (including complex PTSD), good character, and lack of planning. The court accepted that her prospects of rehabilitation were favourable, contingent on compliance with a treatment plan and residency at a drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre where a placement was available upon release.
The court found special circumstances, citing the offender's difficult year in custody during the COVID-19 pandemic, her diagnoses of complex PTSD and substance dependence, and her need for intensive supervision during parole. Both the Crown and defence agreed that time already served adequately served the purposes of sentencing, and the court accepted that submission.
Orders Made
- The offender was convicted of reckless wounding in company
- A sentence of 18 months imprisonment was imposed, commencing 11 November 2020 and expiring 10 May 2022, incorporating a 25% discount for the guilty plea
- A non-parole period of 12 months was set, expiring 10 November 2021, rendering the offender eligible for immediate release on the date of sentencing
- Special circumstances were formally found
Key Takeaways
- Presence at the scene of a wounding, without physical participation or encouragement, placed this offender's conduct just below the mid-range of objective seriousness for reckless wounding in company.
- A 25% discount on the term of imprisonment applied where the guilty plea was entered in circumstances the court accepted justified that reduction.
- Special circumstances were established on the basis of the offender's complex mental health diagnoses, substance dependence, difficult custodial experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the need for structured parole supervision in a residential rehabilitation setting.
- Under section 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the purposes of sentencing informed the overall approach, and the court accepted that time served was sufficient to satisfy those purposes in the circumstances.
- A psychologist's report accepted by both parties, addressing Aboriginality, background disadvantage, and rehabilitation prospects, formed a significant part of the sentencing court's subjective assessment.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 35(3) (reckless wounding in company)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 3A (purposes of sentencing)
Cases cited: None recorded in the judgment or provided metadata.