AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 21 July 2023

R v Savvas

[2023] NSWDC 424

Sexual offences
CRIME SENTENCE SEXUAL TOUCHING WITHOUT CONSENT

Citation: R v Savvas [2023] NSWDC 424
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 21 July 2023
Judge: Bourke SC DCJ

Background

The offender, a man aged approximately 63 at the time of the offences, was found guilty by a jury in October 2022 of four counts arising from conduct against two separate female victims in 2020. The offences occurred at his home in Wentworth Falls in the Blue Mountains, and at locations associated with his dealings with each victim.

The first three counts involved a 15-year-old victim (referred to as "AB") who, along with her boyfriend, had moved into the offender's home in April 2020 after previously living in a tent. The offender procured clothing for her in circumstances the jury found were intended to facilitate unlawful sexual activity, and on a separate occasion sexually touched her without her consent while she was frozen in fear.

The fourth count involved a different victim, approximately 16 years of age (referred to as "CD"), who visited the offender's home on multiple occasions. The offender supplied her with prescription-type tablets to which she was addicted. On one occasion in December 2020, after she lost consciousness following the consumption of drugs supplied by the offender, she awoke to find herself naked with the offender on top of her.

  • What was the objective seriousness of each offence, and where did each sit within the range for its respective maximum penalty?
  • What subjective factors applied to the offender, including his age, health, and prospects of rehabilitation?
  • Whether a standard non-parole period applied and how it functioned as a sentencing guidepost for Count 1.
  • What form of custody was appropriate, including whether an Intensive Corrections Order was available or suitable for any count.
  • How the principles of totality and accumulation should be applied across four counts involving two victims.
  • What aggregate sentence appropriately reflected the overall criminality without being crushing.

Decision

His Honour determined that each offence was of real objective seriousness. The Count 1 procuring offence was treated as grooming conduct, involving a significant age disparity and the exploitation of the victim's vulnerable living circumstances, though His Honour did not accept the Crown's submission that the shopping trip was pre-planned rather than opportunistic. Counts 2 and 3 arose from a single incident of sexual touching through clothing and were treated as largely concurrent, given they formed part of one continuous event.

Count 4 was treated as warranting a degree of accumulation because it involved a separate victim and a distinct incident, during which the offender had supplied the victim with drugs before she lost consciousness and was found naked with him on top of her. His Honour emphasised the harm presumed to flow from sexual offences against children and young people, and the importance of both specific and general deterrence.

On subjective factors, His Honour had regard to a psychiatric report obtained after the verdict. The offender had no prior criminal history, which was given some weight, but the absence of remorse and the maintenance of his innocence after conviction limited the discount available for rehabilitation prospects. His Honour found an Intensive Corrections Order to be wholly inadequate, particularly given that full-time imprisonment was being imposed on the other counts.

Applying totality principles, His Honour imposed an aggregate sentence rather than individual cumulative terms. Counts 2 and 3 were treated largely as concurrent. Count 1 attracted some notional accumulation as a precursor to the conduct in Counts 2 and 3. Count 4, involving a different victim and separate incident, attracted further accumulation.

Orders Made

  • Aggregate head sentence of five years and nine months imprisonment.
  • Non-parole period of three years and nine months.
  • Both periods date from 17 October 2022, to reflect time already spent in pre-sentence custody.
  • Head sentence to expire: 16 July 2028.
  • Non-parole period to expire: 16 July 2026.

Note: A statutory publication restriction applies prohibiting the identification of either victim.

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court confirmed that procuring a child through financial or material benefits, such as purchasing clothing, can constitute the offence under s 66EB(3) of the Crimes Act 1900 even where the grooming conduct is opportunistic rather than pre-planned.
  • Sexual offences against children and young people carry a strong presumption of long-term harm to victims, and this presumption weighs heavily in the objective seriousness assessment regardless of whether physical harm was separately established.
  • Where multiple counts arise from a single continuous incident, a sentencing court may treat them as largely concurrent, but counts involving a separate victim or distinct occasion will generally attract some degree of accumulation to reflect the additional criminality.
  • An Intensive Corrections Order was found to be an inadequate sentencing outcome where the other counts in the same proceedings warranted full-time imprisonment, given the incongruity that would result.
  • Delays between verdict and sentence, where caused by the offender's loss of legal representation and the need to obtain psychiatric evidence, do not alter the appropriate sentence but were acknowledged by His Honour as regrettable for both victims and the broader community.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61KC(a), 66DB(a), 66EB(3)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Cases cited: No specific cases were cited in the portions of the judgment provided.