AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 30 May 2025

R v Ladmore (No 2)

[2025] NSWDC 324

Sexual offences

Citation: R v Ladmore (No 2) [2025] NSWDC 324
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 30 May 2025
Judge: Haesler SC DCJ

Background

Following a judge-alone trial at Bega Court, the offender was convicted on 21 March 2025 of eight serious child sexual offences: R v Ladmore [2025] NSWDC 93. The offences were committed against a child who was between approximately 8 and 10 years old at the relevant times. The offender was a family friend who lived five doors from the child's home, and the two families were close. The child regularly slept over at the offender's home, and her parents had no indication of any wrongdoing until the child made disclosures in April 2023.

The offences spanned from approximately October 2020 to April 2023 and included grooming, using the child for the production of child abuse material, sexual touching, inciting the child to touch the offender, carrying out a sexual act towards the child, and sexual intercourse with a child under 14 in circumstances of aggravation (the offender being a person in authority over the child). Police recovered deleted images from the offender's phone and located sex toys in a locked suitcase at his home.

The offender gave evidence at trial. The sentencing judge did not accept him as a witness of truth, finding that he lied and that some of his denials were absurd. He had no prior criminal record, which was noted as a mitigating factor.

  • What individual sentences were appropriate for each of the eight counts, having regard to maximum penalties and, where applicable, standard non-parole periods?
  • How should the sentences be accumulated, made concurrent, or otherwise structured to reflect the totality principle?
  • Whether special circumstances existed to justify varying the statutory ratio between the non-parole period and the total term of the aggregate sentence?
  • What weight should be given to the offender's lack of prior convictions as a mitigating factor?

Decision

The sentencing judge assessed the objective seriousness of each offence, applying the principles in Markarian v The Queen and Muldrock v The Queen. The judge noted that maximum penalties and standard non-parole periods serve as important legislative guides but are not starting points from which to oscillate. The offending was characterised by a sustained betrayal of trust over several years, involving a young and vulnerable child who was in the care of a trusted family friend.

Individual sentences were imposed for each count, with the most serious being Count 5 (sexual intercourse with a child under 14 in circumstances of aggravation), which attracted 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years and 6 months. The grooming offence under s 66EB(3) received 3 years with a 2 year and 3 month non-parole period. The child abuse material production counts each received 1 year with a 9-month non-parole period. Other counts ranged from 18 months to 4 years.

Applying the totality principle, the judge structured the sentences into an aggregate term. A "very modest" finding of special circumstances was made, resulting in a slightly extended parole period beyond the standard ratio. The absence of prior convictions was acknowledged in mitigation, though the gravity and multiplicity of the offending meant this carried limited weight in the overall outcome.

Orders Made

Individual sentences indicated for each count:

  • Count 1 (sexually touch child aged 10+): 1 year and 6 months imprisonment
  • Count 2 (incite child aged 10+ to sexually touch offender): 4 years imprisonment
  • Alternative Count 3 (sexually touch child aged 10+): 4 years imprisonment
  • Count 4 (sexually touch child aged 10+): 2 years and 6 months imprisonment
  • Count 5 (sexual intercourse with child aged 10-14, aggravated): 6 years imprisonment, non-parole period of 4 years and 6 months
  • Count 6 (grooming): 3 years imprisonment, non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months
  • Count 8 (use child under 14 for production of child abuse material): 1 year imprisonment, non-parole period of 9 months
  • Count 10 (sexual act towards child under 10): 3 years and 6 months imprisonment
  • Count 11 (use child under 14 for production of child abuse material): 1 year imprisonment, non-parole period of 9 months

Aggregate sentence: 14 years imprisonment
Non-parole period: 10 years, commencing 17 March 2025
Earliest parole date: 16 March 2035
Sentence expiry: 16 March 2039

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court applied the Markarian and Muldrock framework, treating maximum penalties and standard non-parole periods as legislative benchmarks to be weighed alongside all other relevant factors, without using them as a staged starting point.
  • Where an offender commits multiple serious child sexual offences involving the same victim over an extended period, the totality principle requires the aggregate sentence to reflect the overall criminality without becoming crushing, even where each individual offence is grave.
  • A finding of special circumstances, which permits a non-parole period that represents a larger proportion of the head sentence than the statutory default, was made only modestly here, reflecting the limited rehabilitation prospects and the need to protect the community alongside supervising the offender's eventual reintegration.
  • The offender's lack of prior convictions was treated as a mitigating factor, but its weight was substantially diminished by the prolonged, calculated, and repeated nature of the offending.
  • Grooming conduct under s 66EB(3) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), which in this case extended over approximately two and a half years and involved exposing the child to indecent material and providing material benefits, was treated as a distinct and serious offence attracting its own significant sentence, separate from the contact and production offences.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 66C(2), 66DB(a) and (b), 66DC(a), 66EB(3), 91G(1)(a), 91H(2)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
- Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW)

Cases:
- Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; (2005) 228 CLR 357
- Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; (2011) 244 CLR 120
- Postiglione v The Queen [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295
- Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610
- Mill v The Queen [1988] HCA 70; (1988) 166 CLR 59
- Ryan v The Queen [2001] HCA 21; (2001) 206 CLR 267
- Hoare v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 348
- R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704
- R v Gavel [2014] NSWCCA 56
- R v Lau [2022] NSWCCA 131
- R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1
- MAK v R [2006] NSWCCA 381
- R v Windle [2012] NSWCCA 222
- Cowling v R [2015] NSWCCA 213
- R v Asplund [2010] NSWCCA 316
- Clarkson v R [2011] VSCA 152
- R v Ladmore [2025] NSWDC 93 (the trial judgment)