R v Eraky

Citation: R v Eraky [2025] NSWDC 512
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 26 September 2025
Judge: King SC DCJ

Background

The offender, a man who married his wife following a brief courtship in 2017, was sentenced after a jury trial for a substantial series of offences committed against her over approximately five years, from October 2017 to December 2022. The victim had migrated to Australia from Syria in 2014 and met the offender through mutual acquaintances. They underwent an Islamic marriage ceremony in late September 2017, after which the victim moved into the offender's apartment.

The offending began just days after the couple moved in together. The victim had agreed to cohabit on the basis that sexual intercourse would not occur until their marriage was officially registered in Australia. On 1 October 2017, the offender ignored repeated refusals and penetrated the victim without her consent. The pattern of physical and psychological abuse continued for years thereafter, forming a sustained course of domestic violence conduct.

The jury convicted the offender of one count of sexual intercourse without consent, nine counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, nineteen counts of common assault, three counts of intimidation, and one count of damaging property. He was acquitted of five counts of common assault and one count of intimidation.

Legal Issues

• The appropriate sentence for a large volume of domestic violence offences, spanning multiple charge types, committed in a single course of conduct against one victim over five years
• How to approach the individual seriousness of offences that, taken alone, would fall within Local Court jurisdiction, when those offences form part of a serious and sustained pattern of abuse
• The weight to be given to the offender's subjective circumstances, including the victim's OCD-related vulnerabilities noted in the judgment
• The appropriate duration and terms of an apprehended violence order (AVO) following the sentence

Decision

King SC DCJ approached sentencing by recognising that, while most individual offences (other than the sexual assault) carried maximum penalties within Local Court limits, the offences could not be assessed in isolation. The five-year course of conduct against a single victim, the offender's wife, significantly elevated the overall criminality. The Crown accepted that, viewed individually, the bulk of the charges would ordinarily attract Local Court penalties, but the cumulative nature of the conduct informed the sentencing exercise.

The sexual intercourse without consent charge (Count 1) carried the most serious consequences, with a maximum penalty of 14 years and a standard non-parole period of seven years. The court's reasons dealt with the facts of that offence in considerable detail, given the jury's rejection of the offender's account that the intercourse was consensual and the victim had indicated willingness by offering him a choice of lingerie.

His Honour also had regard to the offender's subjective features, which the catchwords identify as relevant, and noted that the victim experienced a significant degree of OCD, a circumstance treated as contextually relevant to the course of offending rather than as mitigation. The court expressed the view that, absent a similar relationship dynamic, reoffending was unlikely.

On the AVO, the court ordered that it run for two years commencing after the offender's parole eligibility date of 30 July 2027, covering the parole period. His Honour acknowledged uncertainty about whether the legislation strictly required a longer period and indicated willingness to revisit the matter in chambers if needed.

Orders Made

• Aggregate sentence of four years with a non-parole period of two years, backdated to commence on 31 July 2025
• First eligible for parole on 30 July 2027
• Balance of term of two years commencing on 31 July 2027 and expiring on 30 July 2029
• Apprehended Violence Order for two years to commence after 30 July 2027 (covering the parole period)

The following was confirmed in the transcript:

• An AVO was made for two years, commencing after 30 July 2027 (covering the parole period)
• All offences were characterised as domestic violence offences
• His Honour confirmed the offender's parole eligibility date as 30 July 2027, indicating a head sentence and non-parole period were imposed, though the specific terms were not reproduced in the text provided

Key Takeaways

• A large volume of domestic violence charges that would individually fall within Local Court sentencing limits can carry materially greater weight when they reflect a sustained, five-year course of conduct against a single victim in an intimate relationship.

• The District Court treated the sexual intercourse without consent count as the most serious charge, attracting a standard non-parole period of seven years under s 61I of the Crimes Act 1900, and the jury's rejection of a consent defence was central to the sentencing facts.

• Where a jury returns a not guilty verdict on some counts in a multi-count domestic violence trial, the Crown's facts on sentence are constrained to remain consistent with the verdicts returned, and the sentencing court cannot rely on facts that sit in tension with acquittals.

• AVO duration following a custodial sentence involves a legislative default that ties the order to the term of imprisonment plus an additional period, though the court retains discretion to impose a different period where there is good reason to do so.

• Characterising all offences as domestic violence offences, even where individual charges are relatively minor, reflects the court's recognition of the relational context in which the offending occurred.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61 (common assault), 61I (sexual intercourse without consent), 195(1)(a) (damaging property)
- Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), s 13(1) (intimidation)

Cases cited: None identified in the judgment text provided.