R v Schleu [2022] NSWDC 713

R v Schleu [2022] NSWDC 713

The procurement offence was objectively in the mid-range, involving persistent explicit communications over about seven weeks with a person the offender believed was 14, together with arrangements to meet. The possession offence was below mid-range because the number of images was small and no particular depravity was submitted, but it remained inherently serious and was aggravated because it occurred while the offender was on bail. Giving 25% discounts for guilty pleas and taking account of totality, mitigation, onerous custody, extra-curial punishment and the need for general deterrence, an aggregate sentence of 4 years with a 2 year non-parole period was appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
Offender sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years.
Legal Topics
['child Sex Offences' 'commonwealth Offences' 'child Abuse Material' 'using Carriage Service to Procure Person Under 16 for Sexual Activity' 'possessing Child Abuse Material']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['child Sex Offences' 'commonwealth Offences' 'child Abuse Material' 'using Carriage Service to Procure Person Under 16 for Sexual Activity' 'possessing Child Abuse Material']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentences should be imposed for using a carriage service to procure a person under 16 for sexual activity and possessing child abuse material.' 'How to assess the objective seriousness of each offence.' "What weight should be given to the offender's guilty pleas, personal circumstances, health, caring responsibilities, prior record, time in custody, COVID-19 restrictions and extra-curial punishment." 'Whether partial accumulation and the principle of totality should apply.']

Ratio Decidendi

The procurement offence was objectively in the mid-range, involving persistent explicit communications over about seven weeks with a person the offender believed was 14, together with arrangements to meet. The possession offence was below mid-range because the number of images was small and no particular depravity was submitted, but it remained inherently serious and was aggravated because it occurred while the offender was on bail. Giving 25% discounts for guilty pleas and taking account of totality, mitigation, onerous custody, extra-curial punishment and the need for general deterrence, an aggregate sentence of 4 years with a 2 year non-parole period was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Offender sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years.

Orders

  • ['The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years to commence on 2 June 2022 and expiring on 1 June 2026 with a non-parole period of 2 years. The offender is first eligible for parole on 1 June 2024.' 'The Indicative Term for sequence 1 is three years.' 'The Indicative Term for sequence 5...