R v Martin HARMATA [2013] NSWDC 214

R v Martin HARMATA [2013] NSWDC 214

Because there was no clear picture of earlier sentencing patterns, the Court sentenced by reference to the then maximum penalties, the objective seriousness of each offence and the acknowledgement that sentences at the time were lower than for comparable modern offending. The offences involved child victims, abuse of the offender's position as teacher and religious brother, varying degrees of planning, and catastrophic consequences for the victims. Disputed non-conceded allegations were disregarded unless proved beyond reasonable doubt, but the Court was satisfied that SC was punished because of his resistance. After allowing a 25% discount for early guilty pleas and finding special...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Sentence / Sentencing After Pleas of Guilty; Offender Committed for Sentence From the Local Court on 24 May 2013
Outcome
Offender convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of seven years with a non-parole period of three years six months.
Legal Topics
['historical Child Sexual Assault' 'indecent Assault on a Person Under Sixteen Years' 'indecent Assault on a Person Under Sixteen Years and Under Authority' 'breach of Trust' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Matter' 'special Circumstances' 'guilty Plea Discount']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['historical Child Sexual Assault' 'indecent Assault on a Person Under Sixteen Years' 'indecent Assault on a Person Under Sixteen Years and Under Authority' 'breach of Trust' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Matter' 'special Circumstances' 'guilty Plea Discount']

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

Sentence / Sentencing After Pleas of Guilty; Offender Committed for Sentence From the Local Court on 24 May 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['How to sentence historical child sexual assault offences committed in 1985 and 1987 under the then applicable law and sentencing patterns.' 'Whether earlier sentencing patterns could be taken into account where there was not a clear picture of those patterns and practices.' 'The objective seriousness of each indecent assault offence, including the Form 1 matter and the circumstances of breach of trust and planning.' 'How to treat disputed factual allegations placed before the Court on sentence.' 'Whether the offender should receive a discount for early pleas of guilty and whether special circumstances should be found.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because there was no clear picture of earlier sentencing patterns, the Court sentenced by reference to the then maximum penalties, the objective seriousness of each offence and the acknowledgement that sentences at the time were lower than for comparable modern offending. The offences involved child victims, abuse of the offender's position as teacher and religious brother, varying degrees of planning, and catastrophic consequences for the victims. Disputed non-conceded allegations were disregarded unless proved beyond reasonable doubt, but the Court was satisfied that SC was punished because of his resistance. After allowing a 25% discount for early guilty pleas and finding special...

Court Disposition

Offender convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of seven years with a non-parole period of three years six months.

Orders

  • ['The non-publication orders concerning the names of the three victims, MD, SC and SW, were reconfirmed.' 'The non-publication orders concerning the names of Mr P and Mr W were reconfirmed.' 'The offender was convicted of one offence of indecent assault on a person under the age of 16 years and three offences of...