R v Coleman (No. 2) [2024] NSWDC 576

R v Coleman (No. 2) [2024] NSWDC 576

The offender, a senior police officer, was convicted of misconduct in public office for using his position as investigating officer to pursue his own sexual gratification with a vulnerable victim and committing sexual touching offences. Although mental impairment contributed materially to his offending, reducing both the objective seriousness and moral culpability, the conduct was wilful and sustained, causing significant damage to public trust. Sentencing must reflect general deterrence and denunciation, but is mitigated by mental impairment, minimal risk of recidivism, excellent prospects of rehabilitation, qualified remorse, and hardship experienced during incarceration. Aggregate...

Parties
Crown: Rex; Offender: Glen Coleman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment
Legal Topics
Misconduct in Public Office, Sexual Touching, Sentencing, Abuse of Trust, Police Misconduct
Criminal Law Misconduct in Public Office Sexual Touching Sentencing Abuse of Trust Police Misconduct

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 8 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Crown

Glen Coleman

Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Assessment of objective seriousness for misconduct in public office
  2. 2 Impact of mental impairment on moral culpability and sentencing
  3. 3 Appropriate sentencing for sexual touching without consent

Ratio Decidendi

The offender, a senior police officer, was convicted of misconduct in public office for using his position as investigating officer to pursue his own sexual gratification with a vulnerable victim and committing sexual touching offences. Although mental impairment contributed materially to his offending, reducing both the objective seriousness and moral culpability, the conduct was wilful and sustained, causing significant damage to public trust. Sentencing must reflect general deterrence and denunciation, but is mitigated by mental impairment, minimal risk of recidivism, excellent prospects of rehabilitation, qualified remorse, and hardship experienced during incarceration. Aggregate...

Court Disposition

Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment

Orders

  • Count 1 – Misconduct in Public Office: 3 years and 2 months imprisonment.
  • Count 5 – Sexual Touching s 61KC(a) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW): 3 months imprisonment.