R v Khazma [2019] NSWSC 416

R v Khazma [2019] NSWSC 416

Although the murder was brutal, committed against a very young and defenceless child and in the context of prior assaults and many injuries, the Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offender's culpability was so extreme that only life imprisonment could meet the statutory purposes in s 6(1). The community concerns could be met by a lengthy determinate sentence. The murder was in the high range of objective seriousness, the offender's subjective circumstances carried little mitigating weight apart from age, he showed no remorse or responsibility, and denunciation, deterrence, retribution and community protection required an aggregate sentence of 44 years with a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Murder and Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm / Sentence After Jury Convictions
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 44 years with a non-parole period of 33 years.
Legal Topics
['murder of a Child' 'life Imprisonment' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'objective Seriousness' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'victim Impact Statements' 'protective Custody']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['murder of a Child' 'life Imprisonment' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'objective Seriousness' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'victim Impact Statements' 'protective Custody']

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 Sentencing for Murder and Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm / Sentence After Jury Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the murder warranted a sentence of life imprisonment under s 6(1) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).' 'Which secondary injuries, if any, were proved beyond reasonable doubt to have been inflicted by the offender and could be taken into account on sentence.' 'What determinate sentence and non-parole period should be imposed for the murder if life imprisonment was not warranted.' 'What sentences should be indicated for the two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and whether an aggregate sentence should be imposed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the murder was brutal, committed against a very young and defenceless child and in the context of prior assaults and many injuries, the Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offender's culpability was so extreme that only life imprisonment could meet the statutory purposes in s 6(1). The community concerns could be met by a lengthy determinate sentence. The murder was in the high range of objective seriousness, the offender's subjective circumstances carried little mitigating weight apart from age, he showed no remorse or responsibility, and denunciation, deterrence, retribution and community protection required an aggregate sentence of 44 years with a...

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 44 years with a non-parole period of 33 years.

Orders

  • ['For murder, the Court indicated a sentence of imprisonment of 40 years with a non-parole period of 30 years.' 'For Count 2, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the Court indicated a term of imprisonment of 3 years.' 'For Count 3, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the Court indicated a term of...