Director of Public Prosecutions v Matthew Simon Freeman [2011] NSWLC 8

Director of Public Prosecutions v Matthew Simon Freeman [2011] NSWLC 8

The offender's conduct in fabricating character references and then giving deliberately false sworn evidence was serious offending against the administration of justice, committed on two occasions in two courts for his own benefit. Although he was remorseful, had good prospects of rehabilitation, and his family would suffer hardship, those matters did not amount to circumstances justifying a non-custodial outcome. General deterrence and denunciation required full-time imprisonment. Because the pleas were not entered at the first available opportunity, a 20% discount was allowed. Partial accumulation was required to reflect the distinct criminality of the false evidence offences and the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentencing After Guilty Pleas
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to full-time imprisonment for the offences.
Legal Topics
['perjury' 'using Fabricated False Evidence to Mislead a Judicial Tribunal' 'discount for Guilty Plea' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'denunciation' 'hardship to Family' 'accumulation and Totality']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['perjury' 'using Fabricated False Evidence to Mislead a Judicial Tribunal' 'discount for Guilty Plea' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'denunciation' 'hardship to Family' 'accumulation and Totality']

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 / Sentencing After Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What discount should be allowed for the offender's guilty pleas." 'The objective seriousness of using fabricated false evidence and making a false statement on oath amounting to perjury.' "Whether hardship to the offender's family justified leniency." 'Whether any penalty other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate.' 'Whether the sentences should be concurrent or partly accumulated.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's conduct in fabricating character references and then giving deliberately false sworn evidence was serious offending against the administration of justice, committed on two occasions in two courts for his own benefit. Although he was remorseful, had good prospects of rehabilitation, and his family would suffer hardship, those matters did not amount to circumstances justifying a non-custodial outcome. General deterrence and denunciation required full-time imprisonment. Because the pleas were not entered at the first available opportunity, a 20% discount was allowed. Partial accumulation was required to reflect the distinct criminality of the false evidence offences and the...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to full-time imprisonment for the offences.

Orders

  • ['As to sequences 1, 2 and 3 of H 42082012 being charges of using fabricated false evidence with intent to mislead a judicial tribunal, the offender is convicted and sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of 12 months commencing 20 April 2011 and expiring on 19 April 2012.' 'As to the charge of make false...