R v ROSENSTRAUSS [2011] NSWDC 46

R v ROSENSTRAUSS [2011] NSWDC 46

The Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was as young as she recalled, so the offender was sentenced on the more cautious basis that she was older as he asserted. Applying the historical sentencing range, but recognising the serious breach of trust, repeated sexual assaults on a child, the need for punishment and deterrence, and also the offender's early guilty pleas, genuine remorse, good character, rehabilitation prospects and special circumstances, nothing less than full-time custody was required for each matter. The aggregate sentence was a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of three years.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence Following Early Guilty Plea
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment with an overall non-parole period of two years and head sentence of three years, to be released to parole on 17 February 2013.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'indecent Assault' 'historical Offences' 'child Sexual Offences']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'indecent Assault' 'historical Offences' 'child Sexual Offences']

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 Following Early Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for three historical indecent assault offences against a child under sixteen.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was younger at the time of the offences than the offender asserted.' 'Whether full-time custody was required for each offence despite the delay, guilty pleas, remorse and rehabilitation prospects.' 'How the historical sentencing range applicable at or soon after the time of the offences should be applied.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was as young as she recalled, so the offender was sentenced on the more cautious basis that she was older as he asserted. Applying the historical sentencing range, but recognising the serious breach of trust, repeated sexual assaults on a child, the need for punishment and deterrence, and also the offender's early guilty pleas, genuine remorse, good character, rehabilitation prospects and special circumstances, nothing less than full-time custody was required for each matter. The aggregate sentence was a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of three years.

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to imprisonment with an overall non-parole period of two years and head sentence of three years, to be released to parole on 17 February 2013.

Orders

  • ['For the second count on the indictment, a fixed term of imprisonment of one year commencing 18 February 2011.' 'For the third count on the indictment, a fixed term of imprisonment of one year commencing 18 August 2011.' 'For the first count on the indictment, taking into account the matter on the Form 1,...