R v WE (No.19) [2020] NSWSC 1569

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v WE (No.19) [2020] NSWSC 1569 Hearing dates: 30 September 2020 Date of orders: 11 November 2020 Decision date: 11 November 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Bellew J Decision: 1. The offender is convicted of the offence of doing acts in preparation for, or planning, a terrorist act or acts. 2. The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 16 years commencing on 12 October 2016 and expiring 11 October 2032. 3. I specify a non-parole period of 12 years imprisonment commencing on 12 October 2016 and expiring on 11 October 2028. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Offences – Sentence – Doing acts in preparation for a terrorist act – Offender arrested in possession of knives and camouflage clothing – Steps taken by offender in an effort to conceal the knives – Where offending motivated by an adherence to extremist ideology – Where the commission of a terrorist act was imminent at the time of the offender's arrest – Necessity to impose a sentence which would denounce the offending and protect the community – Necessity for general deterrence CRIMINAL LAW – Offences – Sentence – Doing acts in preparation for a terrorist act – Where offender 16 years of age at the time of the offending – Serious offending – Adult like behaviour – Relevance of youth on sentence – Consideration of the extent of the mitigatory effect of youth in cases of serious offending CRIMINAL LAW – Practice and procedure – Where self-represented offender waived his right to be present at sentence hearing – Determination that the hearing should proceed – Principles to be applied CRIMINAL LAW – Practice and procedure – Amicus Curiae – Where offender's father sought to appear for the offender on sentence – Where the offender did not wish his father to appear – Principles governing leave to a person to appear as Amicus Curiae Legislation Cited: Children (Detention Centres) Act 1987 (NSW) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) Stronger Communities Legislation Amendment (Crimes) Act 2020 (NSW) Cases Cited: Attorney General of NSW v X and anor (2013) 235 A Crim R 17; [2013] NSWSC 1392 Benbrika v R (2010) 29 VR 593; [2010] VSCA 281 BP v R (2010) 201 A Crim R 379; [2010] NSWCCA 159 DPP (Cth) v Besim [2017] VSCA 158 DPP (Cth) v Fattal [2013] VSCA 276 DPP (Cth) v MHK (2017) 52 VR 272; [2017] VSCA 157 Elomar v R (2014) 316 ALR 206; [2014] NSWCCA 303 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Jamal v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 585; [2012] NSWCCA 198 JM v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 55; [2012] NSWCCA 83 KT v R (2008) 182 A Crim R 571; [2008] NSWCCA 51 Lawrence v R [1933] AC 699 Levy v Victoria (1997) 189 CLR 579; [1997] HCA 31 Lodhi v R (2007) 179 A Crim R 470; [2007] NSWCCA 360 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; [1984] HCA 46 National Australia Bank Limited v Hokit Pty Limited (1996) 39 NSWLR 377 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Benbrika (2009) 222 FLR 433; [2009] VSC 21 R v HG [2018] NSWSC 1849 R v Hoang [2003] NSWCCA 380 R v Jones (1998) 72 SASR 281; [1998] SASC 7021 R v Kahar [2016] EWCA Crim 568 R v Khalid and ors [2017] NSWSC 1365 R v Khazaal [2009] NSWSC 1015 R v Lodhi (2006) 199 FLR 364; [2006] NSWSC 691 R v Martin (1999) 1 Cr App Rep 477 R v Mokbel (2010) 30 VR 115; [2010] VSCA 11 R v Touma [2008] NSWSC 1475 R v Tran (2002) 4 VR 457; [2002] VSCA 52 R v WE (No. 13) [2020] NSWSC 225 R v WE (No.15) [2020] NSWSC 332 Taupati v R [2017] VSCA 106 The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 Williams v R (2012) 62 MVR 382; [2012] NSWCCA 286 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina – Crown WE – Accused Representation: Counsel: P McGuire SC and B Anniwell – Crown Accused – Self-represented