R v Rzeminski [2022] NSWDC 731

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Rzeminski [2022] NSWDC 731 Hearing dates: 11 November 2022 Date of orders: 11 November 2022 Decision date: 11 November 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Haesler SC DCJ Decision: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 15 months. To be released forthwith upon entering a recognizance pursuant to s 20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). See orders [30] Catchwords: CRIME – Use carriage service-procure child under 16 years for sexual activity SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – guilty plea – seriousness of online child sex offences- additional matter on schedule- use of Assumed Online Identity - period in custody for breach of bail - time served sufficient deterrent - recognisance can meet purposes of sentencing relevant to rehabilitation Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Cases Cited: Adamson v R (2015) 47 VR 268 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Watson [2016] VSCA 73 R v Dennison [2011] NSWCCA 114 R v Porte [2015] NSWCCA 174 Category: Sentence Parties: Noah Alexander Rzeminski (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth) Representation: Solicitors: Ms A Socorro, Legal Aid (for the offender) Ms I Kallinosis (for Director of Public Prosecutions, Commonwealth) File Number(s): 2021/00144225

sentence – ex tempore revised

Introduction 1. Noah Rzeminski today adhered to a plea of guilty entered in the Local Court to a charge that, he between April 2021 and 4 May 2021 did, as a sender, use a carriage service to transmit a communication to another person, the recipient, with the intention of procuring the recipient to engage in sexual activity with himself and the recipient was under 16 years of age. That offence pursuant to s 474.26(1) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment. 2. He also asks that when I sentence him for that offence, I take into account on a s 16BA Crimes Act 1914 schedule an offence of soliciting procure/using a carriage service; the material being child abuse material: s 474.22(1) Criminal Code. If sentenced separately that matter also carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment, but I do not sentence him for that matter. It is taken into account when I formulate the appropriate sentence for the matter to which the plea was entered. I will do so in accordance with the guideline judgment which applies in State and Commonwealth matters giving greater weight to deterrence and community protection for the matter for sentence: R v Dennison [2011] NSWCCA 114. 3. The maximum penalties are one important guide to the exercise of the Court's discretion. They indicate, as Parliament intended, that Courts take into account that matters involving children by use of the internet can have profound and deleterious effects upon victims for many years. There is an absolute prohibition on sexual activity with children and that prohibition is intended to protect children from the physical and psychological harm taken to be caused by premature sexual activity. 4. The Courts recognise that the harm done to child victims of cybersex offences can be no less serious than in person offences and the medium of the internet permits offenders to employ techniques which are designed to coerce or groom a child in the participation of such activities. 5. The legislature has sought to implement society's detestation of the practice of encouraging children to engage in inappropriate sexual behaviour and to protect children from immature decisions: Adamson v R (2015) 47 VR 268 at [27]. 6. Accordingly, appellate courts have stressed the need to give primacy for the need for general deterrence and denunciation: R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294; [2015] NSWCCA 174 at [52]; Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Watson (2016) 259 A Crim R 327; [2016] VSCA 73 at [89].