R v VR [2024] NSWCCA 91

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v VR [2024] NSWCCA 91 Hearing dates: 13 March 2024 Date of orders: 7 June 2024 Decision date: 07 June 2024 Before: Mitchelmore JA at [1]; Wright J at [2]; Hamill J at [3] Decision: (1) Allow the appeal. (2) Quash the sentence imposed by Craigie SC DCJ on 30 June 2023. (3) In lieu thereof sentence the respondent to an aggregate sentence of 14 years and 6 months to commence on 17 March 2023 and expire on 16 September 2037. The non-parole period of 10 years is to commence on 17 March 2023 and expire on 16 March 2033. Catchwords: CRIMINAL APPEALS – prosecution appeal against asserted inadequacy of sentence – sexual offences against three separate victims – offences spanning 17 years – 12 counts of sexual intercourse without consent – grave examples – whether aggregate sentence manifestly inadequate – where offences committed against women to whom the offender was married or in a serious relationship – coercive control – sexual assault as punishment – degrading and humiliating conduct – where lengthy period of non-offending – evidence of good character and lack of criminal record – sentences imposed after trial – no evidence of remorse or insight – whether indicative sentences inadequate – combination of lenient sentence and absence of substantial notional accumulation – aggregate sentence manifestly inadequate, unreasonable and unjust – sentence failed to reflect gravity of offending and vindicate dignity of separate victims – residual discretion – respondent re-sentenced Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61, 61I, 61N(2), 578A Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 68A Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), s 13 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 44, 53A, 53A(2)(b) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5D(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 166-167 Cases Cited: CMB v Attorney General of New South Wales (2015) 256 CLR 346; [2015] HCA 9 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Gabrieli v R [2023] NSWCCA 204 Giacometti v R [2023] NSWCCA 150 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 JM v R [2014] NSWCCA 297; 246 A Crim R 528 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Mol v R [2017] NSWCCA 76 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 R v AD [2020] NSWCCA 275 R v JW (2010) 77 NSWLR 7; [2010] NSWCCA 49 R v MAK; R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 381; (2006) 167 A Crim R 159 R v McKenzie [2022] NSWCCA 119; (2022) 299 A Crim R 40 R v Packer [2023] NSWCCA 87 The Queen v Carroll (2002) 213 CLR 635; [2002] HCA 55 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Appellant) VR (a pseudonym) (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Brett Hatfield SC (Appellant) Claire O'Neill (Respondent)