NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v White [2022] NSWDC 769 Hearing dates: 24 November 2022 Date of orders: 24 November 2022 Decision date: 24 November 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Haesler SC DCJ Decision: Sentence of imprisonment of 2 years 4 months with a non-parole period of 1 year and 2 months Catchwords: CRIME — Child sex offences — Child abuse material — Possession SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Prior good character — No record of previous convictions — Late plea of guilty SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Deterrence — Objective seriousness SENTENCING — Sentencing procedure — Instinctive synthesis — Mental illness — Alcohol abuse Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Cases Cited: Minehan v R [2010] NSWCCA 140 R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89 Category: Sentence Parties: Karl Edward White (the offender) Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) Representation: Counsel: M Valentin (for the accused)
Solicitors: Astor Legal (for the accused) S Knox solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) File Number(s): 2021/31140
JUDGMENT – ex tempore revised
Introduction 1. On the morning of the date fixed for his trial Karl White pleaded guilty to a charge of possess child abuse material: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 91H(2). That plea had some modest utilitarian value. It requires I reduce the otherwise appropriate sentence by 5%. White, as was his right, adhered to the assertion he was not guilty until the last minute. He is not to be punished for that, but it means he does not get the benefit that would have accrued had he offered a guilty plea at an earlier opportunity. 2. The offender attended Wollongong Police Station on 3 February 2021. He was arrested. He has been on bail ever since. That bail has been relatively strict. He has kept to the conditions of his bail and not reoffended. 3. I am sure he regrets what he did. His arrest has had a salutary impact on him. He has been on strict bail ever since, but more importantly his arrest and offending were the 'final straws', in a marriage that was 'teetering on the brink'. Importantly, it led to some extra curial punishment – separation from his daughter. That will continue for some time. Trust was broken with his family and that may never be restored.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate