Charges: Making a threat unlawfully to kill x 1; Stealing x 1; Breach of protective bail conditions x 7; Breach of bail x 1; Breach of violence restraining order (VRO) x 8; Possession of property reasonably suspected to be stolen x 1; Fraud x 1; Breach of police order x 1.
Appeal type: Appeal against sentence.
Facts: The appellant and respondent were in a relationship for about 3 weeks (). The appellant had come home to find the complainant having sex with another man, which sparked a confrontation. The police issued the appellant with a police order preventing the appellant from approaching the property and complainant (). The appellant returned to the property the same day and tried to force his way in (). The complainant obtained a violence restraining order (VRO) against the appellant (). Over a period of two days, the appellant called the complainant many times and sent text messages of a frightening nature, including threats to kill her (-). This conduct constituted a breach of the VRO subject of the appeal. The following day, the complainant repeatedly rode his motorcycle past the house while the complainant was inside (). This conduct constituted a breach of the protective bail conditions subject of the appeal.
The sentencing judge imposed a head sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment ().
Issues: There were 4 grounds of appeal:
Decision and Reasoning: All four grounds were dismissed for the following reasons.
For ground 4, the appellant bore the burden of proof in establishing remorse on the balance of probabilities (). While the appellant had expressed some level of responsibility for his actions, he displayed minimal victim empathy (). It was open to the sentencing judge to find that the appellant demonstrated no remorse for the impact of his offending on the victim ().
For ground 1, the breach was a sustained course of conduct and the messages were intended to terrify the complainant ().
For ground 2, the breach was not an isolated breach and was intended to intimidate the complainant ().
For ground 3, the sentence was well within the acceptable range ().