A child molester who was convicted after a 20-year delay has lost a bid to have his sentence reduced for abusing his step-daughter.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The man, now 52, was living in Canberra in the late 1980s and early 1990s when he committed two serious sexual offences against the girl.
The victim, who was under the age of 10, complained to her mother and to the child at risk assessment unit at the Canberra Hospital in 1991.
Her mother confronted the man, and he made some admissions and left Canberra for Western Australia.
The crimes caused "serious and long-lasting personal harm" to both the girl and the mother, who suffered ongoing psychological disturbance and distress.
For unknown reasons, it took police 20 years to bring the man to court in 2011.
He was extradited to the ACT and, despite claiming to have no memory of the offences, pleaded guilty to two crimes, saying he couldn't see why the victim would have made the allegations up.
He was sentenced to six years and six months imprisonment, but appealed to the ACT Court of Appeal before Justices John Burns, Richard Refshauge, and Iain Ross.
The man's lawyers argued the sentence had not properly accounted for the discount the offender was entitled to, due to the 20-year delay in bringing him to court.
He said the sentencing judge, Acting Justice John Nield, had not explicitly told him the sentence reduction he had been given for the delay.
There are cases in which delays can reduce an offender's sentence, either if it caused them suspense, fear or uncertainty over an impending prosecution, or if they managed to rehabilitate in the intervening period.
But the court dismissed the man's appeal last week, finding the judge had properly considered the delay in imposing his sentence.
"There is no doubt that, in an appropriate case, delay in the prosecution of what becomes a stale offence should ... be taken into account in formulating an appropriate sentence," the judges wrote.
"There can be no doubt, however, that, in this case, the learned sentencing judge was aware of the delay and took it into account when sentencing."
The man had not suffered suspense or uncertainty during the 20-year delay, the court found, because he had not even been approached about the allegations before 2011.
"Indeed, he had, it appears, quite forgotten about the incidents and, in those circumstances, it could not be said that he was suffering by being fearful as to whether he would be charged," the judges wrote.
"No doubt there was a shock when he was ultimately arrested, but that is likely to be so whenever a person is arrested."
The offender also argued the sentence was manifestly excessive, something the Court of Appeal also dismissed.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, will be eligible for release in April 2017.