A Canberra man convicted of molesting two sisters in the late 1990s has won an appeal to have his jail term reduced.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Michael Alan Gillard, 62, "cynically and evilly" abused the two teenage girls when he looked after them during school holidays at his Canberra home.
ACT Supreme Court Justice John Burns described Gillard's crimes as a "gross breach of trust" when he sentenced him to 10 years and nine months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of seven years, in December 2014.
Justice Burns said Gillard had a history of denial and had repeatedly sought to downplay his own culpability
The sentencing followed years of appeals launched by Gillard.
He originally faced separate trials in 2011, and was found guilty in both.
Gillard successfully challenged some of the convictions from his first trial in the High Court, which ordered a retrial on those charges.
However, that retrial never took place because Gillard later made a plea deal with prosecutors, which allowed Justice Burns to proceed to sentence.
Gillard last year launched a bid in the ACT Court of Appeal to have that sentenced reduced, arguing it was "manifestly excessive".
He also argued different sentences for his individual crimes were accumulated to an inappropriate degree and had resulted in a "crushing" sentence - typically one that destroyed an offender's hopes of a useful life post-release.
In a decision published this week, the ACT Court of Appeal rejected arguments Gillard's sentence had been excessive or crushing. But it still upheld his appeal, finding a "somewhat more lenient sentence" was appropriate.
The court said there was no information to suggest the longer non-parole period imposed by Justice Burns "should make any significant difference to any expectation of a worthwhile life after his return to the community, or rendered the new sentence 'crushing'."
But it found it was appropriate to consider Gillard's submission that although the offences Justice Burns dealt with were overall less serious than those dealt with in 2011, the new sentences imposed had been "inexplicably, significantly more severe".
The court said the increased sentence and non-parole period could easily have given rise to the perception the offender was being punished for pursuing his right to appeal the court's decision.
Gillard was re-sentenced to nine years and two months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of five years and three months.
He will be eligible for release in March next year.
