The state’s oldest person to be sentenced over child sexual assault is essentially a free man for the remainder of his life.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
A 95-year-old Nunawading man, who admitted to sexually abusing his own granddaughter 26 years ago while living in Eden, was sentenced for the heinous crime on Friday in Bega District Court.
One year and 10 months, wholly suspended. It meant, despite some paperwork, he walked away from the courthouse following Friday’s hearing, as did his victim, now a grown woman.
Okay so he’s an old guy with a “low risk of reoffending” and apparently of “prior good character”. A lengthy jail sentence, or any for that matter, would likely be a life sentence.
However, the apparent leniency brings several questions to mind.
Firstly, does that sentence reflect the crime – regardless of age?
Prosecutors told the court the man should be jailed over the abuse, as “age is not a licence to commit sexual offences”.
Is there a precedent being set whereby senior citizens can get away with what’s regarded as society’s worst offence because putting them behind bars may be too harsh on them?
There’s another thing. Isn’t a prison term meant to be harsh – to be punishment for a crime committed? He only acknowledged his crime when arrested last year, more than two decades after the offence. And even then he placed the blame on the 12-year-old girl for “acting like a stripper” and “a sex pot” from the age of three.
What punishment would fit that crime? Surely a 22-month good behaviour bond is far from community expectations.
In NSW, aggravated sexual assault carries a maximum sentence of 20 years, with a standard 10-year non-parole period.
Even accounting for a 25 per cent “discount” for pleading guilty, there’s a lot of air between that maximum and a suspended term. Issues taken into account for sentencing were, in the majority, to do with the outcome – prospect of prison for a 95-year-old, possible exploitation behind bars, the psychological stress of jail.
What about taking into account the crime committed?
There was mention of the “low to mid-range objective seriousness” of the offence, but again we’re here questioning the level of child abuse in our community and courts, and the penalties – or relative lack thereof – dished out.