• Lawyers in Sydney
• Lawyers in Melbourne
• Lawyers in Brisbane
• Lawyers in Perth
• Family lawyers
• Employment lawyers
• Criminal lawyers
• Wills and estates lawyers
• Find a lawyer

1. Benjamin Luke Brown, on 9 July 2025, you were convicted after a trial by jury of one count of aggravated intentionally unlawfully choking, suffocating or strangling so as to render insensible or unconscious and two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Each of these offences were aggravated by reason of the fact that they involved family violence.

2. Given that the jury convicted you, it follows that they accepted the complainant's version of what occurred on the night of your offending. Therefore, the facts on which you are to be sentenced are as follows.

3. You and the victim commenced a relationship in November 2021. The victim was then 19 years old, and you were 41. You are now 43. You moved in together in January 2022 and at the time these offences were committed, you were living in a caravan park.

4. An emergency call to police from a neighbour reported hearing a woman screaming and crying and saying “you've just fucking hit me”. She was taken to the Canberra Hospital that night and treated for the injuries she sustained. The victim gave a family violence evidence-in-chief interview and her first complaint to the police was captured on body-worn camera footage. After the victim arrived home that night, you told her to leave and slapped her with an open hand, causing a cut to the inside of her lip. That is the basis of the first account of assault occasioning actual bodily harm for which you were convicted.

5. The victim then went into the bathroom to check her lip. You then pulled her from the bathroom by her hair forcibly enough for her to sustain injury to her left ear which kept bleeding. That is the basis of the second conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm. You then choked the victim to the point where she became unconscious, at least for a brief time. During the choking incident, the victim felt like she was going to die.

6. The injuries suffered by the victim, in respect of the choking, included bruising on the Adam's apple, right side of the neck, lower jawbone, and chin as well as the cut lip and L-shaped laceration to the left ear.

7. The fact that the victim was rendered unconscious, at least for a short time, is evidenced by the fact that later she was unable to explain to the police why her pants were removed at the time when they attended your residence that night.

8. Your history of compliance for subject to community-based orders is somewhat mixed. You do have a criminal history which dates back to when you were still a child, however the most serious offences for which you have previously been convicted were the serious family violence offences of [redacted] in 2015 and sexual intercourse with a young person. You were eventually released on parole for that offending, sometime in 2021, and met the victim late in 2021.

9. The pre-sentence report I have read indicates that in the past you have been assessed as high risk of reoffending. This appears to have been because you have had a significant history of alcohol and drug abuse. You claim to have been abstinent since 2025, however, your capacity to remain drug-free is yet to be tested in the community.

10. It seems to me from all of the material I have read, including your own letter, that you have not fully accepted responsibility for your behaviour on the night in question. I accept that this was a one-off incident in the context of your relationship, which I note has been on foot since 2021 and is clearly ongoing. Nevertheless, in sentencing, I cannot overlook that it is plainly obvious from the video evidence of the family violence interview and the body-worn camera the police wore when they went there that night that the victim on that night was very, very frightened. The injuries to the left ear, which appeared red and inflamed in the photos, must have been caused by at least significant force.

11. I acknowledge the victim's attitude in relation to your offending. However, I cannot regard it as really relevant in sentencing. The fact that she was prepared to lie on oath in this Court and in her letter to the Court continuing that fiction is somewhat disturbing. At the very least, it shows she is a very vulnerable woman who was, and remains, very dependent upon you.

12. I accept that you are currently motivated to engage in rehabilitative programs which will enable you to move forward as both drug-free and as a person who can control his emotions, particularly his temper. Your behaviour in custody has been exemplary by all accounts and I take that into account. Again, though, based on the pre-sentence report, and notwithstanding the ongoing support you have from very good people who have been in your life for a number of years, and continue to stand by you, I must regard your prospects of rehabilitation as somewhat guarded.

13. General and specific deterrence is an important consideration in sentencing for offences of this type. I acknowledge that this is a one-off incident in the context of your relationship, so general rather than specific deterrence, is probably more important. When criminal assaults occur in the privacy of the family home, it is important that this Court denounce that conduct and send a clear message to the community that violence in any form is unacceptable and the perpetrators will be held to account.

14. That is undoubtedly why the ACT Legislature amended the family violence legislation in 2022 to increase the penalties for offences occurred in the context of family violence. I must have regard to the maximum penalties now prescribed for these offences, being 13 years for the choking offence and seven years for each of the assault occasioning actual bodily harm counts.

15. I have read each of the authorities to which I was referred, which include but are not limited to: R v Palmer [2020] ACTSC 13, DPP v Linsley [2023] ACTSC 255, DPP v Howarth [2024] ACTSC 322, DPP v Adams [2025] ACTSC 167, Murphy v The King [2025] ACTCA 10. Most of those sentences must be viewed in the light that they were imposed pre-the date of the 2022 amendments. A couple of them were not but most of them are. This Court has observed that where the penalties are increased, the Court must recognise that and give effect to the increased penalties.

16. I was urged to impose an intensive correction order on account of the fact that you have already spent over a year in custody and in light of your prospects of rehabilitation. I am confident that you can pursue steps towards rehabilitation and engage in programs if you continue to remain as highly motivated as you appear to be now, whether you are in custody or when you are released on parole. I accept, as I said earlier, this was a one-off incident and, in the circumstances, I intend to impose wholly concurrent sentences.

Orders

17. For these reasons I make the following orders: (1) For each of the offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (CC2024/7450 and CC2024/7451), you are sentenced to six months of imprisonment. Both those sentences are to be concurrent with each other and are to commence on 29 July 2024. (2) For the offence of choking (CC2024/7452), I impose a sentence of three years. I impose a non-parole period of 18 months. (3) Recognising that you have been in custody since 29 July 2024, both the head sentence and the non-parole period are backdated to 29 July 2024. The head sentence will therefore expire on 28 July 2027, and you will be eligible for parole on 28 January 2026.

I certify that the preceding seventeen [17] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of her Honour Acting Justice Kelly. Associate: Date: 19 September 2025