DPP v Lewis

1. You were convicted of one charge of indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16 that relates to Lily Donovan.[10] This offence occurred at your home address when Lily, who was aged between four and five, was in your bedroom with you. You removed your pants and underwear to your knees and exposed your penis. Lily was facing you and she described your penis being half a foot or half a step from her face (Charge 1 - indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16).[11] Her mother walked into the bedroom saying "What are you doing dad, what are you doing?",[12] and removed her daughter from the room.

1. You were convicted of one charge of indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16, and one charge of incest relating to Jane Donovan.[13]
2. Jane was three or four years old when she was in the storage room at your home with you and her sister Lily. You were sitting on a stool and she sat on your lap. You told her that you were going to show her something and you removed something from a drawer. Although she did not have a visual memory of this object she remembers the sensation. She believed that it may have been some kind of feather. You touched her with this object on her face, asking her "How does that feel?". You placed the object on different parts of her body, including her face, her side and underarms. You then moved this object to between her legs and she felt a tickle on her vagina over her clothing (Charge 7 - indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16).[14] You asked her how it felt. She thought it was a playful situation and a game.
3. When Jane was around four years old, she recalled an occasion when she was playing around the house. She may have been on a push bike. You were angry with her and accused her of taking something from her grandma. She was put into the back of your car. You told her she had been naughty and was a brat. She recalled you looking at her through the window and having an angry face which upset her. There came a stage when the door was open. You told her you were going to teach her a lesson. You grabbed her leg. She tried to move away. She was on her hands and knees and you flipped her onto her back. She felt you tugging at her pants and her underwear moving. She thought the underwear was pulled to the side or down. She felt you push your thumb into her vagina causing her a sharp pain (Charge 10 - incest).[15] She managed to get out of the vehicle and ran away, pulling her pants back up.

1. You were convicted of two charges of indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16, relating to Delilah Lewis.[16]
2. When Delilah was around three years old, she recalls being with you in your bedroom. She was lying on the floor on her front completely naked. You were standing behind her and taking photographs of her. Delilah could hear the click of the camera (Charge 12 - indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16).[17]
3. The last offence occurred at the church. Delilah recalls being in a room with you. She was around seven years old. You were sitting on a chair and she was standing facing you. You were talking and then placed your hand on her left knee and moved it up her leg and underneath her dress. You moved your hand to her underpants and began to tickle her vagina over her underpants (Charge 17 - indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16).[18]

1. Your three victims made no complaint about your offending against them until many years later. Lily and Jane first complained to a family member when they were around 16 or 17 years of age.
2. Lily first contacted the police on 17 December 2008, and made a police statement on 10 June 2009. You were interviewed by police in relation to Lily's allegations on 2 June 2010. On 7 June 2010 Lily advised police she wished to withdraw her complaint and she did so formally by providing a police statement on 30 August 2010.
3. Jane contacted the police on 20 April 2009 and attended Morwell police station on 3 May 2009. However, no formal police statement was made at this time.[19]
4. On 6 June 2021, Delilah complained to both her partner and her parents before speaking to the police on 9 June 2021 and making statements.[20]
5. On 27 July 2021 police attended Jane's house, where both Jane and Lily were present and each indicated they now wished to make formal complaints and progress the matter.[21]
6. You were interviewed again by the police on 11 October 2022 and charged.

1. I have had regard to the six victim impact statements tendered by the prosecution. They are from your three victims, the mother of Lily and Jane, and from Delilah's mother and father.[22]
2. Lily spoke of the negative impact your offending had on her confidence, self-image, self-esteem and self-love as a young woman. She further spoke of her ongoing mental health challenges and the manner in which this affects her parenting, making her highly protective of her children.
3. Jane spoke of how your abuse distorted her inner compass, skewed her view of love into something dysfunctional, leaving her with a warped foundation in her relationships. She has struggled with anxiety, people-pleasing, suicidal ideation and debilitating pain.
4. Delilah spoke of the ongoing psychological, social and financial impacts of your offending. Your betrayal of her at a foundational age has impacted her emotional wellbeing and made socializing difficult. Poignantly, Delilah noted that as a direct result of your offending she hates having her photo taken, which was difficult to explain and further contributed to her isolation from her peers whilst growing up. She grieves the loving and protective relationship that should have existed but does not because you, her grandfather, offended against her.
5. Three of the parents of the victims provided written victim impact statements to the court which highlighted the ripple effect of your betrayal on the extended family unit, which is now significantly fractured. Furthermore, they each speak of the enormous personal toll the revelations of your offending have taken on their mental and physical health as well as their financial circumstances.

1. You are now 86 years old and have no prior convictions.
2. You were born in Canada and completed high school education equivalent to Year 12. You arrived in Australia in 1961 and met your wife. You were married within six months of meeting. Having lived in Melbourne for six months, you moved back to Canada where you remained for six years. Your four children were born in Canada. Upon your return to Australia with your family, you obtained a teaching job at a high school in Melbourne. You taught physical education and were a school chaplain for approximately six years. You then became involved in pastoral care at a church from around 1973.
3. You worked in pastoral care and as a pastor for over 30 years with the church. Your wife was diagnosed with brain tumours in around 2003 or 2004. She underwent many surgeries over the next 17 or 18 years. You became her full-time carer. She passed away in May 2021. You now live alone. As a result of this offending, all of your family have ceased all contact with you. However, you maintain the support of many friends.
4. As I observed during the plea hearing, having listened to your sworn evidence during the trial, it appears that your cognitive functioning is intact and you are a relatively intelligent person. Your counsel confirmed that you present with no mental health issues.

1. At the age of 86, you have a number of health issues. I have had regard to the patient health summary, printed on 25 August 2025 and signed by Dr Fady Tawfik.[23] You underwent triple bypass surgery in October 2018. You were diagnosed by a cardiologist with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in May 2024. This involved you suffering shortness of breath, especially with exertion, and fluid retention. You commenced taking diuretic medication. This medication has caused frequent urination. You also take medication for high blood pressure. You have had a previous episode of atrial fibrillation and take blood thinning medication and beta-blockers. You require close cardiac monitoring.
2. In addition, you have recently been diagnosed with Cholelithiasis,[24] and Hepatosteatosis.[25] You also suffer from right ankle and knee Osteoarthritis, which causes you pain and requires the occasional use of a walking stick. In 2021, you fractured the C4/5 anterior, which has caused chronic neck pain. Your hearing is impaired and you have been using hearing aids since July 2021.[26]

1. The community expects our most vulnerable and innocent young children to be nurtured and protected at all times. Therefore, any offending that involves an adult sexually abusing a child is serious. You were not any adult, but the grandfather of your three victims. As young children, your three granddaughters looked up to you. They expected their grandfather to care for them, and protect them from any evil. You did not do that, rather you breached their trust in the most vile manner by sexually abusing them. You also abused the trust that your children, the parents of your granddaughters, bestowed in you.
2. Your granddaughters were particularly young. Your relationship with them and the significant age difference represented a huge power imbalance. The offending overall occurred over some eight years. It occurred in your home and the church, places where your granddaughters were entitled to feel safe. You had opportunities to reflect and refrain, but did not do so.
3. Without doubt, Charge 10, incest, is the most serious offence you were convicted of. The seriousness of this offence is highlighted by its maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment. Jane was only four or five years old at the time of this offence. The actual offending may have been of brief duration, but it occurred in circumstances where you displayed anger towards her and was accompanied by your use of some force. You grabbed her leg and turned her onto her back. She felt you tugging at her pants and her underwear moving. She felt your thumb pushing into her vagina causing her sharp pain.
4. Unsurprisingly, the impact of your offending has been significant upon not only your three victims but also their parents.
5. While the actual conduct forming the indecent act charges is towards the lower end, the surrounding circumstances, in particular: your relationship to the victims; the breach of trust; and the young age of your victims combine to make the offending more grave.[27]
6. You were convicted following a trial, therefore I am unable to mitigate your sentence on account of a guilty plea. You maintain your innocence and there has been no expression of remorse.[28]

1. On your behalf, Mr Desmond filed written submissions dated 26 August 2025.[29] In addition to relying upon the good character evidence given during the trial, 11 written character references were tendered.[30] Further, Mr Desmond relied upon your Patient Health Summary setting out your various health conditions.[31]
2. Mr Desmond quite properly accepted that the offending of which you have been convicted must be viewed as serious. He took no issue with the matters impacting the gravity of the offending as set out in [33] to [38] of these reasons.
3. Mr Desmond highlighted the following matters:

(a) Your health issues and advanced age, which will result in imprisonment being more burdensome.

(b) Delay, in that it is relevant to your prospects of rehabilitation and as additional punishment.

(c) Your good character and contributions to the community.

(d) Generally, your positive prospects of rehabilitation.

1. Mr Desmond submitted that the principles of general deterrence, denunciation and just punishment could be adequately dealt with by a term of imprisonment but one that was wholly suspended. Such a sentence, he submitted, represents significant punishment, and at the same time would promote your continued rehabilitation.[32]
2. As outlined in [31] and [32] of these reasons, you have a number of medical issues. At the age of 86, entering the prison system for the first time will not be easy. I accept your counsel's submission that your poor physical health will make your term of imprisonment more burdensome upon you than it would be on other prisoners who do not have these various health conditions.
3. You have no prior convictions. Over 25 years have elapsed since the offending. You have no subsequent appearances.
4. I have had regard to the 11 character references tendered on your plea. I have also had regard to the evidence of your good character given during the trial.[33] I accept that other than the offending of which you have been convicted, you have led a positive life dedicated to helping others through your pastoral role in the church, and supporting your sick wife over many years. You are held in high regard by many upstanding members of our community.
5. The significant passage of time since the offending is a pertinent matter that I take into account in your favour.
6. You have led a blameless life for more than 25 years since the offending. This, considered alongside your advanced age, is significant in suggesting that you no longer pose any real risk of re-offending.
7. The offending occurred in a familial setting. The opportunity to offend that presented because of your relationship and close proximity to your granddaughters will no longer arise. You now live alone and have lost all contact with your family, grandchildren and great grandchildren. You will also be subject to reporting requirements which will provide an additional protective factor.
8. Accordingly, the protection of the community has no meaningful role in the sentencing exercise. Further, if at all relevant, specific deterrence would have minimal importance in the sentencing exercise.
9. However, I make plain, that the passage of time since the offending does not make your offending any less serious.
10. The delay since being charged is also relevant.[34] Now in your mid-eighties, you have anxiously been awaiting the outcome. I note the trial was initially listed in September 2024, but was unable to proceed due to judge availability. From then, it took another 10 months for your trial to commence. This would have been a stressful time for you not knowing your ultimate fate, and I take that fact into account as some additional punishment.

1. On behalf of the prosecution, Ms Guesdon highlighted the importance of deterrence, both general and specific,[35] and denunciation. She submitted the punitive aspects of sentencing required less weight to be given to good character and rehabilitation.
2. Ms Guesdon submitted that your moral culpability was high. She agreed that you now pose a relatively low risk of re-offending and your prospects of rehabilitation are good.
3. In terms of sentencing disposition, she submitted that the seriousness of the offending overall, required a period of immediate imprisonment.[36]
4. I take no issue with these submissions.

1. Pursuant to s 6B of the Sentencing Act 1991, upon conviction and being sentenced to a term of imprisonment on Charges 1 and 7, you fall to be sentenced as a serious sexual offender on Charges 10, 12 and 17. Pursuant to s 6D of the Sentencing Act, in determining the length of any sentence on Charges 10, 12 and 17, I must regard community protection as the principal purpose for which the sentence is imposed. A disproportionate sentence is clearly not necessary and the protection of the community has limited importance in the circumstances.
2. Pursuant to s 6E of the Sentencing Act, there is a presumption of accumulation with regards to sentencing for serious sexual offender offences. However, I must bear in mind the overarching principle of totality. I must ensure that the totality principal is applied in a manner that does not undermine the legislative policy inherent in s 6E of the Sentencing Act.[37]

1. I have had regard to the sentencing cases referred to by Mr Desmond in his written submissions,[38] and regard to sentencing practices, as best as I can, that existed at the time of your offending.[39] The cases referred to by your counsel were distinguished by Ms Guesdon.[40] Each case ultimately must be determined on its own peculiar facts. I must also bear in mind that there is now a greater understanding of the impact of sexual offending on children.[41]
2. Ultimately, I have concluded that a sentence that involves an immediate component of imprisonment to be served is necessary in order to denounce your conduct and send out a message that sexual offending of the nature you have been found guilty of, regardless of the delay involved and the age of the perpetrator, will result in actual imprisonment. You must also be justly punished.
3. Having carefully considered all relevant circumstances and factors, Mr Lewis, you are sentenced as follows:
   • On Charge 1, indecent act with a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
   • On Charge 7, indecent act with a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 8 months' imprisonment.
   • On Charge 10, incest, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
   • On Charge 12, indecent act with a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
   • On Charge 17, indecent act with a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
4. The sentence on Charge 10 will be the base sentence. I direct that two months of the sentence on Charge 1, two months of the sentence on Charge 12, and two months of the sentence on Charge 17, be served cumulatively upon each other and on the base sentence on Charge 10. The sentence on Charge 7 will run entirely concurrently.
5. This makes a total effective sentence of 3 years' imprisonment.
6. I direct that you serve a period of 6 months' imprisonment. The remaining period of 2 years and 6 months will be suspended for a period of 3 years.
7. This means that once you are released having served 6 months, 2 years and 6 months will remain hanging over your head but suspended for a period of three years. If you were to commit another offence punishable by imprisonment during the period of suspension, that would breach your partially suspended sentence. That would mean you would come before me and I would be obliged to order that you serve the suspended portion of your sentence, namely the 2 years and 6 months - unless you can show that exceptional circumstances have arisen, and it is in the interest of justice not to activate the suspended sentence. Do you understand that?
8. OFFENDER: I do.

1. In respect of Charges 10, 12 and 17, pursuant to s 6F(1) of the Sentencing Act, you are sentenced as a serious sexual offender and I order that this fact be entered into the records of the Court.

1. Pursuant to s 18 of the Sentencing Act, the period of 20 days of pre-sentence detention, not including today's date, is declared as having already been served in respect of this sentence.

1. Pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004, registration is mandatory in relation to these offences and the reporting period is life.[42] Upon your release from prison, you must report your personal details to Victoria Police and continue to comply with the reporting obligations. You will be sent an acknowledgement form for signing in due course and will be provided with a document setting out your reporting obligations upon your release and the consequences of any breach. It is an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with your reporting obligations.
2. HIS HONOUR: Ms Koufidis anything further?
3. MS KOUFIDIS: No your Honour.
4. HIS HONOUR: Mr Desmond, anything further?
5. MR DESMOND: No thank you your Honour.

[2] Charges 1, 7, 12 and 17, contrary to s 47 Crimes Act 1958.

[3] Charge 10, contrary to s 44(1) Crimes Act 1958.

[4] Charges 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 18 (six charges of incest, five charges of indecent act with or in the presence of a child under 16, and one charge of procuring a person for sexual penetration of a child under 16).

[5] Charge 5, being a charge of indecent act with a child under 16.

[6] Cheung v The Queen [2001] HCA 67; (2001) 209 CLR 1, [9], [14].

[12] The mother gave evidence to this effect, stating she asked "what's going on" picked up Lily and walked out of the room - Trial transcript, pg. 802.

[18] Another adult who was present in the room, had left before the offending occurred - Trial transcript, pg. 526 - 528.

[19] She did provide the police with 'memory notes' made by her.

[20] Delilah made a statement to the police on 16 June 2021 which pertained to a pre-text call. She made further statements to the police on 24 June 2021 and 25 January 2022.

[21] Lily sought to reopen her initial allegations and Jane made a formal complaint. Two further statements were taken from Lily on 11 August 2021 and 29 January 2022. A single statement was taken from Jane over a number of sittings which commenced on 21 December 2021 and completed on 8 March 2022.

[22] Exhibits B - G (I have borne in mind that it is a difficult exercise for your victims to compartmentalise the impact. I of course, bear in mind that you were acquitted of the majority of the charges).

[24] The medical term for the presence of gallstones.

[25] The medical term for fatty liver disease.

[26] I have had regard to all the ailments listed in Exhibit 3.

[27] As outlined above in [33] and [34].

[28] Although the absence of a plea or remorse does not aggravate the offending.

[30] Exhibit 2 - there was significant overlap between those who gave evidence at trial and those who provided written character references.

[32] Exhibit 1, [33]. See also [7] - [15].

[33] Trial transcript, pg. 1027 - 1031 and 1249 - 1278.

[34] Dealy of three years since being charged.

[35] Although, she accepted that specific deterrence was less important.

[36] No submission was made suggesting that a head sentence and an accompanying non-parole period was necessary.

[37] Gordon v R [2013] VSCA 343, [74].

[38] DPP v Ryan Carlisle (a pseudonym) [2023] VCC 733; DPP v Corfe [2023] VCC 253; DPP v Elliott [2021]

VCC 1291; DPP v Gardner (a pseudonym) [2019] VCC 1800; DPP v Better [2003] VSCA 71.

[39] The Queen v Stalio [2012] VSCA 120; (2012) 46 VR 426. See Exhibit 1, [45].

[41] Bromley v The Queen [2018] VSCA 329, [51].

[42] As a result of being convicted of one Class 1 offence and four Class 2 offences.