R v Ruhland [1999] QCA 430

R v Ruhland [1999] QCA 430 - QCA 1999 case summary — Zoe

[53]

49 Simpson (CA No 461 of 1998) was a case with facts most similar to the present. The applicant who was aged 36 at sentence pleaded guilty to many sexual offences against five adolescent boys aged between 12 and 15 years occurring over a period of 11 years. He had no previous convictions. Two of the charges were of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with the aggravation of anal intercourse. That aggravated offence carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The applicant was sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment on the maintaining charges which was reduced to 12 years on appeal. The first relationship began when the applicant was 18 and the complainant 12 and continued for five years involving mutual masturbation, oral sex and two acts of sodomy. The offences against the second complainant began when the boy was 13 and the applicant 30 and continued for more than three years. The indecent conduct was similar to that with the first boy and included anal intercourse. The unlawful conduct with the third complainant was similar. He was about 15 when the offences commenced. The fourth complainant was 14 when the applicant, aged 33, exposed him to an indecent photograph and an offer of money for oral sex. The fifth complainant was 15 at the time of the offences which were attempts by the applicant to engage in oral sex with him. An aggravating feature concerning the last complainant was that the applicant was employed by a government department as an adolescent resource worker and the complainant was a youth for whom he had official responsibility. The applicant had encouraged each of the complainants to comply with his desires by gifts and favours. In considering whether the term of imprisonment imposed below was excessive the court compared the conduct of the applicant with that of the applicant in Galley (CA No 380 of 1997). Pincus JA observed at p 8 of his reasons that "the question of willingness or otherwise appears to me to be of some significance" particularly for the purpose of comparison with Galley where repeated violence was used to induce compliance.

[54]

50 In Galley the applicant for leave to appeal against sentence was convicted on pleas of guilty of two counts of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16 years, 17 counts of indecent treatment of a child, two of assault occasioning bodily harm, one of unlawful exposure of a child to an indecent act and one of child abduction. The latter offence was committed on bail and in breach of the conditions of his bail. In most of those offences it was an aggravating circumstance that the child in question was under the applicant's care. The applicant was aged 53 years with minor irrelevant prior convictions. He was a foster parent for the Department of Family Services and the three boys in question came into his care successively. The first was aged about 11. The applicant carried out frequent indecent acts estimated by the complainant to be some 500 although the applicant said there were only 40 to 50 such incidents involving masturbation, oral sex, simulated anal intercourse and ejaculation onto the boy. The sexual abuse persisted over a period of four years until the boy moved out at the age of 15. The next complainant boy suffered sexual abuse at the hands of the applicant from the age of 11 to 13 years. A further aggravating feature was that he was afflicted with mental deficits as well as some physical disabilities. The complainant said that the applicant fondled his genitalia on hundreds of occasions, simulated anal sexual intercourse and ejaculated onto him. He made some unsuccessful attempts to resist the applicant and significant acts of violence against the boy occurred, some seen by witnesses. The applicant then took a third foster child aged 13 and assaulted him. McPherson JA observed at p 7 of his reasons that the offences were among the most serious of their kind which he had encountered. There were 23 separate offences none of them involving actual anal intercourse which is a distinguishing feature from the present case. For reasons not here relevant the court needed to resentence Galley and reduced a sentence of 13 years for the maintaining charges to 12 years. The maximum penalty was 14 years.

[60]

56 The cases of EM Craddock and RP Craddock (CA Nos 269 and 270 of 1998) were referred to by counsel. The facts are quite different from the present but nonetheless a consideration of it serves as a comparison for overall criminality in respect of offences against children. The respondents to the Attorney-General's appeal were the mother and stepfather of the two complainant girls. The male respondent pleaded guilty to seven counts of rape, three of unlawful carnal knowledge, one of indecent dealing with a girl under the age of 14, one of indecent treatment of a child under the age of 16 and one of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child under the age of 16 with a circumstance of aggravation. The female respondent pleaded guilty to four counts of rape and one count of indecent dealing with a girl under the age of 16. The offences began in 1985 when one stepdaughter was aged 8 and the other 6. The female respondent's criminal conduct involved only her elder daughter and spanned the first two years of a seven year period of abuse by the stepfather. The male respondent had a minor irrelevant previous criminal history and the female respondent had no previous convictions. The circumstances, as the court noted, were unusually depraved and disturbing. The female respondent assisted the male respondent to sexually abuse the elder daughter over a two year period when the child was aged between 8 and 10. The four rapes to which she was a party occurred in the marital bed. She apparently found this conduct sexually stimulating and indecent conduct occurred forcibly between herself and the child as well between the child and the male respondent. After the mother ceased to be involved she was aware that other offences were continuing to be committed by the male respondent. Over the same period the second daughter was indecently dealt with by the male respondent on numerous occasions including indecent touching, oral sex and sexual intercourse. The respondents were aged 68 and 58 years at sentence and suffered from serious health problems. There were late pleas of guilty. One complainant was cross-examined at committal because the female respondent maintained a false claim of having acted under duress. The victims had been left with serious long-term emotional problems. The sentences imposed of 12 years with parole after 4½ years for the male respondent and 7 years with parole after 3 years for the female respondent were not interfered with on appeal although the court commented that it would not have been inappropriate for the sentences to have been more severe.

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (73 paragraphs)

Parties