Appeal in teen rape case

TASMANIA’S Director of Public Prosecutions has lodged an appeal against the sentence of a teen rapist who was locked up for nine months, arguing the judge made errors and that his sentence was “manifestly inadequate”.

On October 18, Supreme Court of Tasmania judge Gregory Geason jailed the Hobart youth, who cannot be named as he was 17 at the time, after a jury found him guilty of two counts of rape and one count of indecent assault.

The boy, now 19, raped the victim without a condom at a Carlton party during May 2017, briefly holding his hand over her mouth during the attack.

Justice Geason jailed the boy for two years and three months, but suspended all but nine months of that term, meaning he would be eligible for release in June 2020 given time already served.

The appeal was lodged on behalf of Daryl Coates, SC, on November 1, and outlines four grounds of appeal, including that Justice Geason erred in fact or law by finding the boy held “an honest belief that the complainant was consenting”.

Mr Coates said that finding was inconsistent with the jury’s verdict and not reasonably open to Justice Geason on the evidence.

The second grounds for appeal was that Justice Geason erred by finding the “unprotected nature of the sexual intercourse was not an aggravating factor”.

During his sentence, Justice Geason said it was not an aggravating factor that the boy didn’t wear a condom because he didn’t ejaculate or have an STI.

Thirdly, the DPP argued Justice Geason erred by failing to take into account that it was an aggravating factor that the crimes occurred “in whole or in part in the presence of people other than the complainant”.

Lastly, the prosecutor has argued the sentence was “manifestly inadequate in all the circumstances of the case”.

A Supreme Court of Tasmania spokesman told the

Mercury it could not comment given an appeal had been lodged.

However, the spokesman said it was the court’s policy not to comment on sentences handed down by individual judges. “A sentence must stand alone and cannot be analysed or explained further by the court as an organisation,” the spokesman said.

“However, if a judge has made an error in fact or in law in determining sentence, that can be addressed by judges sitting in the Court of Criminal Appeal, who do have the authority to consider the original sentence and rectify it if an error is found to have occurred.”