Opperman v The State

The appellants, twin brothers aged in their late twenties, were convicted of two counts of indecent assault and one count of rape involving their nephew and niece, aged six and three respectively at the commencement of the offences. The offences occurred over a period between 2000 and 2001 within a family setting where the appellants lived with the complainants. Both appellants were found to have indecently assaulted both children, and to have raped the girl. They were first offenders and of limited intellectual capacity, having attended special schools. Evidence showed they themselves had been sexually abused as children. A social worker’s pre-sentence reports described severe psychological impacts on the complainants. The High Court imposed effective sentences of 25 years’ imprisonment on the first appellant and 20 years on the second. The appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal was against sentence only.

The appeal succeeded. The sentences imposed by the High Court were set aside and replaced with a sentence of 12 years and seven months’ imprisonment for each appellant, all counts taken together for purposes of sentence.

The case is significant for reaffirming the principle of proportionality in sentencing for serious sexual offences, even where the crimes involve very young children. It illustrates that severe offences do not justify the neglect of offender-specific mitigating factors such as intellectual disability and personal history. The judgment also demonstrates the Supreme Court of Appeal’s willingness to interfere on appeal where sentences are found to be unduly harsh despite the gravity of the crimes.