R v Wran [2016] NSWSC 1015 [72–79]. While the focus in the judgment and this article is on the tabloid media ‘the articles and allegations were picked up and repeated in other news organisations including online versions of The Sydney Morning Herald and The Daily Mail’ [75].
3.
R v Wran [2016] NSWSC 1015 [79].
4.
There were a range of more weighty matters in mitigation, eg, an early guilty plea, remorse, her minor role in events, her drug addiction and mental illness, and the unlikelihood of further offending. See R v Wran [2016] NSWSC 1015 48–71].
5.
(2005) 225 CLR 466; see also AB v the Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111; Rv Stanbouli (2003) 141 A Crim R 531; R v Patison (2003) 143 A Crim R 118; R v Rose [2004] NSWCCA 326. See BagaricMirkoEdneyRichard and AlexanderTheo, ‘(Particularly) Burdensome Prison Times Should Reduce Imprisonment Length – And Not Merely in Theory’ (2014) 38(2) Melbourne University Law Review409, 413–9.
6.
Howie J in R v Mostyn (2004) 145 A Crim R 304 held that it should not be assumed protective custody was necessarily more onerous and that evidence of the restrictive conditions should be provided. See also: Bagaric, above n 5, 413—419.
7.
(1991) 57 ACrim R313, 318. See Bagaric, above n 5, 423–5.
8.
See Ryan v The Queen [2001] HCA 21 (2001) 206 CLR 267; R v Bunning [2007] VSCA 205; R v Kenny NSWCCA 6; Einfeld v R [2010] NSWCCA 87 [2010]; R v Wilhelm [2010] NSWSC 378, [33].
9.
R v Wran, [2016] NSWSC 1015 [72–79].
10.
Editorial, ‘Harriet Wran: A strange case of judgment’, The Sunday Telegraph (Sydney), 31 July 2016.
DuffyJames, ‘Roll the Dice, Rational Agent: Should Extra-Curial Punishment Mitigate an Offender's Sentence?’ (2012) 31(1) UQ Law Journal115–130, 116; see Table of legislation at 117.
28.
BagaricMirkoXynasLidia and LambropoulosVictoria, The irrelevance to Sentencing of (Most) Incidental Hardship Suffered by Offenders' (2016) UNSW Law Journal47.
29.
R v Hannigan [2009] QCA 40 [25].
30.
Duffy, above n 28, 129.
31.
ChongMark DavidFellowsJamie and RichardsFrank, ‘Sentencing the “Victimised Criminal”: Delineating the Uncertain Scope of Mitigatory Extra-Curial Punishment’ (2013) 35Sydney Law Review379–406, 405.
32.
Ibid.
33.
Bagaric et al, above n 29, 72. See also Bagaric and Edney, Sentencing in Australia (Thomson Reuters, 3rd edn, 2015) Ch 9, 301–474.
34.
Per MasonCJBrennanDawson and TooheyJJ. Veen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465, 476.
35.
GarlandDavid, ‘Philosophical argument and ideological effect: An essay review’ (1983) 7Contemporary Crises79, 83.
36.
GarlandDavid and YoungPeter, Towards a Social Analysis of Penality’ in Garland and Young (eds), The Power to Punish (Heinemann, 1983) 11.
37.
GarlandDavid, ‘Introduction: The Meaning of Mass Imprisonment’ in Garland (ed), Mass Imprisonment (Thousand Oaks, 2001) 2; see also CunneenChris, Penal Culture and Hyperincarceration (Ashgate, 2013).
38.
Edwards (1996) A Crim R 510, 515.
39.
ALRC, Same Crime Same Time: Sentencing of Federal Offenders Report No 103 (2006) 190.
40.
LaceyNicola, State Punishment (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1988) 200.
41.
AshworthAndrew, Sentencing and Criminal Justice (Cambridge University Press, 5th ed, 2010) 95–100.