The Supreme Court has granted a convicted man leave to appeal while reducing his sentence, citing concerns over how his trial and sentencing were conducted.
In a judgment delivered on April 29, the Court allowed Lawrence Prasad to proceed with an appeal but dismissed his challenge against conviction.
However, the Court ruled in his favour on sentencing, reducing his prison term from 18 years to 14 years and four months, with a non-parole period lowered to 11 years.
Justice William Young, delivering the lead judgment, said there were aspects of the trial that raised broader concerns.
“There are aspects of the way in which the trial was conducted that concern me,” he said, pointing to possible systemic issues in how prosecutors present evidence.
The Court found that while the offending was serious, the original sentence was too close to the upper end of the established range.
“The starting point… is so close as to leave insufficient headroom to accommodate cases with greater aggravating factors,” Justice Young said.
He also noted that mitigating factors such as the offender’s age and lack of prior convictions were not adequately reflected in the original sentence.
The Court further raised concerns about the prosecution’s failure to present all relevant evidence during the trial, warning that such omissions could risk miscarriages of justice.
“What a defendant said when first taxed with alleged offending is generally admissible… and substantially relevant,” the judgment stated.
Prasad had originally been convicted in the High Court in 2019 on one count of indecent assault and five counts of rape and sentenced to 17 years and four months imprisonment after time served was considered.
While the Supreme Court upheld the convictions, it said the sentence required adjustment to better reflect both the seriousness of the offending and the mitigating circumstances.
