Sex offender had ‘no remorse’ for assault on sleeping woman
A SEX offender showed "no remorse" despite being found guilty of assaulting his long-term partner's close friend, a court has heard.
The crime took place at the victim's home after the group of friends attended a wedding together in February last year.
The 30-year-old man, who cannot be named, was handed his sentence in the Coffs Harbour District Court after he was found guilty by a jury of sexual intercourse without consent.
"This is a case of an unsuspecting sleeping woman in her own bed in her own home being subjected to sexual intercourse without consent," Judge Jonathan Priestley said in his judgment.
"Such behaviour is a gross violation of the rights and person of the victim."
According to the agreed facts, in February last year the man and his partner of ten years planned to stay at the victim's home overnight following the wedding reception.
The two women went to bed in separate rooms, while the offender stayed up drinking and smoking with another guest.
MORE COURT NEWS:
The guest had told the court the offender had went back inside the house around three times during the estimated two hours they were together.
Sometime during the night, the victim woke to the offender sexually assaulting her, standing beside her bed with his hand in her pants. The victim said she was stunned and "scooted" away.
He returned to her room later on, and the victim told him to get out.
The man was arrested almost a month later and denied the allegation.
" … He denies any responsibility in respect of the offending behaviour," Judge Priestley said.
"He has indicated no insight into the offending."
A sentencing assessment report revealed the man had a minimal criminal history, which included previous convictions of negligent driving, High Range PCA, and possessing a prohibited plant.
The judge also noted that the man had a low chance of reoffending.
The man was convicted and sentenced to jail for a four month non-parole period, however this was backdated to August 11 this year due to time already served.
Judge Priestley stated that further time in custody would hinder his rehabilitation and prevent him from "continuing to fully contribute to his family and to society."