A rapist who expressed a desire to blow up a courtroom has again avoided time behind bars after three judges found the decision to suspend his jail sentence was, while "undeniably lenient", not erroneous.
The 19-year-old man, who cannot be named because he was underage at the time of his crime, raped his former girlfriend at a Gungahlin recycling centre in February 2020.
His offending involved him grabbing the victim by the throat and pinning her against a brick wall in what was described as "a secluded area", where the pair were surrounded by shrubbery and large bins.
When the teenager was interviewed by investigators the following month, Acting Justice Stephen Norrish said the offender "gave a completely preposterous account of himself".
"He has sought to, in effect, move the blame of his own conduct to some fictional character that he thought, or said, was a manifestation of his personality" the acting ACT Supreme Court judge said.
The teenager ultimately pleaded guilty to a charge of engaging in sexual intercourse without consent.
Acting Justice Norrish sentenced him, in February, to a wholly suspended jail term of two years and seven months. The judge attached a three-year good behaviour order.
Prosecutors appealed at a hearing in August, arguing the sentence was "manifestly inadequate".
Chief prosecutor Anthony Williamson SC told the ACT Court of Appeal that suspending the entire jail term did not adequately punish the offender, denounce his conduct, or deter others from similar crimes.
Mr Williamson submitted that notwithstanding the teenager's youth, the seriousness of the offence, in combination with the offender's "demonstrated lack of remorse" and limited prospects of rehabilitation, warranted time in custody.
Acting Justice Norrish had referred to the teenager's lack of remorse during sentencing, pointing to examples that included the offender having told a pre-sentence report author he was "thinking of using explosives to blow up the courtroom".
The offender's counsel acknowledged the teenager had made "unfortunate and stupid" comments, but stressed that he had not had continuous or effective guidance during his upbringing.
Barristers Travis Jackson and Stephen Robinson ultimately argued Acting Justice Norrish had been entitled to afford leniency given the offender's disadvantaged upbringing, guilty plea, age and mental condition, as well as his lack of any other serious offending.
Chief Justice Lucy McCallum, Justice David Mossop and Justice Geoffrey Kennett ultimately found on Friday that the wholly suspended sentence was not "unreasonable or plainly unjust".
"While the sentence imposed was undeniably lenient, the appellant has not demonstrated that it was manifestly inadequate," the appeal judges said, dismissing the prosecution's challenge.
