I have read the sentencing remarks in the case of R v Drummond [2021] NSWDC 510 and I feel disgusted by the way that privilege amounts to getting away with assault.
The Judge gave #NicholasDrummond a “free pass”. This is what I would have said if I was the Judge...
The Judge gave #NicholasDrummond a “free pass”. This is what I would have said if I was the Judge...
1. This is an appeal by Nicholas Drummond following his conviction before a Magistrate sitting at Hornsby Local Court on 21 July past.
2. Mr Drummond, you have had almost every conceivable privilege possible afforded to you in your life of 20 years thus far.
2. Mr Drummond, you have had almost every conceivable privilege possible afforded to you in your life of 20 years thus far.
3. You attended Sydney’s Knox Grammar School, were the product of a relationship in which your parents had, until recently, remained together. You have a loving relationship with your siblings.
4. You have had the privilege of coaching sport to young children in a sport that you are passionate about and for which you receive considerable respect and admiration from your peers
5. The details of your offence have been documented, but for the sake of completeness I shall summarise them thusly: On the night of X, you were at The Greengate Hotel at Killara with a group of friends, whereupon you made lewd and inappropriate remarks to a young woman.
6. You commented on her appearance, her clothing and dehumanised her with your comments, which were, in full, to “tell her to put her tits away” and to effectively call her a “slut” for her choice of clothing.
7. It was argued that you attended an educational environment in which such attire may be seen as provocative. I reject this notion as it has no bearing on your decision to comment on this woman.
8. It was argued that you viewed the woman taking a photograph of you on her phone after you had called her the words mentioned above as an act of provocation. I reject this notion as it has no bearing on your decision to snatch her phone out of her hands and stomp on it.
9. It was your decision, and your decision alone, to verbally abuse the woman and subsequently refuse to issue an apology.
10. These events have unfolded against a backdrop of, what I understood to be, difficult personal circumstances.
10. These events have unfolded against a backdrop of, what I understood to be, difficult personal circumstances.
11. I understand that amid these circumstances you have sought support, but these actions do not mitigate your behaviour.
12. For too long, Courts have taken a lenient view in terms of men’s violence against women, and it is a view that I depart from in ideology and practice.
12. For too long, Courts have taken a lenient view in terms of men’s violence against women, and it is a view that I depart from in ideology and practice.
13. Your actions were unprovoked, undeserved and led to consequences for your victims not only during the events in question, but ongoing psychological and emotional injury from which they will take time to recover.
14. This court condemns your actions and affirms the trial judge’s finding that courts must act to deter individuals from taking such actions.
15. Your appeal is dismissed and your conviction stands.
16. You are excused.
15. Your appeal is dismissed and your conviction stands.
16. You are excused.
Instead, Nicholas Drummond's actions were viewed as a "one-off" aberration and the judge excused Drummond's actions.
Disgusting.
Disgusting.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
