Ken Anthony Jabboury, convicted of procuring rape, applies to appeal prison sentence

A Central Queensland man has applied to overturn a four-year prison sentence he claimed was “manifestly excessive” after pleading guilty to contacting 11 male strangers on the internet, asking them to rape a woman. Full details.

A Central Queensland man has been denied permission to overturn a four-year prison sentence he claimed was “manifestly excessive” after pleading guilty to contacting 11 male strangers on the internet, asking them to rape a woman and carry out other sadistic, degrading and disturbing acts upon her.

Ken Anthony Jabboury was 37 years old when he pleaded guilty in Rockhampton District Court on April 30, 2021 to 17 counts of attempt to procure rape, nine counts of distributing intimate images and three counts of supplying a dangerous drug.

Jabboury was sentenced to four years prison with three days declared as time served and parole eligibility set at August 27, 2022.

He lodged an application with Queensland’s Court of Appeal to seek leave to appeal the sentences of four years imprisonment imposed for each count of attempt to procure rape.

Ken Anthony Jabboury.

Jabboury submitted the head sentence of four years imprisonment was “manifestly excessive”.

He submitted a sentence of three years imprisonment, partially suspended, properly reflected his overall criminality and mitigating factors.

He further submitted the sentence was “infected by specific errors”.

“Not all of the counts were as serious; there was an error of fact in failing to have regard to a break in the period of offending; there was a failure to have regard to a further three days of pre-sentence custody; desistance in the offending was not considered; and there was improper regard to an inability of the complainant to work and post-offence conduct not expressing remorse,” he submitted in court documents.

The respondent submitted that the head sentence of four years imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and that there was no error in the exercise of the sentencing discretion.

The Court of Appeal handed down its decision on the matter on June 14, refusing Jabboury’s application.

“An effective head sentence of four years imprisonment for multiple counts of attempting to procure rape, committed over a protracted period, in the context of multiple counts of distributing intimate images of the same female complainant, was not manifestly excessive,” the Court of Appeal decision stated.

“A consideration of the applicant’s criminality, including the multiplicity of contacts with multiple male strangers and the nature of the suggested sexual acts with the use of restraints and violence to overcome any resistance, was such that notwithstanding the applicant’s pleas of guilty and other mitigating factors, an effective head sentence of four years imprisonment was neither plainly unjust nor unreasonable.

“There is also no substance in the applicant’s contentions that the sentences involved specific errors.

“The sentencing judge had regard to the fact none of the intended conduct actually transpired but properly observed the applicant’s criminality involved contacting multiple male strangers on multiple occasions in an attempt to procure them to commit non-consensual sexual acts on (the woman), including the use of restraints in the event of resistance.

“The sentencing judge acknowledged relevant mitigating factors such as the co-operation and remorse shown by the early pleas of guilty and the offending occurred while the applicant was using drugs in circumstances where the applicant had no prior similar offending and otherwise had a good work history and was well regarded in his community.

“That properly was regarded as an aggravating feature of the applicant’s offending conduct. Similarly, the impact of the applicant’s criminality on the complainant’s life, including her work, was properly a relevant matter considered at sentence.

“Finally, it is correct that the sentencing judge did not declare three days of presentence custody served by the applicant between his arrest and appearance in court. The failure to do so was a consequence of the pre-sentence custody certificate provided at sentence only referring to a later period of pre-sentence custody, which was the subject of a declaration.

“Having regard to those concessions, and the risk a re-exercise of the sentencing discretion could result in a harsher sentence, it would not be appropriate to grant leave to appeal.”

Facts of the offences

Jabboury contacted 11 strange men via messaging apps between May and September 2019 in an attempt to arrange for them to visit a house in the Rockhampton region to rape a woman.

On many occasions, there was reference to tying the victim up and, on one occasion, there was specific reference to the use of violence on her.

Discussions also included sodomising and urinating on the victim.

Jabboury provided details of the victim’s address on several occasions and he provided her full address on one occasion.

One man told Jabboury he went to the victim’s house and masturbated while he spied on her, to which Jabboury responded that he should have “gone in, covered the victim’s mouth and had sex with her”.

Jabboury had also sent naked pictures of the victim, and other sexual images.

He had also offered to supply drugs to a man.

Jabboury’s offending came to the attention of the authorities after the victim found some messages he had sent to the strangers.

The case was so rare and unusual, neither the Crown nor defence teams could find any cases of a like nature in Queensland.

Judge Jeff Clarke said Jabboury’s actions were abhorrent, distrusting and disturbing.

“Clearly, this is not how a woman should be treated,” Judge Clarke said

Judge Clarke found there were no comparable yardsticks, however, having regard to the relevant principles of sentencing, the fact they were sexual offences and domestic violence offences, and the serious nature of the offending, a sentence as low as two or three years, partially suspended, would not reflect Jabboury’s criminality.