Which case is cited as an exception to rehabilitation being primary due to grave adult behaviour?

• A. R v Milat & Klein NSWSC [2012]
• B. R v GDP [1991]
• C. Khmer Rouge case
• D. Mabo v Queensland

Answer: (A)

In sentencing, rehabilitation is usually the main aim, but there is an exception when the gravity of the offence and the offender’s conduct mean rehabilitation cannot be the primary objective. R v Milat & Klein NSWSC [2012] is cited as that exception, illustrating a situation where the seriousness of the acts and the offender’s pattern of behavior lead the court to prioritise denunciation, deterrence, and community protection over rehabilitation. The other options don’t establish this particular exception: the Khmer Rouge case and Mabo v Queensland concern other areas of law (international crimes and native title, respectively), and R v GDP [1991] is not the authority that sets this rule for grave adult offending.