Hill received what many consider to be an extraordinarily light sentence, even though his kid victim attested to the horrible things he did and his evident lack of regret.
Compared to certain punishments that just involve charges of possessing child pornography, the convicted child rapist received a sentence of 17 years in jail.
The prosecution contested the sentence, claiming it was “manifestly inadequate” and “plainly unjust, being so far below the range of sentences that could justly be imposed.”
In a sarcastic rebuttal, Hill’s defense team claimed that the sentence was “manifestly excessive” and that he ought to have received a less sentence for his offenses.
The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal finally rejected the challenge, finding that the sentence was appropriate in spite of the prosecution’s complaint.
However, given that Hill was repeatedly beaten in prison within months of starting his sentence, the prosecution may not require a more severe penalty.
