A Queensland court has dramatically reduced the prison sentence for a Far North Queensland man who carried out a terrifying and unprovoked knife attack on a stranger, finding his original jail term was far too harsh.
Court of Appeal Overturns Original Sentence
The Queensland Court of Appeal has ruled that the six-and-a-half-year prison sentence handed down to Cairns man Kynan Sam was manifestly excessive. The court has instead imposed a new head sentence of five years' imprisonment. Sam, who was 19 at the time of the offence, will now be eligible for parole on June 12, 2025, after the court set a parole eligibility date of August 12 this year.
The incident occurred on the evening of June 12, 2022, in the Cairns suburb of Manunda. Sam approached a 31-year-old man who was sitting in his car on Birch Street. Without any prior interaction or provocation, Sam opened the car door and launched a violent assault.
Details of the Vicious and Unprovoked Assault
The court heard chilling details of the attack. Sam repeatedly punched the victim in the head before producing a knife. He then stabbed the victim in the chest and slashed his face. During the struggle, the victim managed to grab the blade of the knife, suffering severe cuts to his hand as he tried to defend himself.
Following the stabbing, Sam fled the scene on foot. The injured victim drove himself to the Cairns Hospital, where he required urgent medical treatment for his serious wounds.
Sam was arrested and later pleaded guilty in the Cairns District Court to one count of unlawful wounding and one count of assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed. In October 2023, Judge Anthony Rafter SC sentenced him to six and a half years behind bars. However, Sam's legal team appealed the sentence, arguing it was unjustly severe.
Appeal Judges Cite Youth and Rehabilitation
In their published reasons, Justices Philip Morrison, Debra Mullins and James Henry agreed with the appeal. They acknowledged the seriousness of Sam's persistent and dangerous conduct but found the original sentence did not adequately account for several key mitigating factors.
The judges highlighted Sam's youth, his guilty plea, and what they described as his genuine remorse. They also noted his disadvantaged background and his efforts towards rehabilitation while in custody. The court concluded that a head sentence of five years, with parole eligibility after serving 40%, was sufficient to reflect the crime's gravity while allowing for Sam's prospects of reform.
This ruling underscores the complex balance courts must strike between punishing violent crime and considering the potential for an offender's rehabilitation, particularly when the offender is young.
