A child-sex offender who has preyed on seven children since 1986 has had his jail term cut by five years.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Neville John Fridey, 64, whose prospects of rehabilitation were described as "not that great", had been due to be released from prison in 2023 before he appealed against his latest jail sentence.
Fridey, who has been in prison since 2005, was jailed for 10 years in August 2013 by the Geelong County Court for sexually abusing a young
boy (a neighbour's child, known only as "AJ") over a four-year period from 1989 when the boy was seven years old.
"The sentencing judge [in August 2013] viewed the applicant's offending as very grave indeed, as it obviously was," the appeal judges said.
"The harm done to AJ by the applicant's predatory behaviour was immense. There was a significant breach of trust involved. He has shown no remorse for his conduct."
The judges said the problem was they believed Fridey did not deserve a "crushing" sentence and should serve a total of 11 years and six
months for abusing his former partner's three children and AJ, meaning he should be made eligible for parole in 2017.
A psychological report revealed Fridey had undertaken rehabilitation programs, including the sex-offender treatment program at Ararat prison.
"The fact that he had done so, but still refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing in relation to AJ, was a source of concern, indicating that perhaps his prospects of rehabilitation were not all that great," the judges said.
"The sentencing judge observed that the applicant could not look forward to any family support upon his release. He was isolated from all family apart from his mother. He had no friends, and no realistic prospect of making any new friends apart from those with whom he came into contact in prison."
Her honour accepted that this made imprisonment more onerous for him, and said that she would take that into account.
"A sentence is said to be 'crushing' when it is of such a length that it would provoke a feeling of helplessness in the applicant, if and when he or she is released, or which would result in the destruction of any reasonable expectation of useful life after release."
