Current Man from high-profile Victorian AFL family found guilty of rape *TOM SILVAGNI is named

[Tigerat2020]

Look he should have done that, or maybe just not r*ped her, but he took it on and they spent their dough trying to save the furniture. Their legal team will get their next bathroom and kitchen reno taken care of. We all move on.

Kings Council rates are between $8,000 and $25,000 a day so it's probably well over $1 million maybe even $2 million

 

[Kurve]

Look he should have done that, or maybe just not r*ped her, but he took it on and they spent their dough trying to save the furniture. Their legal team will get their next bathroom and kitchen reno taken care of. We all move on.

Silvagni could have set an example by admitting what he'd done, apologised, committed to recompense, courses, therapy and been prepared to accept his court ordered punishment.

He might have even avoided a jail term and been held up as how to handle yourself when you've done wrong. In that frame, it's a missed opportunity.

 

[Munich]

I appreciate that “consent” (or lack of) is the real determining factor here, but is digital rape (which he’s been convicted of) considered less serious than full on penile rape when sentencing?

No.

Rape is rape whether it's a finger, D, object.

 

[Jim Cricket]

Silvagni could have set an example by admitting what he'd done, apologised, committed to recompense, courses, therapy and been prepared to accept his court ordered punishment.

He might have even avoided a jail term and been held up as how to handle yourself when you've done wrong. In that frame, it's a missed opportunity.

A decent person might have done that but a decent person doesn't commit rape, so it was never going to happen.

 

[Frank Bunn]

I appreciate that “consent” (or lack of) is the real determining factor here, but is digital rape (which he’s been convicted of) considered less serious than full on penile rape when sentencing?

Generally yes, but there's no rule.

Mitigating factors.

No prior convictions.​

It was opportunistic rather than planned.​

There was no violence or a weapon used.​

No physical harm caused.​

No humiliation intended.​

Short duration of offence.​

Low likelihood of re-offending.​

Defence team are going to try to play the mental health card.​

​

Aggravating factors.

Tried to hide the crime.​

Not guilty plea.​

Lack of remorse.​

Vulnerable victim.​

Victim impact statement.​

​

I reckon he's looking at a 7 year sentence with NPP of 5 years.

 

[Tigerat2020]

Generally yes, but there's no rule.

Mitigating factors.

No prior convictions.​

It was opportunistic rather than planned.​

There was no violence or a weapon used.​

No physical harm caused.​

No humiliation intended.​

Short duration of offence.​

Low likelihood of re-offending.​

Defence team are going to try to play the mental health card.​

​

Aggravating factors.

Tried to hide the crime.​

Not guilty plea.​

Lack of remorse.​

Vulnerable victim.​

Victim impact statement.​

​

I reckon he's looking at a 7 year sentence with NPP of 5 years.

To a few of your points- there may have been physical harm caused, humiliation was intended, big risk of reoffending due to the brazen nature of the rape.
Having said that, I can't see him getting more than 2.5 years in actual jail due to the legal power behind him.

 

[faible]

I reckon he's looking at a 7 year sentence with NPP of 5 years.

Whacking a young bloke from a high profile football family with a prison sentence might be the kind of thing that gets through to young men that this kind of stuff isn't just a bit of a laugh. It's serious stuff with serious consequences.

 

[3rd Grade Maggy]

Silvagni could have set an example by admitting what he'd done, apologised, committed to recompense, courses, therapy and been prepared to accept his court ordered punishment.

He might have even avoided a jail term and been held up as how to handle yourself when you've done wrong. In that frame, it's a missed opportunity.

So instead of going the Cronulla Sharks route he went the Essendon route.

 

[Trucker Tiger]

Why did they drop the prosecution drop the perverting the course of justice charge, which he was initially hit with? He admits it (the Uber receipt).

 

[Jatz]

I'm betting it'll be a lenient sentence.

25 years is the max.

25 years is the max but I don't think anyone really gets close to that.

I've read they expect it to be between 5-7 years.

 

[faible]

Why did they drop the prosecution drop the perverting the course of justice charge, which he was initially hit with? He admits it (the Uber receipt).

If I was to guess; prosecutors might have thought it was superfluous given the more serious charges he was up on?

 

[FIGJAM]

If I was to guess; prosecutors might have thought it was superfluous given the more serious charges he was up on?

Should weigh into the judge's sentencing either way.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Whacking a young bloke from a high profile football family with a prison sentence might be the kind of thing that gets through to young men that this kind of stuff isn't just a bit of a laugh. It's serious stuff with serious consequences.

One would hope, but in the case of Silvagni I don’t think consequences were on his mind at all. It’s bizarre, sociopathic behaviour.

His girlfriend was there and it was a girl he knew and who his mate was involved in. Even if he wasn’t charged there could have been fallout. Just didn’t care.

 

[DT_35]

0 chance it’s anything more than 5 years.

It is Victoria after all

 

[justlookingaround]

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...for-the-rest-of-her-life-20251211-p5nn09.html

On Friday, Stephen and Jo Silvagni remained outside the courtroom as the young woman spoke, and only entered as defence barrister David Hallowes, SC, began addressing the court.

Initially I felt bad for his parents, having to come to terms with the fact that your son is a rapist... but after learning of the millions they spent on suppression orders, and now this fundamental disrespect of the victim, can't say I've got much respect at all.

 

[Terrafirma]

25 years is the max but I don't think anyone really gets close to that.

I've read they expect it to be between 5-7 years.

Is there 2 counts of Rape though..?

 

[madjoe]

Another odd thing about the suppression order was i came across quite a few people saying it was his brother and not Tom. Poor Ben got mentioned alot.

 

[Anja_Nees]

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...for-the-rest-of-her-life-20251211-p5nn09.html

Initially I felt bad for his parents, having to come to terms with the fact that your son is a rapist... but after learning of the millions they spent on suppression orders, and now this fundamental disrespect of the victim, can't say I've got much respect at all.

It poses an interesting ethical dilemma - on the one hand most people would spend a million dollars to keep their child out of jail, but you’re then helping them avoid consequences they’ve thoroughly earned.

I don’t really judge them much for the way they’ve done it. They’ve been focused on trying to save their son. He’s probably an irredeemable prick but he’s still their son.

I have no idea whether they are good people or not. They’ll be copping abuse for years in public over it and will have to face a member of the family being a registered sex offender etc. They have to live with having raised a rapist. I certainly don’t envy them in that respect.

 

[justlookingaround]

It poses an interesting ethical dilemma - on the one hand most people would spend a million dollars to keep their child out of jail, but you’re then helping them avoid consequences they’ve thoroughly earned.

I don’t really judge them much for the way they’ve done it. They’ve been focused on trying to save their son. He’s probably an irredeemable prick but he’s still their son.

I have no idea whether they are good people or not. They’ll be copping abuse for years in public over it and will have to face a member of the family being a registered sex offender etc. They have to live with having raised a rapist. I certainly don’t envy them in that respect.

Yeah, I do still feel bad for them to an extent, and while they're not the victim, they are likely a victim of their son's deception. However I think it was quite cowardly to refuse to attend the victim's testimony.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Yeah, I do still feel bad for them to an extent, and while they're not the victim, they are likely a victim of their son's deception. However I think it was quite cowardly to refuse to attend the victim's testimony.

Sounds like an appeal is on the way, so they’re all in now!

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Sounds like an appeal is on the way, so they’re all in now!

Yep. According to his father, they're considering it.

Speaking outside court, Stephen Silvagni said: “Jo and I, together with our family members and friends, are so disappointed with the outcome.

“We all love and support our son Tom. Our son continues to maintain his innocence and we stand firmly behind him.

“We will be considering our options to appeal and shall not be making any further comments on this case. Our goal is to clear his name and bring him home and ask for our privacy.

“We’re very grateful for our support.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/tom-silvagni-convicted-rapist-from-prominent-footballing-family-confronted-by-woman-he-assaulted/news-story/759fe98c7e239235aaca7fbc6845e2e5

 

[Tony Harrison]

Yeah, I do still feel bad for them to an extent, and while they're not the victim, they are likely a victim of their son's deception. However I think it was quite cowardly to refuse to attend the victim's testimony.

If they listened to the victim impact statement it would make them reconsider their bias, which they don't want to do. They want, and choose, to stay in denial, so they can both go and get ****ed imo. Any sense of sympathy I may have had for them and their situation, I am tossing aside, as they would prefer to further torment a rape victim with their words and actions.
That part is on them, not Tom.

 

[Pamcake1]

Generally yes, but there's no rule.

Mitigating factors.

No prior convictions.​

It was opportunistic rather than planned.​

There was no violence or a weapon used.​

No physical harm caused.​

No humiliation intended.​

Short duration of offence.​

Low likelihood of re-offending.​

Defence team are going to try to play the mental health card.​

​

Aggravating factors.

Tried to hide the crime.​

Not guilty plea.​

Lack of remorse.​

Vulnerable victim.​

Victim impact statement.​

​

I reckon he's looking at a 7 year sentence with NPP of 5 years.

On your above list of mitigating factors you can remove the following as none of them are applicable:

No physical harm caused.​

No humiliation intended.​

Short duration of offence.​

Low likelihood of re-offending.​

​

In the list of agravating factors you need to add​

psychological harm.​

​

It is clearly stated in the victim impact statement that there is lasting damage.​

​

​

​