The jail time handed to a businessman who attached a fake collar bomb to a Sydney schoolgirl should be cut because the sentencing judge didn't properly consider his mental health, a court has heard.
Paul Douglas Peters was jailed last November for at least 10 years, with a maximum of 13-and-a-half years, for the attack on Madeleine Pulver.
Peters entered the Pulver family home at Mosman on August 3, 2011, armed with a baseball bat and attached the device to the then 18-year-old's neck.
The device had a USB stick and ransom note attached, warning that tampering with it would make it explode.
Ten hours later, the device was found to be fake.
News that makes sense
Your trusted source for staying up-to-date with the world around you. Get free daily news updates and analysis, straight to your inbox.
The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal is hearing an appeal by Peters against the severity of the sentence.
Peters' barrister, Tim Game, SC, told the court on Tuesday that the sentencing judge erred when it took into account his treatment for mental illness.
"The important part of our argument is that ... we were not asserting that he was psychotic," Mr Game told the court.
"That was not the case we were pressing.
"It's a straw man in terms of what has to be determined."
Mr Game said a doctor who gave evidence of treating Peters "was not treating him for psychosis contrary to what the judge says".
Peters was arrested in the home he shared with his ex-wife in Louisville, Kentucky, about two weeks after the bomb scare and extradited to NSW.
Peters' legal team has previously said the appeal will proceed on seven grounds.
Mr Game also submitted that Peters was a case where "special circumstances" should be taken into account.
Mr Game said Peters had no prior offences, was in custody for the first time, suffered from mental issues and had "good prospects of rehabilitation".
Justice Megan Latham said a challenge of the case was that while Peters may have suffered from depression his actions were "well thought out".
In his submissions, a lawyer for the crown said the sentencing judge was "confronted by a difficult sentencing exercise".
"His honour would have been assisted if evidence had been given by the applicant ... that didn't take place," he told the court.
He also said sentencing was tough because of the variety of psychiatric opinions before the court.
He conceded those opinions created "significant problems" in the sentencing proceedings, but said the judge's conclusions were "entirely open" to him.
In reply, Mr Game said minimal weight had been given to Peters' depression and bipolar disorder.
The court reserved its judgment.
