"This began with an international media firestorm, which was created even before Mr Rudd made his first appearance in court for an initial charge [of attempting to procure a murder], which was withdrawn 24 hours later and all that has subsequently flowed from that," he said.
Rudd made two brief appearances in court at the start of hearing and as he left on the second occasion he told Justice Asher: "I'm sorry, your honour, I have an abscess and I'm off to find a dentist."
"That's okay Mr Rudd, you don't have to be here," Justice Asher replied.
Mr Tuck further argued the starting point of 18 months' imprisonment for the September 26, 2014 threat to kill offence against one of Rudd's former contractors was too high.
This happened at a time when Rudd was experiencing significant addiction problems and abusing substances, and his wild "nutting off" phone call was made during a period of paranoia, he said.
Mr Tuck said the usual sanction for the drugs charges would have been a fine or community work, instead extra home detention had been added.
Justice Asher said there was no doubt Judge Ingram had used an orthodox approach to sentencing but agreed a three months' uplift for the drugs charge was "very stern".
Mr Tuck said Judge Ingram also failed to give sufficient credit to Rudd's two-day restorative justice process with the victim, and a $120,000 reparation offer to make amends.
"There has been complete healing and restoration of the situation, with the victim having forgiven Mr Rudd and accepted his offer, which essentially means it is now accepted as being a victimless crime, " he said.
Mr Tuck argued a discharge without conviction was warranted, given the significant impact on Rudd's personal life, his work, his career, "his heritage and legacy", and ability to travel. If a discharge was not granted, a sentence of nine months' supervision and community work would adequately cover the gravity of the offending and address Rudd's rehabilitative needs, he said.
Crown prosecutor Anna Pollett argued Rudd had tried to "gloss over" the seriousness of his offending, and the victim had genuinely feared for his and his family's safety and also lost his job. Miss Pollett said no criticisms could be made of Judge Ingram's sentencing approach, which included his taking into account Rudd's two prior discharges without conviction for cannabis possession and common assault, which related to threatening behaviour.
Rudd had so far only paid $50,000 to the victim, she said.
Justice Asher told Mr Tuck: "I accept this has been a substantial blow for Mr Rudd. He was clearly in a terrible downhill spiral last year but maybe, given time, he can turn his life around and come back from this. No one really knows," he said.
Justice Asher reserved his decision.
