R v Griffith
[2024] QDC 207
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Pending
- R v Griffith[2024] QDC 207
- Add to List
R v Griffith[2024] QDC 207
R v Griffith[2024] QDC 207
DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: | R v Griffith [2024] QDC 207 |
PARTIES: | THE KING v GRIFFITH, Ashley Paul (defendant) |
FILE NO/S: | 1477/24 |
DIVISION: | Criminal |
PROCEEDING: | Sentence |
ORIGINATING COURT: | District Court at Brisbane |
DELIVERED ON: | 29 November 2024 |
DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
HEARING DATE: | 28 November 2024 |
JUDGES: | Smith AM DCJA |
ORDER: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – where the defendant committed serious sexual offences against young children over about a 20 year period – where the defendant was a childcare worker and recorded the offences – some of it was uploaded to the dark web – whether life imprisonment should be imposed – whether the parole date should be altered from 15 years, the statutory period Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) s 181 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss 16A, 17A Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) ss 9, 160C, 160D Cameron v R [2002] HCA 6; (2002) 209 CLR 339, cited Ibbs v R [1987] HCA 46; (1987) 163 CLR 447, considered Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; (2005) 228 CLR 357, cited R v Appleton [2017] QCA 290, applied R v BEB [2023] QCA 105, cited R v D [2003] QCA 547, cited R v Evans and Pearce [2011] QCA 135; [2011] 2 Qd R 571, cited R v Free; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [2020] QCA 58; (2020) 282 A Crim R 94, considered R v Harris [2000] NSWCCA 469; (2000) 50 NSWLR 409; (2000) 121 A Crim R 342, applied R v Kalajzich (1997) 94 A Crim R 41, applied R v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; (2016) 259 CLR 256, considered R v Mahony & Shenfield [2012] QCA 366, cited R v Marshall [1993] 2 Qd R 307; (1992) 62 A Crim R 162, cited R v Mizner [2019] QCA 198 , applied R v Robinson [2007] QCA 99, cited R v SAG [2004] QCA 286 ; (2004) 147 A Crim R 301, applied R v Singh [2006] QCA 71, cited R v Turnbull [2013] QCA 374, cited R v Twala, NSWCCA unreported 1994, applied R v SEA [2023] QCA 56, cited R v Weldon [2006] QCA 504, cited Veen (No 2) v R [1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465, applied |
COUNSEL: | T Fuller KC and S Gallagher for the Crown S Cartledge for the defendant |
SOLICITORS: | Office of the Director of Prosecutions for the Crown Gnech and Associates for the defendant |
Introduction
- [1]The defendant, Ashley Paul Griffith, has pleaded guilty to the 307 offences as follows:
- 15 x repeated sexual conduct with a child.[1]
- 28 x rape.[2]
- 190 counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16 under 12 under care.[3]
- 67 x making child exploitation material (“CEM”).[4]
- 4 x producing child abuse material outside of Australia.[5]
- 1 x distributing child abuse material outside Australia.[6]
- 1 x using a carriage service for child pornography.[7]
- 1 x possession of CEM.[8]
- [2]I take into account the pleas of guilty.
- [3]In sentencing him, I have regard to the principles of sentencing mentioned in s 9 subsection 1 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), and the relevant matters in subsection 2. Because violence and harm was involved here subsection (2A) applies and I primarily have regard to the matters mentioned in subsection (3). Because this is sexual offending against children subsections 4, 5, 6 and 6A apply to the child sex offences. As regards to the child exploitation material, I also have regard to subsections 7 and 7A.
- [4]As regards the Commonwealth offences, I specifically have regard to s 16A of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and s 17A. In my opinion, having regard to the seriousness of the charges, no other penalty aside from imprisonment is appropriate.
Antecedents and history of proceedings
- [5]The defendant was born on 5 December 1977 and therefore is 46 years of age presently. He was aged 25 to 44 at the time of the offending. He has been in custody since his arrest on 21 August 2022 a period of 831 days.
- [6]The defendant was initially charged in August 2022 and was interviewed between his arrest and January 2023.
- [7]He waived his right to receive a full brief of evidence and consented to the presentation of an ex officio indictment.
Overview
- [8]The offending occurred between January 2003 and August 2022 a period of almost 20 years.
- [9]In 2014 police detected a website on the dark web called “The Love Zone” or “TLZ”. It was hosted overseas but administered from South Australia. It provided access to extreme CEM.
- [10]A series of videos were uploaded to the site in October 2013 to April 2014 by a person with the username Zimble– this was the defendant. This involved videos of 6 female children being touched and digitally penetrated at a daycare facility (Count 214).
- [11]A joint AFP and QPS operation named Tenterfield commenced to identify Zimble and the children. TLZ was closed down by the police in August 2014 and the administrator arrested.
- [12]The investigation was lengthy and difficult. Ultimately though, the police were able to identify the daycare centres and then identified the defendant as the offender.
- [13]On 21 August 2022, investigators from the AFP executed a search warrant at a house in Elanora occupied by the defendant and his mother. During the search a number of electronic devices were located in a bedroom. This included hard drives and a laptop. The police reviewed these devices and located child exploitation material.
- [14]On 22 August 2022, the AFP executed another search warrant at Beechmont. During this search a number of electronic devices were located in a bedroom including a SD card and hard drive. These devices were reviewed and further CEM was located.
- [15]The defendant first possessed CEM on 2 January 2000 but s 228D was not inserted into the Criminal Code until 2005. An examination of the electronic devices showed they contained 571 videos and 18,257 images of CEM (count 320).
- [16]The media files depicted prepubescent and pubescent female children ranging from 2 to 15 and included images depicting those children engaged in sexual activity including sexual posing, masturbation, vaginal, anal and oral penetration of children by other children and adult males and females.
- [17]This does not include media files produced by him.
- [18]The photos and videos produced by him form the factual basis of the particular counts reflected in the indictment. An analysis revealed that material relating to some of the complainants had been deleted but later recovered. This coincided with the closing of TLZ in South Australia.
- [19]The analysis showed that he offended against 69 children all of whom were young females aged between 2 and 7 the majority being between 3 and 5.
- [20]It all occurred in daycare centres where he was employed as a carer. The recordings were catalogued into the daycare centres and labelled to identify the children involved and the type of sexual interaction. He also retained some enrolment and attendance records and class photos. In some cases he created montages and films.
- [21]There are other charges from when the defendant worked in New South Wales. These are the subject of an arrest warrant.
Summary of the offending
- [22]Between 2003 – 2014 and 2018 – 2022,[9] the defendant sexually offended against 69 female children. All of his offending occurred in daycare centres, where he was employed by the centres as a carer of the children. He offended against 65 children in Queensland, across 11 different childcare centres and 4 children in one daycare centre in Pisa, Italy. He lived in Queensland and offended against children between 2003 and 2013 and then went to Italy in 2013, before returning to Australia in 2014. He lived in New South Wales before returning to Queensland in 2018 where he continued his offending.
- [23]The age of the defendant’s victims generally ranged between 2-5, though one victim could have been as young as only one year old when she was offended against and another victim was aged between 7 and 9. The defendant offended against the victims in many ways, ranging from touching of the victims over and under their clothes to raping them. He kissed some of his victims, including putting his tongue in their mouths or licking their lips. He touched the victims on their legs, their buttocks and their vaginal areas. He rubbed his penis against the faces, vaginal areas and buttocks of his victims. He raped victims by penetrating their labias with his fingers and his penis. He raped his victims by putting his penis in their mouths. He ejaculated on victims including on their faces, stomachs, vaginal areas, back and buttocks. The children were offended against whilst awake and asleep. When he offended against them whilst they were awake, he usually positioned them on his lap which allowed him to be more discrete. He also frequently gave the victims an iPad to distract them, if offending against them whilst they were awake.
- [24]The defendant made CEM, as he videoed and photographed his sexual offending against all but one of the victims (Count 1). The charges brought against the defendant are otherwise based on the material located on his devices. Generally, he filmed this material with either a camera or his phone. At one daycare centre (Tiny Town at Enoggera) he frequently used two devices to film his offending, having setup a tripod camera in the location where he took the victims to offend against. The defendant offended against some of the victims for extended periods, including durations of between 15 – 30 minutes at a time, particularly when the children were asleep.
- [25]Following the offending against the victims, the defendant transferred the CEM he made of the offending from his phone or camera onto other devices. During the transfer process, the defendant would rename some of the material to identify the victim or the sexual conduct, for example, ‘H's - Luscious pussy.mpeg’. The defendant also created montages of his offending against certain victims, by editing multiple pictures together or splicing multiple videos together and naming them with the child’s name and/or descriptive features, for example, “Kissing and cum in mouth.mp4”.
- [26]The defendant’s sexual offending involved repeated sexual conduct with 15 of the children.
- [27]The defendant’s offending against each of these 15 children had features that support aspects of a sexual relationship which was maintained with the victim, rather than opportunistic, fleeting or individual offences. Some of those features consistent across the offending against these victims included:
- Offending against the victim on many separate occasions, demonstrating a continuity and habitualness in his offending.
- Creating videos of a victim by putting multiple pictures together or splicing multiple videos together and naming them with the victim’s name and/or descriptive features.
- Offending against the victim despite other children being proximate (highlighting a particular interest in one child over others, including other children who are asleep and might be thought of as less risky to offend against).
- Offending against a victim for a particularly lengthy period of time (for example some videos he took were brief, whereas some victims he offended against for up to 30 minutes at a time).
- The intimate nature of the sexual offences committed against the victim (for example some of the offending involves kissing/licking thighs and open mouth kissing).
- [28]In addition to the offending against the victims, the defendant’s sexual interest in children lead to him accessing darknet websites where he would view child exploitation material and download it onto his devices. This occurred between 2000 – 2022.[10]
- [29]One particular website the defendant accessed was ‘The Love Zone’ (TLZ). The defendant commented on child abuse material on TLZ, under the username ‘Zimble’. In addition to comments which demonstrated his sexual interest in young girls, he left comments suggestive of him abusing children and advising others on how they could do so. For example:
“Without knowing specifics about the child’s personality (is she shy? Super affectionate?), my first priority would be to try and get her sitting on my lap. This can be very easy with some children… I would be hoping she is wearing a dress so you have access to her bare legs. Once I have been tickling her around the tummy area, I would go for the legs giving her thighs a bit of a squeeze and moving my hands up…The point is not to make this an obvious sexual advance…One other idea, if you have an iPad and you manage to get her on your lap you can let her play while sitting on you. Her focus will be on the game and while she is playing you can maybe have a little feel around. Just go slowly and don’t make is obvious. If you move your hand to her panties just sit on hand at the top and leave it sitting for a minute, if she doesn’t flinch move down a bit. Slowly start to rub over her mound, if she pushes you away, don’t try again…If she was younger you could probably get away with a lot more.”
“Anyways those are some of my experiences, in answer to your question, no I have never considered just sticking to cumming into tissues looking at my fav candydoll vids (though I do do this quite a lot, lol). For me I simply have to experience the warmth, softness and intoxicating scent of little girls as much as I am able to, so it becomes a balance between minimising risks and seizing opportunities.”
- [30]TLZ allowed for users to upload their own child exploitation material to the website. If users contributed material (a minimum of 4 gigabytes over a certain time period), they gained access to a broader range of material themselves, which the defendant described as access to ‘rare’ and some ‘hardcore’ material. This material was material not readily available upon a search for child pornography. The defendant uploaded a series of child exploitation material which he named the ‘K and B’ series to TLZ in 2014. That series involved videos of his offending against 6 of his victims, including touching and digital penetrations of the victims’ genitals. After uploading this material, the defendant wrote to the ‘VIP requests’ asking to be considered for approval as he had uploaded the required content, and he was approved.
- [31]It was apparent from the videos uploaded by the defendant to TLZ that the sexual abuse was occurring in a daycare setting. In February 2014, the Queensland Police Service (QPS) became aware of ‘Zimble’ and this lead to a joint investigation by QPS and AFP, named Operation Tenterfield.
- [32]The investigation was lengthy and at times stalled. In 2022, police had a breakthrough as they were able to identify the company that sold a blanket which was visible in some of the child exploitation material that the defendant had created and uploaded on TLZ. Police enquiries revealed this company sold blankets to daycare centres in Queensland and ultimately following attendance at various daycares and an investigation into employment records at these daycares, the police were able to identify the defendant as ‘Zimble’ in August 2022.
- [33]Upon determining the defendant’s identity, police executed a warrant as the home he lived at in Elanora and his mother’s home in Beechmont on 21 and 22 August 2022. Police seized his phone and other devices across those two homes. An analysis of those devices revealed his offending against the victims and also revealed he possessed 18,828 CEM files, unrelated to his victims.
Summary of offending at each daycare centre
Chelmer Graceville Kids Activities Group
- [34]The defendant offended against one child at this daycare, located in Graceville. He left this daycare as he was fired due to performance issues, though it is not alleged this related to sexual offending. The defendant did not record his offending against this victim. Following media attention about the defendant after he was initially charged by police, this victim provided a statement to police about his offending.
QUT Student Guild Gardens Point Child Creche
- [35]During 2007, the defendant commenced employment at “Gardens Point Child Care” located at Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane. Gardens Point Child Care was owned and operated by the QUT Student Guild and was closed in late 2009. The defendant was employed as an assistant at Gardens Point Child Care until it closed in December 2009.
- [36]During the defendant’s employment, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching, kissing, digital penetration, oral penetration and the production of child abuse material, with 12 young girls[11] ranging between 2 and 5 years of age. In total, he committed 112 offences against these victims. Most of the children he committed offences against between 2-6 times. However, there were two victims who attended this daycare, H and I and it was not always possible to discern which twin he was offending against. He committed 57 offences against them combined.[12]
- [37]Of the 12 victims, the defendant raped four of them. During the rape of one victim, L, she told him “it's yucky stop, it yucky” and “get off me/let go of me”. The defendant laughed at her and mocked her by saying "get away from me" in a high-pitched voice.[13]
Little Ted’s
- [38]The defendant was employed as an assistant and teacher at ‘Little Ted’s Childcare Centre’ at Oxley, from the start of 2010 until early 2013. The defendant left Little Ted’s as they did not have an ongoing teacher role for him.
- [39]During the defendant’s employment at Little Ted’s Childcare Centre, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching, digital penetration, oral sex, ejaculation and the production of child abuse material, with 16 victims[14] ranging between 2 and 5 years old. The defendant engaged in repeated sexual conduct with 7 of the 16 victims and his sexual activity involved rape of 11 of the 16 victims.
St Mark’s Early Learning Centre at Mt Gravatt
- [40]In July 2013, the defendant commenced employment at ‘St Mark’s Lutheran Early Learning Centre’ at Mount Gravatt, Queensland. He was employed there for approximately 6 weeks. During the defendant’s employment at St Mark’s Early Learning Centre the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching of vaginal areas and buttocks and the production of child abuse material, with 6 victims, ranging between 4 and 5 years of age.
Westminster International School, Pisa Italy
- [41]In August 2013, the defendant commenced employment at ‘Westminster International School’ located in Pisa, Italy. The defendant was employed as teacher and predominately worked in a room known as ‘Pre-Reception’, which catered for children aged between 3 and 5 years old. Whilst working here, the defendant engaged in the production of child abuse material involving 4 victims, which included closeup material of their vaginal areas and buttocks. The defendant ceased working in Italy and returned to Australia in 2014, where he worked in New South Wales, until his return to Queensland in 2018.
Penola Casa at Wavell Heights
- [42]Between 8 July 2018 and 4 August 2018, the defendant was employed at ‘Penola Casa’, a childcare centre located at 7 Sugarloaf Street, Wavell Heights, Queensland. The defendant worked in the kindergarten room. During the defendant’s employment at Penola Casa, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching, digital penetration, oral sex and the production of child abuse material, with 5 victims, aged between 2 and 4 years of age, on multiple occasions. He raped one of the victims. The defendant advised police that he left this daycare centre as he and the owner “did not see eye to eye”.
Guardian Early Learning Group at Bowen Hills
- [43]On 3 September 2018, the defendant commenced employment at ‘Guardian Early Learning Centre’ located at 3/45 King Street, Bowen Hills, Queensland. The defendant was employed at Guardian Early Learning Centre until 28 September 2018, when his employment was terminated for ‘performance issues’. It is not known what this related to specifically.
- [44]During the defendant’s employment at Guardian Learning Centre, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching, penile penetration, digital penetration, ejaculation and the production of child abuse material, with 4 victims, aged between 2 and 5 on multiple occasions. His offending included rapes of one victim.
Moreton Bay College Early Learning Centre
- [45]In October 2018, the defendant commenced casual employment at ‘Moreton Bay College Childcare Centre’ located at 72 Hargreaves Road, Manly West, Queensland. The defendant was employed at Moreton Bay College’s Childcare Centre on a casual basis between October 2018 and January 2019. Between 18 January 2019 and about February 2019 the defendant was employed on a full-time basis as a Pre-Prep Teacher. During the defendant’s employment, he offended against one victim, by pulling down her pants and taking photos of her genitals.
Everton Park Child Care and Development Centre
- [46]On 18 February 2019, the defendant commenced employment at ’Everton Park Child Care and Development Centre’ located at 25 Halle Street, Everton Park, Queensland. The defendant was employed until 13 December 2019, following his resignation. During the time he worked there, he offended against six victims aged between 2-4 on multiple occasions. The sexual activity included sexual touching of the victims’ vaginal areas and bottoms, rape by digital penetration and repeated sexual conduct against one of the victims. The defendant raped two of the six victims.
Tiny Town Child Care and Kindergarten at Enoggera
- [47]In December 2019, the defendant commenced employment at ‘Tiny Town Childcare and Kindergarten’ located at 92 Laurel Street, Enoggera, Queensland. During the defendant’s employment he performed the role of Educator and Director. The defendant was employed at Tiny Town Childcare and Kindergarten until April 2022, when he resigned.
- [48]During the defendant’s employment at Tiny Town Childcare and Kindergarten, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching, kissing and licking, digital and oral penetration, ejaculation and the production of child abuse material, with 11 victims aged between 2-5 years old, on multiple occasions. He engaged in repeated sexual conduct with 7 of those victims and raped 10 of the victims. At this daycare, the defendant used a tripod camera to film his offending, in addition to his phone. He advised police he recorded from two different angles to make the videos ‘more interesting.’
- [49]Whilst employed, an allegation was made by one of the defendant’s victims that a female teacher had touched her inappropriately. The report was made to the defendant and he notified the Department and his superiors, which lead to an investigation. The defendant was aware of this investigation occurring in the context that he had offended against her. Ultimately no charges were brought against that teacher, though she did not return to the daycare. The defendant advised police he was aware there was a possibility that child was mixing up the offending he did against her.
- [50]Whilst the Director of Tiny Town, a social media post was made suggesting that the daycare was involved in a paedophile ring. The defendant wrote a letter on 11 June 2021 which was distributed to all families to address the post. It included the following:
“It has been brought to our attention that there is a scurrilous post on social media implicating Tiny Town in illegal activity. Please be advised we are taking the issue very seriously and are currently seeking legal advice though Synod. We want to reassure families that the well-being and safety of you and your family are of paramount importance to the centre and that we take child protection extremely seriously. All employed staff undergo rigorous screening through the blue card system which included police and criminal history check. All staff also undertake yearly training in child protection as mandated by legislation”.
- [51]Whilst working here, the defendant was investigated by the police for alleged offending against ER. He interviewed with the police on 8 November 2021 and denied offending against her. He was not charged, and he continued to work at this daycare for approximately 6 months.
St Alban’s Wilston Childhood Centre
- [52]Between 13-19 April 2022, the defendant undertook casual employment at ‘St Alban’s Wilston Childhood Centre’ located at 47 Lovedale Street, Wilston, Queensland. During the defendant’s employment at St Alban’s Wilston Childcare Centre, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching and the production of child abuse material, with one victim aged 3 years of age.
- [53]On 20 April 2022, the defendant’s shifts were cancelled, as a result of a notification of an incident by a child that the defendant touched her vaginal area during rest time on 19 April. Police spoke to the child (who is not the victim) and determined the disclosures made did not meet the necessary threshold for a criminal investigation. The defendant did not return to this daycare.
Lady Ramsay Child Care Centre
- [54]Between 10 May 2022 and 22 June 2022, the defendant undertook casual employment at ‘Lady Ramsay Child Care Centre’ located at Royal Brisbane Women’s Hospital,
- [55]Bramston Terrace, Herston, Queensland. During the defendant’s employment at Lady Ramsay Child Care Centre, the defendant engaged in sexual activity, including sexual touching and the production of child abuse material, with 2 victims, aged 5 years old, who were twins, on separate occasions.
Interviews with the police and cooperation
- [56]When police first arrested the defendant, he was questioned about his use of the ‘dark web’ and he denied seeing any child abuse material or being involved in uploading it. He denied being in possession of child pornography. Police then showed the defendant some sanitised abuse material taken by the defendant at Little Ted’s which he had uploaded on TLZ. They advised the defendant they believed he was the person committing the abuse and when asked if he had anything to say about the allegation the defendant said no. He advised police he did not wish to comment further.
- [57]On 21 August 2022, the defendant advised the police that he wished to speak to them again. He advised that the allegations of him uploading child pornography to the internet were true and that he did that so he could access other material. He incorrectly stated that offending only related to two children. The defendant advised police he had also engaged in filming abuse that he had carried out. He stated:
“I noticed that the girls were heavy sleepers and having that desire just made me lose all sense of right or wrong…the urge was stronger than my ability to control myself.”
- [58]He said that the offending commenced by him touching girls whilst they were asleep, progressed to him masturbating against them and ‘escalated from there’ including offending against them while they were awake. He said he thought there was between 50 and 100 children he abused. He was asked if there was ever any penetration of a child and he stated ‘no.
“I would use my finger to try – like, I would just be stroking the opening of a child’s, um – but not actually – there was no actual penetration”.
- [59]However the defendant was aware he had penetrated victims and he labelled videos accordingly, for example the videos he labelled ‘fingering’ as distinct from ‘rubbing’.
- [60]The defendant participated in interviews with the police on 13 additional occasions, largely between September 2022 and January 2023, with a final interview occurring in July 2023. The interviews occurred over a number of occasions because of interview time constraints.
- [61]The defendant was asked about the daycares that he worked at. At times he would minimise his offending when he was asked how many children he had offended against, or the ways in which he offended against them. Once police showed him photographs of victims, he accepted he had offended against them and was frequently able to tell police the victims’ names. For example:
- The defendant told police he recalled offending against half a dozen children at QUT Student Guild Gardens Point Child Creche, though he offended against 12.[15]
- With respect to offending at Little Ted’s, the defendant advised police the touching progressed to masturbation, by rubbing his penis on them, at this daycare. The defendant initially stated he recalled touching 7 children and said he did not think there were any more victims, though there were 16[16]. During a later interview he accepted there were more than 7 victims and nominated some further names.
- With reference to his offending in Italy, he initially advised police he was making a conscious effort not to offend, but did take photos of one girl and that was in the context of them playing and her dress came up. This was false. In a later interview he agreed he pulled her dress up and that he offended against more than one child. Those admissions occurred in the context of police showing the defendant the images of other victims.
- [62]During the interviews, police showed the defendant photographs and videos taken from his own computer of his offending. The defendant could largely identify the first name of the children he was asked about and at times their surname or the location the offending took place. On some occasions he was shown photos of children and whilst he could identify them, he denied offending against them, though this was not correct. There were a variety of reasons police showed the defendant images including:
- to identify an unknown child;
- to confirm the identity of a child where the AFP had belief about the identity;
- to confirm the defendant’s knowledge of the child’s identity and offending against the child.
- [63]On most occasions, the AFP already had knowledge of the child’s first name due to the file structure and naming conventions on the defendant’s devices. There were occasions when there was very little information to identify a child, where the defendant provided information to assist with identifying the victim. At times, the defendant provided information at the following interview with police, after having more time to think about the question.
- [64]The AFP was able to obtain records from most childcare centres to help with identifying child victims. At one childcare centre, (Gardens Point Childcare Centre) it was identified business records had been destroyed and the defendant’s cooperation was of assistance to the AFP. In conjunction with business records, AFP intelligence enquiries and the defendant’s cooperation, police were able to sufficiently identify most child victims prior to notifying families. As part of the investigation, police showed parents of the victims redacted photographs taken from the defendant’s computer, in order to have the parents identify the child’s face and clothing.
- [65]The defendant’s cooperation was able to speed up the process of identifying a child victim prior to speaking with families; clarify the correct victim when police were unsure of the child depicted in the material; and identify locations where offending occurred when the location of offending may not have been clear.
- [66]The defendant did not identify any victims outside the material located on his devices.
- [67]The defendant also made the following statements across various interviews:
- He was employed at other daycares, but said he did not offend at those daycares because they had cameras in the centre.
- When referred to the effect on him of the police investigation into his conduct involving BA,[17] he said he wanted to stop offending and prove he could abstain, however he wasn’t strong enough to stop himself.
- He accepted he was sexually attracted to young girls and admitted to watching child exploitation material in the early 2000s.
- He was able to identify the children from their faces and clothing as he would regularly go back and review the footage he had made. He stated filming the children naked but it became ‘not enough’ and he had to go further to satisfy himself or ‘feel the same effect’.
- He chose children to offend against based on his physical attraction to them including children he felt were ‘pretty’ or had ‘natural features’. He filmed for this for ‘selfish reasons’ because he wanted to ‘enjoy the videos later on’.
- He would look at the material every few days and would masturbate as he watched them.
- He considered that the children he offended against whilst awake were not affected at all and told police they were happily laughing or having conversations. However, during a later interview the defendant accepted that there was the potential his victims might suffer harm later in life.
- He advised police they would not find any images taken at his current workplace, which he had worked at for a month, as he was trying not to offend.
- [68]The defendant consented to fingerprints, a DNA swab and intimate images being taken of him. He was initially charged with three offences and then over 1400 additional charges once police had reviewed the devices seized.[18] He has been remanded in custody since his arrest in August 2022.
- [69]A summary of the offences is as follows:
Year | Victims | Offences |
2003 | 1 | 1 |
2005 |
| 1 |
2007 | 5 | 31 including rape |
2008 | 4 | 67 including rape |
2009 | 3 | 13 including rape |
2010 | 9 | 45 including repeated sexual conduct with a child and rape |
2011 | 4 | 17 including repeated sexual conduct with a child |
2012 | 3 | 13 including repeated sexual conduct with a child and rape |
2013 | 9 | 19 including whilst overseas including uploading images to TLZ |
2014 | 1 | 2 including whilst overseas including uploading images to TLZ |
2018 | 10 | 35 including repeated sexual conduct with a child and rape |
2019 | 7 | 22 including repeated sexual conduct with a child and rape |
2020 | 4 | 10 including repeated sexual conduct with a child. 3 victims were the subject of charges of repeated sexual conduct |
2021 | 5 | 20 including rape |
2022 | 4 | 11 including rape |
| 69 | 307 |
- [70]The images captured more than 600 sexual interactions between the defendant and various children.
Particulars of the counts
- [71]Following are the particulars of the individual counts.
Offending at Chelmer Graceville Kids Activities Group at Graceville
Count | Date | Offence | Facts |
Victim – A – aged 7-9 | |||
1 | 1 January 2003 – 31 December 2004 | Indecent treatment of a child under 16 under 12 under care | On this occasion the defendant asked the victim to kiss him and she did. |
Offending at QUT Student Guild Gardens Point Child Creche
Victim – B – aged 2-4 | |||
2 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant pulled the victim’s underwear down and took a photograph of her vagina and captured it in four photos |
3 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant videotaped an incident where he rubbed the victim’s vagina on the outside of her underwear |
4 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant recorded rubbing the victim’s vagina on the outside of her underwear |
5 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant positioned the victim on his lap and rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear and recorded this |
6 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant put the victim on his lap and rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear and videotaped this |
7 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2008 | Making child exploitation material. | The defendant recorded himself committing each of the five offences |
Victim – C – aged 2-4 | |||
8 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant positioned the child on his lap and touched her vaginal area on the outside of her underwear taking five photos |
9 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant had the victim on his lap and touched her vaginal area on the outside of her underwear taking six photos |
10 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a closeup picture of the victim’s vaginal area |
11 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took two close up photos of the victim’s vaginal area |
12 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant had the victim on his lap and touched the vaginal area on the outside of the underwear and took three videos of this |
13 | Date unknown 1 January 2007 – 28 November 2008 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded the victim on five occasions as detailed above. The contact offences Counts 8, 9 and 12 involved the defendant making child exploitation material |
Victim – D – aged 2-3 | |||
14 | 1 January 2007 – 10 March 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back and the defendant photographed her vaginal area |
15 | 1 January 2007 – 10 March 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back holding a dummy and the defendant rubbed her legs and outside her underwear on her vaginal area filming this |
16 | 1 January 2007 – 10 March 2008 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the two separate incidents of offending. Contact offence Count 15 involves him making CEM |
Victim – E – aged 2-5 | |||
17 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on his lap and he rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear and he videotaped this |
18 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap and he rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear and he videotaped this |
19 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on his lap and the defendant rubbed the victim’s vagina on the outside of her underwear and he videotaped this |
20 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap and the defendant rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear and he videotaped this |
21 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Rape | The victim was lying down and the defendant pulled her underwear to the side, rubbed her vagina and raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger and he videotaped this |
22 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down and the defendant pulled her underwear to the side and rubbed her vaginal area |
23 | 1 January 2007 – 31 December 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the offences as detailed above on six separate occasions |
Victim – unknown child GPU03 – estimated aged 4 years | |||
24 | 26 September 2007 – 19 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a series of five photographs of the victim lying her back focused on the genital regions. In 1 photo the vagina was partially visible though the side of her underwear |
25 | 26 September 2007 – 19 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took images focusing on her genital region |
Victim – F – aged 4 | |||
26 | 27 September 2007 – 27 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a series of four photographs focused on the victim’s vaginal area |
27 | 27 September 2007 – 27 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a single photograph of the victim’s vaginal area |
28 | 27 September 2007 – 27 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took seven photographs of the victim’s vaginal area |
Victim – unknown child GPU04 – aged 4 years | |||
29 | 10 October 2007 – 25 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took three photos of the genital region whilst the victim was lying on her back |
30 | 10 October 2007 – 25 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took two photographs of her vaginal area exposed |
Victim – unknown child GPU07 – aged 4 years | |||
31 | 11 October 2007 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant moved the victim’s underwear and touched her vagina and recorded this by taking eight photographs |
32 | 11 October 2007 | Making child exploitation material | He took the eight photographs |
Victim – G – aged 2-4 | |||
33 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant pulled her underwear down, rubbed her buttocks and felt down towards her perineum |
34 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant pulled her underwear down, rubbed her buttocks and felt down towards her perineum |
35 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant kissed her on the lips with an open mouth and videoed this |
36 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant kissed her on the lips with an open mouth and videoed this |
37 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant kissed her on the lips with an open mouth and videotaped this |
38 | 1 January 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the offences as detailed above on five occasions |
Victim H – aged 2-4 | |||
39 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Rape | The victim was asleep. The defendant raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger and videoed this |
40 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her buttocks and videoed this |
41 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back. The defendant pulled her underwear down and took a video of her vagina |
42 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Rape | The victim was on her stomach. The defendant raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger and spread it so the opening was visible on the camera. He took two videos and 5 photographs |
43 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her buttocks and recorded this on video |
44 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her stomach and pubic region and took 16 photos |
45 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Rape | The victim was asleep. The defendant raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger and recorded this on three videos |
46 | 1 January 2008 – 10 December 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the offences as detailed above on seven separate occasions |
Victim – unknown child GPU09 – aged 4 years | |||
47 | 11 February 2008 | Rape | The victim was asleep. The defendant exposed her vaginal area, spread her labia apart and raped her by penetrating her labia with his fingers |
48 | 11 February 2008 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded the offending by taking a series of four photographs depicting the rape |
Victim – unknown child GPU08 – aged 4 yours | |||
49 | 12 February 2008 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took two images showing the victim’s vagina which was exposed through the side of her playsuit. She was lying on her back with no underwear on |
Victim – I & J – aged 3-5 | |||
50 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant had BGM sitting on his lap rubbing her vaginal area over the top of her underwear and videoed this |
51 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant had AM sitting on his lap and rubbed her vaginal area over the top of her underwear and filmed this |
52 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant created a video showing both victims. BGM was sitting on the defendant’s lap and he rubbed her vaginal area over the top of her underwear. The camera angle shifted |
53 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The camera angle shifted position and he offended against AM. She was sitting on his lap and he rubbed her vaginal area of the top of her underwear |
54 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | This offending was captured on two videos. The defendant was sitting on a hammock with BGM and five other children. BGM’s legs were resting on the defendant’s torso. He filmed her vaginal area whilst her skirt raised. The 2nd video showed the same incident with two other children on the hammock. He kept filming her vaginal area |
55 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | This offending was captured on a video montage of 13 separate incidents of involving one of the twins. The first incident showed the victim lying on her back wearing underwear. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear and pulled it to the side to reveal the vagina |
56 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant had the victim sitting on his lap and rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear The third incident depicted the offending described above The fourth incident depicted the offending described above |
57 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The fifth incident involved the victim on her stomach with the defendant rubbing her buttocks and vaginal area on the outside of the underwear |
58 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The sixth incident involved the victim on her stomach wearing underwear. He rubbed her buttocks on the outside of her underwear |
59 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The seventh incident showed the victim on her stomach and the defendant rubbing her buttocks on the outside of the underwear and pulling her underwear to reveal her vagina |
60 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The eighth incident shows the victim being rubbed by the defendant on the vagina on the outside of the underwear and he pulls the underwear sideways to reveal her vagina and he rubs it |
61 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The ninth incident shows the victim lying on her back wearing underwear. He pulled the underwear to the sides revealing her vagina and rubbed it |
62 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The tenth incident shows the victim on her back. The defendant pulled the victim’s underwear to the side revealing her vagina and rubbing it |
63 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The eleventh incident show the victim lying on her back and the defendant pulled the underwear to the side revealing the vagina and rubbing it |
64 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The twelfth incident shows the victim lying on her back wearing underwear. He pulled it to the side to reveal the vagina and rubbed it |
65 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The thirteenth incident shows the victim sitting on the defendant’s lap with the defendant rubbing her vagina |
66 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant touched the victim’s buttocks and pulled her underwear down to reveal the buttocks. He took a video and four photographs of this offending |
67 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her vagina and recorded this on video |
68 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her stomach and the defendant rubbed her buttocks area and took 10 photographs of this |
69 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Rape | The victim was on her stomach. He rubbed her vagina and then raped her by penetrating her labia with his fingers. He recorded this in 14 photographs and two videos |
70 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and captured this in a series of 20 photos and a video |
71 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | On the same day as Count 70, the victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her buttocks and between her legs towards her vagina and recorded this on 14 photographs |
72 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on his lap. He rubbed her vagina and filmed this |
73 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on his lap. He rubbed her vagina for about 10 minutes and took four photos and four videos |
74 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant pulled down her underwear revealing her vagina. He captured this on three photos |
75 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant rubbed the victim’s vagina recording this on video |
76 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back. The defendant rubbed her vagina and captured this on video |
77 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back asleep. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on two videos |
78 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying or sitting near the defendant. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on video |
79 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and recorded this on video |
80 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on film |
81 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care |
The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap and wearing underwear. The defendant positioned the victim on his lap with her legs up to reveal her vagina to the camera and held her around the stomach. The offending was captured on a video.
|
82 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back and the defendant rubbed her vagina. The offending was captured on a video.
|
83 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. The defendant rubbed the victim’s buttocks. The offending was captured on a video.
|
84 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back. The defendant rubbed her vagina and captured this on video |
85 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on video |
86 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her thighs and buttocks and captured this on video |
87 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her buttocks and pulled her underwear down to expose them. He captured this on video |
88 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying across the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her buttocks and vagina for about 15 minutes and captured this on five videos |
89-91 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | 3 x Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | This offending was captured on a video montage of three separate incidents. Incidents 1-9 and 12 are videos already particularised by the indictment. |
The tenth incident involves the victim sitting on the defendant’s lap and he rubbing her vagina | |||
The eleventh incident involves the victim sitting on his lap and him rubbing her vagina | |||
The thirteenth incident involves the victim sitting on his lap and him rubbing her vagina | |||
92 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back on a hammock. The defendant’s foot was on her upper thigh. The camera was positioned to focus directly on her vagina and a photograph was taken |
93 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. The defendant touched her buttocks and vagina and captured this on nine photos |
94 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. The defendant pulled her underwear to the side and took a photograph of her vagina |
95 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on six photos |
96 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant put three fingers on her vagina and captured this by a photograph |
97 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He took pictures of her vaginal area and captured this on two photographs |
98-99 | 1 June 2008 – 31 December 2009 | 2 x making child exploitation material | This relates to: 1) offending involving the making of CEM that involved both AM and GBM as described in Counts 50-53 and 2) the offending involving either AM or GBM which occurred on 42 separate occasions described above |
Victim – K – aged 3-4 | |||
100 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant kissed her on the lips with an open mouth and recorded this on video |
101 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant kissed her on the lips with an open mouth |
102 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant kissed the victim on her mouth and then licked her lips and mouth and used his fingers to open her mouth and stuck his tongue in. This was captured on a video |
103 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the above offences on three separate occasions |
Victim – L – aged 4-5 years | |||
104 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on his lap. He touched her vaginal area over the underwear and captured this on video |
105 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap watching a movie. He touched her vaginal area over her underwear and captured this on video |
106 | 1 February 2009 – 31 December 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the above offences on two separate occasions |
Victim – M – aged 2-3 years | |||
107 | 10 February 2009 – 5 November 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on a couch with a skirt on but no underwear. The defendant touched her vagina and spread her labia to expose her vaginal opening and recorded this on video |
108-109 | 10 February 2009 – 5 November 2009 | 2 x rape | The victim was lying on a couch wearing a skirt and no underwear. The defendant licked her vagina and then penetrated her labia with his tongue. He then rubbed her vagina with his finger and used his fingers to penetrate her labia. This was captured on video |
110 | 10 February 2009 – 5 November 2009 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He took photographs of her vagina and pulled her underwear to the side to expose her vagina and captured this on two photographs |
111 | 10 February 2009 – 5 November 2009 | Rape | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap wearing a dress and no underwear. He touched her vagina and raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger. She said it was yucky and for him to let her go and he laughed at her and mocked her. The offending was captured on five videos |
112 | 10 February 2009 – 5 November 2009 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the above offences on four separate occasions |
Offending at Little Teds Childcare Centre at Oxley
Victim – N – aged 3-4 | |||
113 | 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2010 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The victim was aged 3-4 when the offended against. Over a one year period, the defendant offended against her on 15 separate occasions. The offending involved 1 digital rape and 14 incidents of indecent treatment which included 13 occasions of rubbing her vaginal area, on some occasions over her underwear and other occasions under her underwear |
114 | 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2010 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on each occasion he offended against the victim. He spent time creating video montages of his offending against her. He created a video titled “L-feeling her beautiful pussy”. He created the videos and spliced videos. On the occasion he digitally raped her he captured the offending in a series of 55 images. The defendant recorded himself on each occasion he offended against her. He made 69 separate files of CEM relating to this victim. |
Victim – O – aged 3-4 | |||
115 | 1 January 2010 – 22 January 2011 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The victim was aged 3-4 when she was offended against. Over about a one year period, the defendant offended against her on 20 separate occasions. The conduct involved: a) four digital rapes b) 1 incident of rubbing his penis on her vaginal area to ejaculation c) two incidents of rubbing her vagina d) 11 incidents of pulling down her clothes and rubbing her buttocks e) three incidents of licking or kissing her thighs f) 1 incident of pulling down her pants and taking a photo of her buttocks.
|
116 | 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2010 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant created a video montage which he labelled “L – early” and involved four separate occasions of offending spliced together. He created another 11 videos of her. The offending occurred largely whilst she was asleep. On one occasion there was an 11 minute video where he pulled down her underwear, rubbed her vaginal area concentrated on the clitoris before raping her by penetrating her labia. He pulled down the underwear back up and kissed the vagina on the outside of the underwear. On another occasion he rubbed the victim’s buttocks, took out his erect penis and rubbed it against her buttocks until he ejaculated on to her underwear. He recorded himself on each occasion. He made 25 separate files of CEM relating to this victim |
Victim –P – aged 2-5 years | |||
117 | 1 December 2010 – 31 December 2012 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant offended against the victim 34 separate occasions over a two year period. The offending involved: a) nine digital rapes b) two oral vaginal rapes c) 18 incidents of rubbing her vagina d) four incidents involving licking her vagina e) three incidents of kissing her mouth f) three incidents of removing clothes in order to take photos of her genital areas
|
118 | 1 December 2010 – 31 December 2012 | Making child exploitation material | The kissing of the victim often involved open mouth kissing by the defendant. He offended whilst other children were in the vicinity. His offending took place over a long periods of time. One video captured him rubbing her vaginal area and digitally penetrating her for about 17 minutes. The defendant saved a large number of videos of offending against the victim with descriptors. He uploaded some of the offending against this victim on a darknet site (Count 214). On one occasion, whilst he was rubbing her vagina inside the underwear, she woke up and said “hey don’t let anyone see my vagina.” During a different occasion when he was rubbing it he sucked his own finger and then digitally penetrated her. He offended against her whilst she was awake and asleep. On one occasion when he was raping her with his finger she woke up and watched him. One video he made showed him using his fingers to separate the labia and then penetrating the vagina with his tongue. He then kissed her and then towards the end of the video began to undo his shorts but something startled him and he walked away. He recorded himself on each occasion he offended against the victim. In total 83 separate CEM files. |
Victim – Q – aged 4-5 years | |||
119 | 1 February 2011 – 31 January 2012 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over an 11 month period the defendant offended against this victim on 18 occasions. The offending involved: a) digital rape b) nine incidents of rubbing her vaginal area c) two incidents of rubbing her buttocks d) seven incidents of kissing her on the mouth. |
120 | 1 February 2011 – 31 January 2012 | Making child exploitation material | The kissing often involved open mouth kissing and licking of the mouth and lips. He also created video montages of his offending against her with labelling. One of the videos he made was for seven minutes and 55 seconds in duration of him licking and kissing her with an open mouth. The victim was asleep and mostly asleep during the offences. He made 28 separate files of CEM relating to this victim |
Victim – R – aged 4-5 years | |||
121 | 27 February 2012 – 28 February 2013 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant against the victim on 52 separate occasions over a 12 month period. This involved: a) four digital rapes b) two oral vaginal rapes c) 26 incidents of rubbing her vaginal area and the anus d) five incidents of licking her vagina e) five incidents of kissing her f) two incidents of rubbing his penis on or ejaculating on the victim g) 1 incident of kissing her buttocks h) 11 incidents of touching the victim or her clothing to expose her genitals and taking a photograph |
122 | 27 February 2012 – 28 February 2013 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant often kissed the victim with an open mouth and licked her lips on multiple occasions. He preferred her to other children. On occasions he offended against her whilst other children were awake and she was awake. He created videos of the offending and labelled it. On one occasion the victim said “stop touching my undies Ashley” and he removed his hand and tried to pull her shirt down before going back to rubbing her thighs. He offended against her while she was asleep. On one occasion while she was asleep over a 19 minute period he rubbed her vagina and penetrated her labia with his fingers before licking her vagina. On another occasion he pulled her underwear away from her body and moaned whilst she was asleep. He rubbed her vagina and raped her with his finger before ejaculating on her stomach. He uploaded some of this offending to the darknet site (Count 214). He made 75 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – S – aged 3-5 | |||
123 | 1 March 2011 – 31 December 2012 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over a 21 month offending period, the defendant offended against this victim on at least 22 separate occasions: a) three digital rapes b) two oral vaginal rapes c) five incidents of rubbing his penis on the victim to the point of ejaculation d) three incidents of licking her vaginal area e) eight incidents of rubbing her vaginal area f) five incidents of rubbing her buttocks g) six incidents of kissing her h) 1 incident of removing her clothing to take a photo of the genital region |
124 | 1 March 2011 – 31 December 2012 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant created a video which he called “kissing” in which he filmed himself kissing, licking and sucking the victim’s lips while she slept. He created several similar videos of himself doing this. At times he opened her mouth with his hands so he could put his tongue in it. He also spliced together five separate occasions into a video labelled “R – feeling her naked pussy.” She was often asleep though at times there were other children awake. On one occasion whilst she was asleep he rubbed his penis on her buttocks and ejaculated on them. He labelled this video. He uploaded some of this offending to the darknet (Count 214). He made 66 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – T – aged 3 years | |||
125 | 17 April 2011 – 27 May 2011 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over approximately a six week period the defendant offended against the victim on 13 separate occasions: a) 1 digital rape b) two incidents of rubbing his penis on her to the point of ejaculation c) 11 incidents of rubbing her vaginal area d) four incidents of rubbing her buttocks |
126 | 17 April 2011 – 27 May 2011 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant often offended against the victim whilst she was awake sitting on his lap watching an iPad. On the occasions he ejaculated on her back he would label the video. He recorded himself on each of the 13 occasions he had offended against her |
Victim – U – aged 3-4 years | |||
127 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant rubbed the victim’s buttocks whilst she was lying down. He took 22 photos of this offending |
128 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed the vaginal area on the outside of the clothes and captured this on two videos |
129 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He sat next to her touching her buttocks capturing this on two videos |
130 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a series of seven videos of the victim’s vaginal region. Another childcare worker was in the background and he moved the phone away. |
131-132 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | 2 x Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | This offending was captured on a video montage showing two separate incidents: a) the first incident involved the defendant with the victim on his lap where he rubbed the vaginal area on the outside of the underwear b) the second incident involved the victim sitting on his lap. He rubbed the vaginal area outside the underwear. |
133 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear. This offending was captured on two videos. Another childcare worker was in the background and he moved his phone away |
134 | 1 January 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the seven separate incidents as described above making CEM |
Victim – V – aged 3-5 years | |||
135 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. He rubbed her buttocks capturing this on a video |
136 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. He rubbed her buttocks with children nearby. He captured this on a video |
137 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took a video of the victim’s vaginal region |
138 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant pulled her skirt up and rubbed her buttocks capturing this on a video |
139 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. He pulled her shorts down and rubbed her buttocks capturing this on a video |
140 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting. He rubbed her thigh and buttocks and captured this on a video |
141 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her buttocks and captured this on a video |
142 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Rape | The offending was captured on a video that showed a close up of the victim’s vaginal region. He pulled the underwear down, rubbed the vagina and raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger |
143 | 1 January 2010 – 8 December 2011 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on eight separate incidents of his offending as described above making CEM |
Victim – W – aged 2 years | |||
144 | 1 January 2010- 21 September 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. The defendant rubbed her vagina. The offending was captured on 8 images and a video |
145 | 1 January 2010- 21 September 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He removed her underwear separating her labia and rubbing it. He captured this on a series of 3 images and a video |
146 | 1 January 2010- 21 September 2010 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on two separate occasions of the offending as described above |
Victim – X – aged 3-4 years | |||
147-148 | 1 January 2010 – 10 January 2011 | 2 x Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The offending was captured on a video montage showing 2 separate incidents: a) the first incident involved the victim lying down. He rubbed her vagina over her underwear while another child was nearby b) the second incident involved the child lying down asleep. The defendant pulled her pants down and underwear down and rubbed her vagina and licked it for about 60 seconds. Other children were lying nearby. At some stage the victim woke up and the defendant asked “what happened to your pants?” |
149 | 1 January 2010 – 10 January 2011 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. The defendant rubbed her vagina over her underwear and recorded this on a video |
150 | 1 January 2010 – 10 January 2011 | Rape | The victim was lying down asleep. The defendant rubbed her vagina over her underwear, pulled it down, rubbed the vagina and raped her with his finger by penetrating the labia. This was captured on a video |
151-152 | 1 January 2010 – 10 January 2011 | 2 x Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The offending was captured on a video montage of two incidents: a) the victim was asleep. He pulled down her pants and rubbed her vagina over her underwear and then rubbed the vagina on the bare skin. He also licked the victim’s lips and mouth. b) the second incident she was sitting on his lap. He rubbed his erect penis on her buttocks until he ejaculated |
153 | 1 January 2010 – 10 January 2011 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on 6 separate incidents of offending as described above |
Victim – unknown child LTU08 – 4 years | |||
154 | 1 January 2010 – 1 January 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing at a table. The defendant rubbed her buttocks and she then sat on his lap and he continued to rub them and captured this on a video |
155 | 1 January 2010 – 1 January 2013 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the above offence |
Victim – unknown child LTU09 – 4 years | |||
156 | 1 January 2010 – 1 January 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He pulled down some shorts, rubbed her buttocks pulled her underwear down and continued to rub the buttocks capturing this on a video |
157 | 1 January 2010 – 1 January 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself committing the above offence |
Victim – Y – 3-4 years | |||
158 | 1 October 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear capturing this in a video |
159 | 1 October 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took the victim to the bathroom and removed her clothing so she was naked waist down. He took 4 photographs focusing on the genital and thigh regions |
160 | 1 October 2010 – 31 October 2010 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself as described above |
Victim – Z – aged 1-3 years | |||
161 | 25 November 2010 – 26 February 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was awake lying on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vaginal area over her underwear. Multiple other children were present. One child touched the victim’s thigh and he pushed the hand away. The offending was captured on 3 photographs and a video |
162 | 25 November 2010 – 26 February 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed and squeezed her vagina. Children were present. This was captured on a video |
163 | 25 November 2010 – 26 February 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. The defendant rubbed her vaginal area with other children present capturing this on a video |
164 | 25 November 2010 – 26 February 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back. He rubbed her vaginal area. They moved to a couch and he continued to rub it. There were children present. He captured this on a video |
165 | 25 November 2010 – 26 February 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself as described above |
Victim – AA – aged 2-4 years | |||
166 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant took the victim to the bathroom and removed her clothes and took 4 videos of her vaginal area |
167 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim sat on his lap. He rubbed her vagina. This was captured on a video |
168 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant touched her vaginal area, capturing this by a photograph |
169 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her thighs and vagina capturing this on a video |
170 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back. He rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
171 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on his lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear capturing this on a video |
172 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear capturing this on a video |
173 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear capturing this on a video |
174 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back. He removed her underwear rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
175 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was playing in a sandpit. He moved her dress to expose her underwear and videoed her vaginal area. |
176 | 1 December 2011 – 1 July 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself on the instances of offending described above |
Victim – AB – aged 3-4 years | |||
177 | 1 December 2012 – 18 September 2013 | Rape | The victim was lying down on a mattress. The defendant rubbed her vagina, pulled her underwear down and continued rubbing the vagina and then raped her by penetrating the vagina with his finger passed first knuckle. Other children were asleep nearby. He captured this on a video |
178 | 1 December 2012 – 18 September 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on his lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear. A male child spoke to him during the offending and he continued rubbing the vagina through the conversation. This was captured on video |
179 | 1 December 2012 – 18 September 2013 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the incidents of offending as described above |
Victim – AC – aged 2-3 years | |||
180 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back asleep. He kissed her with an open mouth. This was captured on video |
181 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back asleep. He pulled her underwear down and rubbed her vagina capturing this on video |
182 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Rape | The victim was on her back asleep. The defendant pulled her underwear down, rubbed her vagina and then raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger capturing this on a video |
183 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He put his hand inside her underwear and rubbed her vagina capturing this on video |
184 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Rape | The victim was lying down. He kissed her with an open mouth, pulled her underwear down and rubbed her vagina and then raped her by penetrating her labia capturing this on 5 videos and 2 images |
185 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He kissed her on the mouth with his tongue then put his hand in her underwear and rubbed her vagina capturing this on video |
186 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He kissed her on the mouth, rubbing her thighs and buttocks capturing this on video |
187 | 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself on the separate incidents as described above |
Offending at St Marks Early Learning Centre at Mt Gravatt
Victim – AD – aged 3-4 years | |||
188 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He pulled down her underwear to expose her vagina, rubbed it and captured this on a video |
189 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing. He rubbed her buttocks and captured this on a video |
190 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing. He rubbed her buttocks and vagina capturing this on 2 videos |
191 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself on 3 separate occasions of the offending described above |
Victim – AE – aged 4 years | |||
192 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and captured this on a video |
193 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
194 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina and was captured on a video |
195 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself on the 3 incidents of offending |
Victim – AF – aged 4 years | |||
203 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on 7 separate incidents of offending against her. He created 8 videos and 8 photos. This showed him rubbing her buttocks and vagina whilst she awake |
Victim – AG – aged 4 years | |||
205 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant made 1 video of CEM depicting her vagina on the outside of the underwear then with his hand inside the underwear. Other children were nearby |
Victim – AH – aged 4 years | |||
206 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on his lap. He rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
207 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself rubbing her vagina |
Victim – AI – aged 4 years | |||
208 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing up. He rubbed her buttocks and captured this on 2 videos |
209 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on his lap. He rubbed her vagina and other children were nearby. He captured this on 2 videos |
210 | 1 July 2013 – 20 August 2013 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself on these 2 incidents |
Offending at Westminster International School at Pisa, Italy
Victim – unknown child WI02 – 5-7 years | |||
211 | 11 September 2013 | Producing child abuse material outside Australia | The defendant produced a series of 5 photos of the victim lying asleep. He pulled down her shorts to reveal her clothed buttocks |
Victim – unknown child WI03 and WI04 – about 4 years | |||
212 | 1 October 2013 | Producing child abuse material outside Australia | The offending relates to 2 unknown victims around 4. He took a series of 18 photographs of WI03 showing her on her back exposing her underwear and took closeups of her buttocks and vagina. 2 of the photos depicted WI04. Her dress had been pulled up over her bottom to expose her stockings and underwear |
213 | 8 October 2013 | Producing child abuse material outside Australia | This offending relates to WI03. The defendant took a series of 24 photographs showing her dress pulled up over her buttocks to expose her stockings and underwear and a closeup shot |
214 | 29 October 2013 – 24 April 2014 | Distributing child abuse material outside Australia | This offending occurred while the defendant was in Italy. Between the dates charges he distributed on TLZ a darknet site CEM produced by him during his employment at the Little Ted Childcare Centre and the St Marks Lutheran Early Learning Centre. This included 9 videos and 42 images and he uploaded this as part of a series. The video showed the victims being touched and licked including digital and oral penetration of the children by the defendant and ejaculation on to the bodies of the children |
Victim – unknown child WI01 – about 4 years | |||
215 | 5 May 2014 | Producing child abuse material outside Australia | This relates to an unidentified child. There were a series of 8 photos where he took photographs where he took photos showing the skirt lifted up and leggings pulled down to expose the underwear with the camera focused on the buttocks |
Returned to Australia
216 | 13 June 2014 | Using a carriage service for child pornography material | The offending occurred on his return to Australia. He uploaded 9 images on 14 June 2012 to the TLZ site |
Offending at Penola Casa at Wavell Heights
Victim – AJ – aged 3 years | |||
217-218 | 8 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | 2 x rape | The victim was lying on her back and he pulled her underwear and shorts down. He rubbed her vagina, licked it and raped her by penetrating her labia with his tongue. He rubbed her vaginal area and then raped her again by penetrating her labia with his middle finger |
219 | 8 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | On the same occasion he kissed her on the lips and placed his penis over her mouth and rubbed it on her lips. The offending was captured on 2 videos |
220 | 8 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing the above offences |
Victim – AK – aged 2 years | |||
221 | 8 July – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing up and then later lying down. He took images of her genital region whilst touching her vaginal area. This was captured in 13 photos |
222 | 8 July – 4 August 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant photographed himself touching her genital region |
Victim – AL – aged 3 years | |||
223 | 8 July – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her buttocks and captured this in 10 photos |
224 | 8 July – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her back. He kissed and sucked her lips capturing this on video |
225 | 8 July – 4 August 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the 2 incidents described above |
Victim – AM – aged 3 years | |||
226 | 16 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing up. The defendant rubbed her thighs and buttocks capturing this in 6 photos and a video |
227 | 16 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself rubbing her buttocks |
Victim – AN – aged 3 years | |||
228 | 16 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her thighs, buttocks, vagina and captured this on 10 photos and a video |
229 | 16 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on a mattress awake. He rubbed her thighs, legs and vagina and made a video of this more than 16 minutes. Another child watched. The offending was captured on 20 photos and 2 videos |
230 | 16 July 2018 – 4 August 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself as described above |
Offending at Guardian Early Learning Group at Bowen Hills
Victim – AO – aged 5 years | |||
231 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was standing a chair. He took a photograph of her buttocks |
232 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing on a chair. He removed her underwear and rubbed her vaginal area whilst she sat on his lap. This was captured on a video |
233 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant rubbed her vaginal area while she was standing. Other children were nearby. It was captured on a video |
234 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing on a chair. She moved to his lap and he rubbed her vaginal area over the underwear with other children nearby capturing this on a video |
235 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing. The defendant pulled her pants down, rubbed her vaginal area over her underwear capturing this on a video |
236 | 3 September 2018 – 12 September 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the 4 incidents described above |
Victim – AP – aged 4 years | |||
237 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear with other children nearby. He was captured on 7 photos and a video |
238 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The offending was captured on 2 videos and a photo that showed her sitting on his lap, him rubbing her vagina on the outside of the underwear with 2 other children watching |
239 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear. Other children were watching. It was captured on 9 photographs and 9 videos |
240 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Making child exploitation material | This is the recording of the incidents described above |
Victim – AQ – aged 2 years | |||
241 | 3 September 2018 – 28 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim had no underwear on. He touched her vagina multiple times and rubbed his penis between her buttocks and legs until he ejaculated over the buttocks focusing the camera on the semen. This was captured on video |
242 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant recorded the victim taking upskirt photographs touching her vaginal area capturing this in 2 videos and 5 photos |
243-244 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | 2 x rape | The victim was lying on a couch. The defendant lifted her skirt exposing her vaginal area with no underwear on. He raped her by penetrating her labia with his finger and captured this on video. He then rubbed his penis on her vagina and raped her by penetrating her labia until he ejaculated on her vagina. Other children could be heard. A boy approached them and the defendant asked “what’s going on?” |
245-246 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | 2 x rape | The defendant touched the victim’s vagina and raped her by inserting his finger into her labia. He then rubbed his penis against her vagina and raped by penetrating her labia until he ejaculated capturing this on a video |
247 | 3 September 2018 – 17 September 2018 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself in the above 4 incidents |
Victim – AR – aged 3 years | |||
248 | 3 September 2018 – 26 September 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He pulled down her clothes to expose her buttocks and rubbed his penis against her buttocks and masturbated until ejaculated on them. There were other children around. It was captured on 5 videos |
249 | 3 September 2018 – 26 September 2018 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself committing the above offence |
Offending at Moreton Bay College Early Learning Centre
Victim - AS – aged 4 years | |||
250 | 1 October 2018 – 26 December 2018 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down next to 2 girls. He pulled her shorts down revealing her vagina and recorded himself on 10 photos and a video |
251 | 1 October 2018 – 26 December 2018 | Making child exploitation material | The recording of the above |
Offending at Everton Park Childcare and Development Centre
Victim – AT – aged 3-4 years | |||
252 | 18 February 2019 – 13 December 2019 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over a 10 month period the defendant committed offences against the victim on 15 separate occasions involving: a) 10 digital rapes b) 4 incidents of rubbing the victim’s buttocks c) 1 incident of pulling down her pants to take a photo of her buttocks with the underwear on |
253 | 18 February 2019 – 13 December 2019 | Making child exploitation material | The offending against the victim involved many digital rapes and occurred over a lengthy periods of time. For example 1 video of a rape lasted for 20 minutes. The shortest video lasted 5 minutes while several videos were over 15 minutes. The victim was normally asleep when he raped her |
Victim – AU – aged 4-5 years | |||
254 | 18 February 2019- 13 December 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was lying on her stomach and he recorded rubbing her buttocks and the vaginal area on the outside of the underwear. The victim was asleep. This was captured in a video in a series of 4 photos |
255 | 18 February 2019- 13 December 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. The defendant recorded himself rubbing her buttocks, speaking to other people as he did this capturing this in 3 videos |
256 | 18 February 2019- 13 December 2019 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the 2 incidents described above |
Victim – AV – aged 4 years | |||
257 | 18 February 2019- 12 March 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was lying on her stomach. The defendant pulled down her underwear and recorded an image of her bare buttocks in 6 photographs |
258 | 18 February 2019- 12 March 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant recorded himself as she was lying on her stomach rubbing her buttocks under her underwear and pulling them down to expose her buttocks |
259 | 18 February 2019- 12 March 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was lying on her stomach. Her underwear was pulled down and he put his hand on the buttocks on the outside of the underwear. This was captured in 6 photos |
260 | 18 February 2019- 12 March 2019 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself in the incidents described above |
Victim – AW – aged 4 years | |||
261 | 18 February 2019- 20 March 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He put his hand on her upper hamstring and took a photograph focusing on her buttocks |
262 | 18 February 2019- 20 March 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The child was lying down. He photographed her vaginal area |
263 | 18 February 2019- 20 March 2019 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself committing Count 261 |
Victim – AX – aged 1-2 years | |||
264 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her stomach. He rubbed her buttocks capturing this in a video |
265 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Rape | The victim was on her stomach asleep. He rubbed her vaginal area, spread the labia apart and raped her by penetrating her vagina with his finger. This was captured on video |
266 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Rape | The victim was lying on her stomach asleep. He rubbed her vaginal area, spread the labia apart and penetrated the vagina with his finger. This was captured on video |
267 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant pulled her underwear to the side and photographed her vagina |
268 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Rape | The victim was on her back. He pulled her underwear down, raped by penetrating her vagina with his finger capturing this on video |
269 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Rape | She was on her stomach. He pulled her underwear to the side and penetrated her vagina with his finger capturing this on video |
270 | 18 February 2019- 31 October 2019 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded himself as described above |
Victim – AY – aged 3 years | |||
276 | 1 October 2019 – 29 October 2019 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on 5 separate occasions touching her buttocks and vaginal area both over and under the underwear. She was both asleep and awake. He took 36 photos and made 2 videos |
Offending at Tiny Town Childcare and Kindergarten at Enoggera
Victim – AZ – aged 2-4 years | |||
277 | 1 December 2019- 31 December 2020 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant offended against this victim on at least 54 occasions over a 13 month period when she was aged 3 to 4. His sexual conduct involved: a) 27 digital rapes b) 1 oral vaginal rape c) 1 penile rape with ejaculation d) 13 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks and ejaculating on her e) 2 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks f) 13 incidents of rubbing her vagina with his hand g) 2 incidents of rubbing her buttocks with his hand h) 3 incidents of licking her vaginal area During the offending the defendant recorded himself offending on separate occasions for lengthy periods of time. On one occasion he rubbed her vaginal area and digitally penetrated her for more than 30 minutes. The offending against her occurred while she was both asleep and awake and with other children around. He used 2 different devices to record. The offending involved him isolating her by taking her to a fort. On the occasions when he ejaculated on her he wiped it off with a sheet or blanket. On one occasion when he was rubbing her vagina the victim grabbed his hand and tried to swat it away but he brushed her hand away and the victim covered her vagina again. On the occasion he raped her with his penis she was asleep. He ejaculated on her vagina and she woke up as he wiped the semen off her and the defendant said “you took your shorts off while you were asleep what’s going on.” He used 2 devices to record this offending. In December 2020, the victim told her mother that during rest time she would spend time in the fort with friends or just the defendant and the defendant would pat her bottom and the vaginal area. The mother wrote to the daycare to express her concerns about this behaviour. The defendant responded he was Patting the victim to help self-regulate but would stop this immediately. |
278 | 1 December 2019- 31 December 2020 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on each occasion he offended against. He made 256 separate files of CEM relating to this victim |
Victim – BA – aged 4-5 years | |||
279 | 1 June 2020 – 1 February 2021 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over about an 8 month period the defendant committed offences against the victim on at least 19 occasions as follows: a) 12 digital rapes b) 2 oral vaginal rapes c) 6 penile rapes until he ejaculated d) 2 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks until he ejaculated f) 1 incident of licking her vagina g) 1 incident of rubbing his penis on her mouth h) 1 incident of rubbing her vagina i) 2 incidents of touching the victim and taking a photograph of the genital region |
280 | 1 June 2020 – 1 February 2021 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant’s offending against the victim was brazen occurring while she was awake and often where he could be caught by other children. On one occasion a young boy looked directly at his hand rubbing her vagina. The defendant grabbed the child’s head twisting it away telling him to stop looking. He used 2 devices to record the offending and edited the videos in a single video. One recording showed him rubbing his penis against her vagina penetrating the labia until he ejaculated. One of the videos was 30 minutes in length where he offended against her by penile raping her and ejaculating. Other videos were over 15 minutes in length. He also often kissed and licked the victim’s mouth whilst committing the offences. On one occasion he kissed and licked her mouth then rubbed his finger across her lips gathered her saliva and used that to masturbate and rub his penis on her mouth. He made 50 separate CEM files relating to this victim and spliced a number of them |
Victim BB – aged 4-5 years | |||
281 | 4 June 2020 – 27 July 2021 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant committed sexual offences against the victim on 31 occasions over a 14 month period. The victim was often the last to be picked up from the daycare and he would be left with her alone. The conduct involved: a) 3 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks until he ejaculated b) 24 incidents of rubbing her vagina c) 2 incidents of rubbing her buttocks d) 2 incidents of rubbing her thigh |
282 | 4 June 2020 – 27 July 2021 | Making child exploitation material | One of the incidents recorded went for 30 minutes. The video he created involved compiling 7 separate videos into 1. The offending was brazen often happening with other children around. For example on one occasion he was rubbing his penis on her buttocks and he would ejaculate. Another approached and told the child to go away. He frequently used 2 devices to film the victim labelling the videos. In the videos labelled “cum” he often pulled her underwear down, rubbed her buttocks and rubbed his penis against her buttocks until ejaculated on to her back. On one occasion he pulled the left lip of her vagina to the side before photographing it. He made a total of 109 separate CEM files |
Victim – BC – aged 4-5 years | |||
283 | 1 August 2020 – 8 October 2021 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | During the 14 month offending period the defendant offended against the victim on 19 separate occasions as follows: a) 9 digital rapes b) 3 oral vaginal rapes c) 1 penile vaginal rape with ejaculation d) 2 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks until ejaculated e) 1 incident of rubbing his penis on her mouth until he ejaculated f) 2 incidents of rubbing her vaginal area g) 1 incident of touching the victim and taking a photograph of the genital area h) 2 incidents of kissing the victim on her mouth i) 1 incident of removing the clothing to take a video of her genitals |
284 | 1 August 2020 – 8 October 2021 | Making child exploitation material | The offending was intimate. On one occasion he kissed and licked her on the lips and on a second occasion kissed and licked her on the lips and filmed her sleeping while he stroked her hair. On one of these occasions she woke up and wiped his saliva from her mouth. He recorded himself offending against her for length periods including 1 video when she was asleep which lasted for about 30 minutes. He created 5 different videos relating to this offending with labels. 3 of the videos involved splicing. The offending against her she was both awake and asleep. On one occasion he pulled the underwear down rubbing the vagina penetrating her labia and licking the vagina penetrating it. Towards the end of the 6 minutes 38 second video, the victim told him to stop and he pulled up her underwear. On another occasion he had her naked in a toilet area. She said she didn’t want anyone to see her naked. He took a video focusing on the vaginal area and gave her clothing. On another occasion, he rubbed her vagina, licked his fingers and penetrated the labia. The victim covered her vagina with her hand and asked him what he was doing. He said “it’s just a bit wet.” She closed her legs and he stopped filming. He often wiped his ejaculate away with a towel after ejaculating onto her buttocks. On one occasion he kissed her, took out his penis, rubbed it on her mouth until he ejaculated on her face and recorded this. During 2020 and 2021, the victim’s mother noticed the victim was upset at bath time. She didn’t want her mother to bathe her and complained about her vagina hurting. On 8 October 2021, the defendant was seen by another employee on his knees and hands on top of the victim and kissing her. The employee asked what he was doing and he said “what.” The victim sat up. A statement was made by the employee to police and in November 2021 he was interviewed. He lied stating he was trying to wake her and never kissed her. No charges were laid. He was suspended during the investigation but after no charges were laid he returned to work. He made 23 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – BD – aged 2-3 years | |||
285 | 1 February 2021- 25 January 2022 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | Over a 12 month period the defendant offended against the victim when she was 2-3 over at least 33 occasions as follows: a) 19 digital rapes b) 26 penile rapes until ejaculation c) 6 incidents of rubbing his penis on her mouth until ejaculation d) 4 incidents of licking her vagina e) 1 incident of rubbing her vagina The defendant would take the victim to the fort to be alone with her. He usually recorded on 2 recording devices namely a phone and a camera. He often changed her clothes to permit easier access to the genitals. In addition to the above offending, he often kissed and licked her on the lips whilst committing other sexual acts. He offended against her for long periods including between 20 and 30 minute periods and filmed these. On one occasion he rubbed her vagina and rolled her on to the side and thrust his penis between her legs and labia until he ejaculated. This happened for about 20 minutes. On another occasion, he offended against her for 25 minutes. During that time he kissed her, rubbed her vagina and removed her underwear. He rubbed the vagina, penetrated it and then rubbed his penis on her vagina penetrating the labia. He used devices to record this. He frequently ejaculated on her including on her face. On one occasion he kissed and licked her on the lips, took out his penis, rubbed his penis on her lips and ejaculated on her face and then wiped some of the semen off with a cloth but left some in the hair. He committed these offences while she was both awake and asleep with other children nearby. On one occasion, he removed her underwear and rubbed her vaginal area. She tried to sit up but he pushed her back down. He rubbed his penis against her vagina until it became erect and continued rubbing it on her vagina penetrating the labia and ejaculating on her vagina. He wiped the semen off with a white cloth. On one occasion, he zoomed the camera in to look at this before wiping it away. |
286 | 1 February 2021- 25 January 2022 | Making child exploitation material | He made 100 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – BE – aged 3 years | |||
287 | 3 February 2021 – 11 June 2021 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant committed offences on 13 occasions over the 4 month period against the victim involving: a) 4 digital rapes b) 4 incidents of rubbing his penis on the victim’s buttocks until ejaculation c) 1 incident of rubbing his penis on her buttocks d) 1 incident of rubbing her vagina e) 2 incidents of rubbing/kissing/ licking the victim’s buttocks f) 2 incidents of touching the victim and taking photographs/video of her genital region |
288 | 3 February 2021 – 11 June 2021 | Making child exploitation material | The offending against this victim occurred on multiple occasions whilst other children were close by. He offended against her for lengthy periods of time for example 1 video captured offending for 25 minutes and another for 16 minutes. He used 2 devices for the recording and spliced the videos together renaming them. On one occasion he filmed her where he undressed the victim, sprayed her with a hose and then took photos/ videos of her naked. Another child walked into the area and played with the victim. An adult female spoke to the defendant about toileting and he covered the camera up. He largely ejaculated on the victim’s buttocks and offended against her mostly while she was asleep. On one occasion the defendant was rubbing and kissing her buttocks and starting masturbating and rubbed his penis on her buttocks until he ejaculated. She woke up and felt behind her where the semen was and he said “what’s happened here something has happened to your pants” and helped her to pull up the underwear. On one occasion, he digitally penetrated her, he cut her with his fingernail and she bled a small amount. She came home from daycare with blood in her underpants and a small laceration which was painful which prevented her from urinating. Her mother called the daycare who advised they were not aware of any injury. She was taken to the emergency department and a male doctor assessed her opining the injury was caused by a fingernail. The defendant made 61 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – BF – aged 3-4 years | |||
289 | 9 February 2021 – 19 September 2021 | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | The defendant committed offences against this victim on 12 occasions over 7 months. The offending involved: a) 3 digital rapes b) 1 penile vaginal rape with ejaculation c) 8 incidents of rubbing his penis on her buttocks until he ejaculated d) 1 incident of rubbing his penis on her vagina until he ejaculated e) 1 incident of rubbing her vagina |
290 | 9 February 2021 – 19 September 2021 | Making child exploitation material | On the occasion the defendant raped her with his penis he rubbed his penis on her vagina penetrating her labia continuing to thrust vigorously until ejaculated on the vagina. He offended against the victim on multiple occasions while other children were close by including other children talking to him. He offended against her in the fort which was covered only by a sheet. On another occasion he took his penis out while 2 children could be seen playing with toys 5 metres away in full view of the defendant. He rubbed his penis on her buttocks. She tried to walk away but he guided her back and said “you have to stay here with it darling” and continued rubbing his penis between her buttocks until he ejaculated. Prior to the ejaculation 3 other children approached and he ejaculated on the victim in the presence of the other children. He often used 2 devises to record the offending and would largely ejaculate on the buttocks and wipe it away. On one occasion he rubbed his penis on the vagina until he ejaculated on her leg. He made 17 separate CEM files relating to this victim |
Victim – BG – aged 5 years | |||
291 | 17 May 2020 – 26 January 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her stomach. He rubbed her hips and buttocks capturing this on 6 photographs and 2 videos |
292 | 17 May 2020 – 26 January 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was asleep. He kissed and licked her lips while she was asleep capturing this on video |
293 | 17 May 2020 – 26 January 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He took photographs of the victim’s genital region and his hands on her waist. This was captured in 8 photographs |
294 | 17 May 2020 – 26 January 2021 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself concerning the above offending |
Victim – BH – aged 4-5 years | |||
295 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on his lap. He rubbed her thighs and vagina recording this for about 30 minutes. The offending was captured in 10 videos |
296 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her stomach. He rubbed and squeezed her buttocks using 2 devices to record this |
297 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on cushions in the fort. He rubbed and squeezed her thighs, buttocks and vagina capturing this on 2 videos |
298 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying on her back. He rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
299 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina capturing this on a video |
300 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed and squeezed her buttocks and vagina capturing this on video |
301 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The defendant rubbed the victim’s thighs, buttocks and vagina while she was sitting on his lap and lying down. This was captured on 4 videos |
302 | 6 April 2021 – 16 December 2021 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself on the above 7 incidents of offending |
Victim – BI – aged 3 years | |||
303-305 | 25 July 2021 – 4 April 2022 | 3 x rape | The victim was lying on her back asleep in the fort. The defendant pulled her underwear to the side, rubbed her vagina and raped her by penetrating the labia with his finger. He licked her vagina and raped her with his tongue by penetrating her labia. He rubbed his penis on her vaginal area and raped her for a third time by penetrating the labia with his penis until he ejaculated. He captured this offending in 4 videos |
306 | 25 July 2021 – 4 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He pulled her underwear to the side and rubbed her vagina. Other children were sleeping during the offending and it was captured by a video |
307 | 25 July 2021 – 4 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of the underwear for about 8 minutes and then pulled the underwear off rubbing her vagina. It was captured on a video |
308 | 25 July 2021 – 4 April 2022 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself in the above 3 incidents of offending |
Victim – BJ – aged 4 years | |||
309 | 23 March 2022 – 1 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear producing 3 videos |
310 | 23 March 2022 – 1 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear capturing this on a video |
311 | 23 March 2022 – 1 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was sitting on the defendant’s lap. He rubbed her vagina on the outside of her underwear capturing this in 3 photographs and a video |
312 | 23 March 2022 – 1 April 2022 | Rape | The victim was asleep. The defendant rubbed her vagina and raped her by penetrating her labia with his fingers capturing this on a video |
313 | 23 March 2022 – 1 April 2022 | Making child exploitation material | He recorded the 4 incidents of offending |
Offending at St Albans Wilston Early Childhood Centre
Victim – BK – aged 3 years | |||
314 | 19 April 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was on her stomach. The defendant pulled her underwear down and rubbed her buttocks. During the offending he hid the camera when adults and children talked to him. The offending was captured on 2 videos and a photograph |
315 | 19 April 2022 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself rubbing her buttocks |
Offending at Lady Ramsay Early Learning Centre at Herston
Victim – BL – aged 5 years | |||
316 | 10 May 2022 – 22 June 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was standing. He pulled her skirt down and touched her vaginal area. She then sat on his lap and removed her underwear. During the offending another child interacted with the defendant and adult was present and was captured on 3 videos |
317 | 10 May 2022 – 22 June 2022 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself touching the victim’s vaginal area |
Victim – BM – aged 5 years | |||
318 | 10 May 2022 – 22 June 2022 | Indecent treatment of a child, under 16, under 12, under care | The victim was lying down. He pulled her underwear down and rubbed her buttocks. The offending was captured in a series of 5 videos |
319 | 10 May 2022 – 22 June 2022 | Making child exploitation material | The defendant recorded himself rubbing the buttocks |
Possessing child exploitation material
320 | 4 April 2005 – 22 August 2022 | Possessing child exploitation material | Possession of 571 videos, 18,257 images |
Victim Impact statements
- [72]The crown tendered a number of victim impact statements. A number were read to the court.
- [73]There is no doubt that the offending had a significant effect on the lives of many people and caused feelings of guilt to many parents who trusted the defendant and the childcare centres.
- [74]I find that significant harm has been caused by the offending and it will continue to cause harm to many victims and/or their families even those who have not provided such statements.
- [75]
Psychiatric evidence
- [76]Adjunct Professor Anna Lenardon has provided a psychiatric report concerning the defendant.
- [77]Mr Griffith gave an account to the psychiatrist. He said he pleaded guilty to the charges so he didn’t put the families through a trial. He said he became attracted to children when he started working as a primary school teacher in 2003. Before this, he had an attraction to same aged females. Throughout high school he had normal relationships with girlfriends but girls were not attracted to him. After his attraction to children in 2003 the situation snowballed and when the opportunity emerged he began offending. He said the offending began in 2007 when he started employment as a teaching assistant at an after school care centre in a primary school. After the offending began he would drink a bottle of wine to stop the horrible feelings. He felt guilty. It was too hard to stop abusing the children. He had trouble with an addiction from a young age and reached a level of enjoyment.
- [78]He said that he had rape fantasies which started early on but he did not engage with this because it was a line he could not cross. However, as time went on he pushed the line.
- [79]He would choose children he was most attracted to for their bodies, skin and personality. He was never attracted to male children. He thought the relationship was not purely sexual, he felt love towards some of them. He said he would take the video recordings of his offending to watch at home for his own personal gratification and never sold them but did post some of them on internet forums. Since 2004 he had not any relationship with an adult.
- [80]Since 2003, he never tried to stop the offending as he did not have the courage to do so. He claimed he took care to not physically hurt the victims. He said his preference was for children aged between two and five as they were easier victims but he was attracted to older children up to the age of 12 to 13. He denied having offended against other victims aside from the ones connected to the charges. He claimed he did not groom the children. He believed that in the six months before his arrest his offending had reduced and he thought he had gone too far and considered stopping work with children. He hated himself for what he was doing.
- [81]Sometimes he would delete all of the CEM he had but then would download it again. He started accessing the dark web in the late 2000’s and was able to purchase cocaine or ecstasy from it. When asked if he felt remorse for his actions he said he felt completely terrible and he should not have done this.
- [82]It was noted that the defendant had been in custody since August 2022 and was in protection working as a painter. He had not received any visitors whilst in custody but had weekly phone contact with his mother and father. He said he was happy to engage in therapy and wanted to change. He believed if he was released into the community his risk of offending would be high as he had not undergone any therapy. He was aware he still experiences sexual urges towards children.
- [83]The psychiatrist noted that the defendant was born in Melbourne and grew up with his parents and younger sister. His parents separated when he was 18 years of age. His parents often fought. It was possible there was a degree of physical violence.
- [84]The family were never affectionate and there was a lack of love. The defendant did not report childhood abuse or childhood sexual abuse. His father worked for the Air Force and his mother was a homemaker. There was no history of family mental illness. The family moved frequently until he began high school. He finished school at Rosewood High School and had a good group of friends. He was an average student and rebelled in high school but was never suspended. He attended university to study science at the University of Queensland and was eventually able to complete a degree. He started working at the primary school after school centre in the last year of university. His attraction to children developed after this.
- [85]He went to Sydney for four years between 2014 and 2018 as he needed a change and said there were pending charges of a similar nature in New South Wales.
- [86]The Risk for Sexual Violence Protocol (RSVP) is a set of structured professional judgment guidelines for a comprehensive assessment and management of the risk of sexual violence. The psychiatrist noted that his presentation was consistent with an average level of intelligence. There was no evidence of any developmental disorder such as intellectual disability or autism. He presented with a paedophilic disorder exclusive type females under 12. There was no evidence of any psychiatric conditions such as a psychotic or mood disorder. There was no developmental disorder or substance use disorder.
- [87]The psychiatrist noted that his offending spanned a period of almost 20 years and likely involved extensive grooming and a degree of physical coercion of the victims. He put in a high level of effort in order to be able to offend repeatedly without being caught by using psychological coercion and by abusing the victims while asleep and by frequently moving jobs. He often videotaped his recordings to watch the material later.
“Based on what we know of Mr Griffith’s background there are no factors which could explain his offending. In fact, there is no evidence of childhood abuse, severe mental disorder or personality disorder, substance use or other form of criminality…
Sexual offending treatment will further clarify factors involved in his offending. It is evident from the assessment that Mr Griffith minimises the severity of his offending, has developed cognitive distortions such as the victims did not mind the offending, has identified emotionally with the victims, has an increased sex drive and sex preoccupation and has used sex as coping.”
- [88]It is very likely that he lacks empathy for the victims. The defendant presents with several risk factors associated with sexual reoffending. His offending was chronic and escalated over time and involves psychological and possible physical coercion. He presented with a degree of minimisation and problems with self-awareness and with stress in coping. He has severe sexual deviance and severe problems with social adjustment. The very young age of the victims suggest high level of sexual deviance.
- [89]Given the severity of his offending and the high number of risk factors associated with recidivism, his risk of reoffending would be high if released into the community. It is difficult to comment on protective factors but the lack of substance abuse, other criminal behaviour and lack of mental illness and his willingness to discuss the offending and accept responsibility and his partial insight can be favourable factors.
- [90]The defendant has not engaged in any treatment and will need to engage in extensive psychological treatment in the form of group interventions to begin with. These are available in the prison settings. He may require individual intervention delivered by an experienced forensic psychologist and possibly antilibido medication to reduce deviance.
Pre-sentence report
- [91]There is also a pre-sentence report dated 21 November 2024. The report notes that prior to his being remanded in custody the defendant had a stable income from employment and was able to support himself independently. He is currently incarcerated in the Wolston Correctional Centre and was unsure where he may be able to reside in the community if released.
- [92]The Offender Intervention Unit (OIU) has advised there are no suitable programs in the community for addressing the defendant’s sexual offending risk. The OIU has recommended that he complete the High Intensity Sex Offender Program which is a program only available in a custodial correctional centre. The HISOP is a high intensity program for male sexual offenders who have been assessed as a high risk of offending. Before commencing this program he would be subject to standardised assessments for sex offenders and be required to complete a preparatory program. He has a Bachelor of Science degree and a graduate diploma in Education. The defendant is considered unsuitable for supervision in the community currently. Queensland Corrective Services considers the most suitable treatment program for the defendant would be the High Intensity Sex Offender Program.
Crown submissions
- [93]The Crown in its written submissions refers to an overview of the case and ultimately submits that a sentence of life imprisonment should be imposed with a non-parole period of not less than 30 years.
- [94]The Crown refers to the antecedents of the defendant and points out that the defendant has a high level of sexual deviance and a high risk of reoffending if released into the community. The psychiatrist concluded that he lacked empathy for the victims and evidenced minimisation and cognitive distortions and recommended sexual treatment.
- [95]The Crown refers to a summary of the facts of the case and notes specific counts of particular interest which I have taken into account. It submits that the victim impact material shows there has been a significant effect on the victims and families involved in this case.
- [96]The Crown submits that there was a significant breach of trust and he exploited the trust and children for his own gross sexual gratification. The children were very young, the offending was prolific and there were a significant number of penetrative acts.
- [97]The Crown relies on the factors referred to in R v SAG[21]. The offending was long standing and persistent. A significant aggravating feature was the recording of the children.[22] The recordings were saved in a methodical way so that he could watch it for his sexual gratification. He enabled others with like perversions to benefit from his offending. The reality is that this cannot be destroyed.
- [98]It is submitted that the lack of previous criminal convictions provides little by the way of mitigation.[23] As to the co-operation, it is pointed out that he denied knowledge of the CEM or of uploading any material when first questioned by the police. When asked initially by the police he said that he had uploaded material in relation to two children. The material in fact related to six children. He then nominated he had abused between 50 and 100 children but denied penetration. He participated in 15 interviews between August 2022 and January 2023 minimising the number of locations, children and acts.
- [99]It is submitted that the defendant’s guilty plea must be viewed against the strength of the case against him and the nature of the offending.[24] As to the psychiatric report, it is pointed that the only source of information relied on is the defendant. His statements need to be treated with circumspection. He alleged that he had an attraction to young girls and claimed the attraction commenced in 2003 which is inconsistent with the possession of child abuse material from as early as January 2000. It is submitted that his statements that the children gave him permission to engage with them show a significant lack of insight. There is no evidence to corroborate his statements that he felt guilty because he took no steps to stop or limit his exposure to children and he continued to work in the relevant industry until arrested. There are extreme risk factors in his case. The defendant has a severe sexual deviance which involves extensive grooming and physical coercion. It involved cognitive distortions and lacked sympathy and insight. His risk of reoffending is high.
- [100]The Crown submits that the brazenness of the offending is breathtaking. His regular movement between the daycare centres lessened his risk of discovery and evidenced self-awareness of his actions.
- [101]The creation and recording of content cataloguing, labelling, retention, manipulation, deletion and recovery of images shows the defendant to be a highly calculating, motivated and organised individual. There is a lifelong risk of offending. He was undeterred by possible detection on two occasions and in June 2021 penned a letter to refute suggestions of inappropriate behaviour.
- [102]It is submitted the defendant falls within the worst category of cases for which the maximum penalty for the counts of repeated sexual conduct of a child is prescribed. The overall conduct is horrendous and the sheer number of victims and lengthy period of offending demonstrates the real need for a sentence which protects the community in particular from the defendant. The principle of rehabilitation falls away. Whilst the plea of guilty must be taken into account, the aggravating features of the case mean there can be no moderation of the sentence for his co-operation in the plea of guilty. Punishment, denunciation and community protection overwhelm the issue of rehabilitation.
- [103]It is submitted in reliance on R v Appleton[25] that the features of this case would lead to a conclusion that the defendant be required to serve not less than 30 years before being eligible for parole.
- [104]
- [105]Those cases have assisted me in reaching my decision but at the end of the day each case depends on its own facts and it is for the sentencing judge to do the best that he or she can on the given facts of the case.
- [106]In oral submissions the crown submitted:
- There is a high level of risk if he is released.
- The offending has had an insidious effect on the community.
- Statements made by the defendant to the psychiatrist show a lack of insight on his part.
- There was emotional manipulation of the children.
- It was brazen offending and well planned.
- Community protection is crucial in a case such as this.
Defence submissions
- [107]The defence contends for a head sentence of 25 to 30 years imprisonment with the usual statutory eligibility for parole under s 181(2)(d) of the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld).
- [108]The defence points out that the defendant is currently 46 years of age with no criminal history. The offending spanned when he was between 25 and 44 years of age.
- [109]He was born and grew up in Melbourne with his mother, father and younger sister. His upbringing was largely uneventful but the parents’ relationship broke down. He has had self-deprecation and a lack of intimate relationships. After obtaining a degree in science, he worked in the childcare field.
- [110]The defence concedes the offences are abhorrent. It is submitted that the offences themselves are not in the worst category of cases for each charge. It is submitted there was no violence nor emotional coercion nor threats. I might say I did not accept this submission as in my view the acts charged do show an application of force and I do consider there was a degree of emotional manipulation of these children.
- [111]It is accepted that whilst the sheer volume places this case as one calling for severe punishment it is not in the worst category of cases for which the maximum penalty is prescribed.
- [112]It is submitted that it is true that initially the defendant denied knowledge and minimised his conduct but then thereafter voluntarily participated in 15 interviews with the police spanning 18 hours over five months.
- [113]The defendant told the officers of his filming and of his employment history and the various childcare centres and took the officers through the names of the children, clothing and descriptions and elaborated on how he touched the children. He consented to voluntary forensic procedures and told the officers where the CEM was obtained from.
- [114]The level of cooperation extended to identifying each of the children portrayed in the media files. Whilst the offending the subject of the charges was captured on the recordings (except for Count 1) the recordings were such that the identity of the complainants and locations could not be distinguished. The police investigation was greatly assisted by the defendant by the co-operation not only by facilitating justice but this has demonstrated remorse including the election to have an ex officio indictment and the pleas of guilty.
- [115]The defence relies on the principles expressed in Cameron v R.[31] The defendant accepted full responsibility and did not make any excuses. He has also apologised.
- [116]As to the psychiatric report, the defence submits the defendant engaged well in this interview and did not appear arrogant or entitled. He made a genuine effort to engage in a helpful manner and displayed a willingness to discuss the offending and accept responsibility. Whilst there was partial insight, he fully accepted the need for treatment and had insight that his risk of reoffending would be high. It should be noted that sexual offending treatments are not offered to inmates on remand.
- [117]As to the victim impact statements, it is accepted that the offences did have a significant and detrimental impact on the complainants and their families and the details are relevant but much of the material goes beyond that which is relevant and should not form part of the Court’s consideration.
- [118]
- [119]In conclusion, the defence submits the offending is not of the worst category but the volume of offences places it in a very serious category. He has cooperated extensively with the investigation and had demonstrated remorse and his co-operation and plea must be reflected. The imposition of a life sentence is exceptional. The court needs to consider whether a lesser sentence can be imposed.[34]
- [120]Even though the conduct was abhorrent, he is entitled to have factors of mitigation taken into account in the amelioration of the sentence. To impose a life sentence or delay parole eligibility to 30 years would not give effect to mitigatory factors present in this case.
- [121]In oral submissions:
- The defence tendered a letter of apology and some character references. I take those into account.
- The defence submitted that the defendant did have family support.
- Ms Cartledge stressed the co-operation and the pleas of guilty.
- Ms Cartledge distinguished the Crown cases.
- Ms Cartledge submitted the defendant was remorseful and wanted to engage in treatment.
Conclusions
- [122]This was very serious offending in terms of length and scale. The victims were very vulnerable and there was a significant breach of trust. People expect that their children will be protected in childcare centres and this matter will be of significant concern to any parent or indeed any citizen in this State.
- [123]The offences were depraved and committed by a man with a high risk of re-offending. They were planned and recorded. Some of these recordings were uploaded on the internet which preserves some of the offending forever.
- [124]The case was an overwhelming one with the offences caught on videos and photos. A conviction was inevitable on most of the counts.
- [125]A significant sentence needs to be imposed to reflect the principles of deterrence, denunciation, punishment and community protection.
- [126]Whilst the defendant did co-operate with the psychiatrist, he made statements which did show a lack of full insight into his offending behaviour and the effect on the victims.
- [127]I agree with the defence that there was significant co-operation with the police in helping to identify the childcare centres and the victims.
Maximum sentence
- [128]I now turn to the issue of imposition of the maximum penalty.
- [129]This issue of the imposition of the maximum penalty was considered by the High Court of Australia in R v Ibbs.[35]
- [130]It was held that that the imposition of the maximum penalty for any offence is a sentencing option reserved for cases which can properly be characterised as falling within the worst category of cases for which that penalty is prescribed.
- [131]In Veen (No 2) v R,[36] the offender was sentenced to the maximum penalty for manslaughter and appealed this to the High Court. His appeal was dismissed.
- [132]Veen established:
- The importance of proportionality in the sentencing process.
- The purposes of criminal punishment of protection of society, deterrence, retribution and reform.[37]
- The fact that a sentence cannot be disproportionate because of previous criminal convictions.[38]
- The fact that the maximum penalty is reserved for cases falling within the worst category of case.[39] This does not mean a lesser penalty should be imposed if it is possible to envisage a worse case.
- [133]Similar principles were applied by the courts of Australia over many years.
- [134]
“However, in order to characterise any case as being in the worst case category, it must be possible to point to particular features which are of very great heinousness and it must be possible to postulate the absence of facts mitigating the seriousness of the crime (as distinct from the subjective features mitigating the penalty to be imposed) … .”
- [135]
“The maximum penalty for murder of penal servitude for life, meaning for the term of the prisoner's natural life, is (as I have said) reserved for cases falling within the worst category of cases, but it is not reserved only for those cases where the prisoner is likely to remain a continuing danger to society for the rest of his life or for those cases where there is no chance of rehabilitation; the maximum may be appropriate where the level of culpability is so extreme that the community interest in retribution and punishment can only be met by such a punishment. It must nevertheless be possible in the individual case to point to its particular features which are of very great heinousness, and there must be an absence of any facts mitigating the objective seriousness of the crime (as distinct from any subjective features mitigating the penalty to be imposed).
- [136]
- “[18]What is meant by an offence falling within the “worst category” of the offence is that it is an instance of the offence which is so grave that it warrants the imposition of the maximum prescribed penalty for that offence. Both the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the criminal are considered in determining whether the case is of the worst type. Once it is recognised that an offence falls within the “worst category”, it is beside the point that it may be possible to conceive of an even worse instance of the offence. Thus, an offence may be assessed as so grave as to warrant the maximum prescribed penalty notwithstanding that it is possible to imagine an even worse instance of the offence.” (Footnotes omitted)
- [19]Where, however, an offence, although a grave instance of the offence, is not so grave as to warrant the imposition of the maximum prescribed penalty (as the offending was agreed to be here (a sentencing judge is bound to consider where the facts of the particular offence and offender lie on the “spectrum” that extends from the least serious instances of the offence to the worst category, properly so called. It is potentially confusing, therefore, and likely to lead to error to describe an offence which does not warrant the maximum prescribed penalty as being “within the worst category”. It is a practice which should be avoided.”
- [137]In determining the sentence one must bear in mind that the purposes of criminal punishment are various “… protection of society, deterrence of the offender and of others who might be tempted to offend, retribution and reform. The purposes may overlap. They are guideposts to the appropriate sentence.”[44]
- [138]However, sentencing is essentially a discretionary exercise requiring consideration of variable facts and circumstances of individual cases and the application to those facts of the principles of sentencing. There is no single correct sentence.[45]
- [139]Also it must be borne in mind that even the existence of mitigating factors (such as in this case namely the plea of guilty and the absence of previous convictions) does not preclude the imposition of the maximum penalty.[46]
- [140]Another factor to be borne in mind is that when one is sentencing an offender for multiple offences, and although one offence may not justify the maximum it may be the offences in combination do justify the maximum penalty.[47]
- [141]Having considered all matters and despite the factors of mitigation, in my opinion this is a case of such seriousness or gravity as to warrant the maximum penalty for the following reasons:
- The offending happened over a lengthy period.
- The offending involved many victims.
- Many of the victims were very young and very vulnerable.
- There were many rapes.
- There were a number of maintaining offences.
- There was a significant breach of trust involved.
- He filmed most of this kept it and uploaded some to the dark web. This is a significant aggravating feature here.[48]
- There was planning involved with the offending.
- There has been a significant impact on the families.
- The defendant is regarded as a high risk of reoffending.
- [142]In these circumstances I consider that despite the plea of guilty, the co-operation and the absence of previous convictions that a life sentence is required on the penile rape counts and the maintaining counts.
- [143]In my view the factors of denunciation, punishment and deterrence far outweigh the issue of rehabilitation in this matter.
Non-parole period
- [144]The next question is the question of the length of the non-parole period.
- [145]
- [146]
“This Court has previously acted upon this consideration. In another case of horrific murder, in which an increase in the non-parole period was at issue, Keane JA said:
‘There are, however, other considerations which apply in this case, in addition to the claims of community protection. In this case, the need for condign punishment is as strong as it could ever be bearing in mind considerations of denunciation of Maygar's conduct and the vindication of the victims of his conduct. The horrific nature of these offences, and the unspeakable suffering endured by the victims and their families, makes this aspect of the sentencing function of special importance in this case.’”
- [147]The Court of Appeal in R v Free; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld)[52] in discussing the discretion to delay a parole date noted:
- The considerations which may be taken into account in the exercise of the discretion are the same as those which may be taken into account in other aspects of sentencing.
- Bringing forward a parole date is concerned with the offender’s prospects of rehabilitation as well as co-operation with the administration of justice.
- To delay a parole date is usually concerned with circumstances which aggravate the offence which suggests the protection of the public or adequate punishment.
- All relevant matters mentioned in s 9 of the Penalties and Sentences Act are to be considered.[53]
- As part of the integrated sentencing process consideration must be given to whether the circumstances of the offending warrant the conclusion that the protection of the public or adequate punishment requires the offender to serve longer in custody than otherwise would be required.
- [148]Also, in Free[54] the Court acknowledged that a sentence could have a strong denunciatory element to reflect the community’s condemnation of the conduct by the imposition of a higher head sentence rather than by making the declaration. Also, the court acknowledged that there is an unfettered discretion as to the fixing of the parole date.[55]
- [149]In my opinion this is a case where the conduct of the defendant is such that the parole period should be extended from 15 years. There are real issues of community protection in this case. As the Crown has submitted this is a case where the principles of punishment, denunciation and community protection overwhelm any mitigating issues and the issue of rehabilitation.
- [150]Bearing in mind the number of offences, the large number of complainants, the nature of the offences, the breach of trust and the defendant’s risk of reoffending I would have agreed with the crown submission that the non-parole period should be at least 30 years.
- [151]However I cannot ignore the fact the defendant did co-operate with the police in a number of interviews and there has been a plea to an ex officio indictment.
- [152]I consider that some discount should be accorded in that circumstance. I consider the non-parole period should be 27 years.
General
- [153]I also record that in my opinion the police work in this case was of a high standard and the investigating police both State and Federal should be commended for their work.
Sentences imposed
State sentences
- On each count a conviction is recorded.
- On each count I impose the following terms of imprisonment:
| Count No | Penalty | Charge |
1, 2, 10, 11, 14, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 35, 36, 37, 41, 49, 54, 66, 74, 92, 94, 97, 100, 101, 102, 110, 130, 137, 159, 166, 175, 180, 224, 231, 250, 257, 261, 262, 267, 292, 293, | 5 years | Indecent Treatment of a child under 16, under 12, under care (photos/video/kissing) | |
3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 31, 33, 34, 40, 43, 44, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 95, 96, 104, 105, 107, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 138, 139, 140, 141, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 154, 156, 158, 161, 162, 163, 164, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 178, 181, 183, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 192, 193, 194, 206, 208, 209, 221, 223, 226, 228, 229, 232, 233, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 242, 254, 255, 258, 259, 264, 291, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 306, 307, 309, 310, 311, 314, 316, 318, | 7 years | Indecent Treatment of a child under 16, under 12, under care (touching on genital area/buttocks) | |
152, 219, 241, 248, | 10 years | Indecent Treatment of a child under 16, under 12, under care (ejaculating on child or involving penis) | |
7, 13, 16, 23, 32, 38, 46, 48, 98, 99, 103, 106, 112, 114, 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, 134, 143, 146, 153, 155, 157, 160, 165, 176, 179, 187, | 5 years | Making CEM (maximum 10 years) | |
191, 195, 203, 205, 207, 210, | 7 years | Making CEM (maximum 14 years)
| |
220, 222, 225, 227, 230, 236, 240, 247, 249, 251, 253, 256, 260, 263, 270, 276, 278, 280, 282, 284, 286, 288, 290, 294, 302, 308, 313, 315, 317, 319, | 10 years | Making CEM (maximum 20 years) | |
21, 39, 42, 45, 47, 69, 108, 109, 111, 142, 150, 177, 182, 184, 217, 218, 243, 245, 265, 266, 268, 269, 303, 304, 312 | 15 years | Rape (digital/oral) | |
244, 246, 305, | Life imprisonment | Rape (penile) | |
113, 115, 117, 119, 121, 123, 125, 252, 277, 279, 281, 283, 285, 287, 289 | Life Imprisonment | Repeated sexual conduct with a child | |
10 | 320 | 5 years | Possession CEM |
Commonwealth offences
- On count 211, I impose 5 years imprisonment
- On count 212, I impose 5 years imprisonment
- On count 213, I impose 5 years imprisonment
- On count 214, I impose 10 years imprisonment
- On count 215, I impose 5 years imprisonment
- On count 216, I impose 5 years imprisonment
- Each sentence commences on 21 August 2022.
- On all counts pursuant to s 19AB(3) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), I decline to make a non-parole period as the defendant will be serving a State sentence at the end of his Federal sentence.
Explanation of the Commonwealth sentences
- I have sentenced the defendant to an effective term of 10 years imprisonment on the Commonwealth offences.
- These are to be served concurrently with the State Offences and in those circumstances I have not set a non-parole period.
General
- All of the sentences are to be served concurrently with each other.
- I fix the date the defendant is eligible for parole is 20 August 2049.
- Pursuant to s 159A of the Penalties and Sentences Act, I declare the defendant has served 831 days in pre-sentence custody. I state the dates are 21 August 2022 until 28 November 2024. I declare this to be time already served under the sentence.
Footnotes
[1]Maximum penalty - life imprisonment.
[2]Maximum penalty – life imprisonment
[3]Maximum penalty – 20 years imprisonment.
[4]Maximum penalty – 20 years imprisonment from 9 December 2016; 14 years from 29 April 2013 and before this 10 years imprisonment.
[5]Maximum penalty – 15 years imprisonment.
[6]Maximum penalty – 15 years imprisonment
[7]Maximum penalty – 15 years imprisonment
[8]Maximum penalty – 14 years imprisonment from 29 April 2013 and before this 5 years imprisonment.
[9]Between 2014 – 2018, the defendant resided in New South Wales. It is alleged he committed offences against children there and a warrant has been issued for his arrest with respect to that alleged offending.
[10]The start date of count 320 accords with the date possessing child exploitation material became an offence in Queensland.
[11]In error in the oral sentencing remarks I referred to 17 children.
[12]Counts 50-97.
[13]Count 111.
[14]In error in the oral sentencing remarks I referred to 18 children.
[15]In error in the oral sentencing remarks I referred to 17 children.
[16]In error in the oral sentencing remarks I referred to 18 children.
[17]Counts 283 and 284.
[18]The Crown rolled a large number of police charges together, so that whilst there is a reduced number of offences charged on indictment, the defendant has not contested the criminality as charged by police.
[19] R v Singh [2006] QCA 71 and R v Evans and Pearce [2011] QCA 135; [2011] 2 Qd R 571.
[20]Section 9(2)(b)(i) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld) and Pt 10B.
[21][2004] QCA 286 ; (2004) 147 A Crim R 301.
[22] R v Mizner [2019] QCA 198.
[23] R v Turnbull [2013] QCA 374 at 49.
[24]R v Mahony & Shenfield [2012] QCA 366.
[25][2017] QCA 290 at [44].
[26][2023] QCA 56.
[27][2019] QCA 198.
[28][2007] QCA 99.
[29][2003] QCA 547.
[30][2006] QCA 504.
[31][2002] HCA 6; (2002) 209 CLR 339 at page 360.
[32][2023] QCA 56.
[33][2019] QCA 198.
[34] R v Robinson [2007] QCA 99 at [38].
[35][1987] HCA 46; (1987) 163 CLR 447 at pp 451 and 452.
[36][1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465 at 478.
[37][1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465 at 476.
[38][1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465 at 477.
[39][1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465 at 478.
[40]Unreported CCA NSW 4 November 1994.
[41](1997) 94 A Crim R 41 at pp 50-51.
[42][2016] HCA 48; (2016) 259 CLR 256.
[43][2016] HCA 48; (2016) 259 CLR 256 at [18].
[44]Section 9(1) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1991 (Qld) and Veen (No 2) v R [1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465 at 476.
[45] Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; (2005) 228 CLR 357 at [27].
[46] R v Harris [2000] NSWCCA 469; (2000) 50 NSWLR 409; (2000) 121 A Crim R 342.
[47] R v Harris [2000] NSWCCA 469; (2000) 50 NSWLR 409; (2000) 121 A Crim R 342.
[48] R v Mizner [2019] QCA 198.
[49]Section 181(2)(d) of the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld).
[50]Section 181(3) of the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) and ss 160C(5) and 160D(3) of the Penalties and Sentences Act.
[51][2017] QCA 290.
[52][2020] QCA 58; (2020) 282 A Crim R 94 at [46].
[53][2020] QCA 58; (2020) 282 A Crim R 94 at [53].
[54][2020] QCA 58; (2020) 282 A Crim R 94 at [84].
[55][2020] QCA 58; (2020) 282 A Crim R 94 at [55].