CDPP v Akin [2025] VCC 1646

Charge 2: Fail to comply with reporting obligations contrary to s 46(1A) of the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic).

Charge 3: Possess or control child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service contrary to s 474.22A(1) of the Code.

1. Charges 1 and 3 carry a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment, and a mandatory minimum head sentence of four years' imprisonment also applies on each charge.[1]
2. Charge 2 is punishable by a maximum of five years' imprisonment.
3. You also fall to be sentenced for a related summary offence of failing to comply with reporting obligations contrary to s 46(1B) of the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) which carries a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment or 240 penalty units.
4. You have admitted your criminal record (Exhibit B).

1. The agreed facts of your offending are set out in the Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea (Exhibit A). In summary, on 9 September 2019 you became a registered sex offender pursuant to s 6 of the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) (SORA) with a reporting period for life. In October 2023, Victoria Police received information that you were uploading child abuse material via a Gmail email you had previously reported on 23 June 2023 as part of your reporting obligations.
2. In June 2024, Victoria Police received another report that you were uploading child abuse material via Facebook Messenger using your Facebook profile connected to a Gmail email account. Following this report, on 12 September 2024, search warrants were executed at your residence in Greenvale. During a search of your bedroom, police seized a Motorola mobile phone which they had observed you place inside a pillowcase.

1. During the search, you participated in a record of interview in the presence of an independent third person during which you told police that:

a) The phone located in your pillowcase was not your current phone.

b) You obtained your new phone two months ago and the Motorola phone was your old phone.

d) You could not explain why the 'old' black Motorola phone in your pillowcase rang when your current registered phone number was dialled or why it was in your pillowcase.

1. The Motorola phone was subsequently forensically analysed and found to contain images and videos of child abuse material (Charge 3 - possess child abuse material). Police

re attended your home on 23 September 2024 where you were arrested for possession of child abuse material and for failing to comply with reporting obligations under SORA (Charge 2 - fail to comply with reporting obligations). 2. During further forensic examination of your Motorola phone, multiple chats were also located across multiple applications which involved you transmitting child abuse material images and videos as well as text-based communications containing child abuse material to 22 separate users (Charge 1 - transmit child abuse material).

Charge 1 - Use carriage service to transmit child abuse material

1. Between about the 9 July and 11 September 2024, you used the social messaging applications Signal, WhatsApp, Telegram and Zangi to transmit 19 category 1 child abuse images and 6 category 1 child abuse videos along with text-based child abuse material during conversations with 22 separate users. The material you sent was predominantly unsolicited. Some sanitised examples include:

a) On 31 August 2024, you engaged in a conversation via WhatsApp with user Ito. During the conversation you transmitted two child abuse material images of a girl aged approximately eight wearing sexualised clothes of stockings with suspenders attached to a short skirt and bra but no underwear and posing in sexual positions, showing her bottom and vagina to the camera. You told the other user that you often have sex with children while their mothers watch or join in.

b) On 9 September 2024, you engaged in a conversation with WhatsApp user Kenya and transmitted text-based child abuse material to her, telling her that you had just been at a friend's house watching a little girl masturbate and strip for you.

c) Between 10 and 11 September 2024, you also engaged in a conversation via WhatsApp with user Kanya and transferred your WhatsApp profile picture which contained child abuse material. When asked by Kanya about the image, you described it as your relative who is an 'erotic preteen model' and then encouraged Kanya to send photographs of her daughter to get her into the nude modelling industry. You then narrated a story about young girls doing pole dancing and working in a strip club for money. You then transmitted another video of a female child aged around 10 years old who does a dance on screen where she gradually strips off her clothing until she is naked and showing her genitals, breasts, and bottom to the camera.

1. As noted above, you were placed on the sex offender register on 9 September 2019 and ordered to be subject to reporting obligations under the SORA for life. You participated in annual interviews in 2022, 2023 and 2024 and at each interview you signed a Notice of Reporting Obligations confirming that you understood your obligations under the register.
2. As part of your reporting obligations under the SORA, mobile numbers, email addresses, internet, instant messaging and chat room usernames, and other usernames or identity used, through the internet or other electronic communication services, must be reported to police within seven (7) days after creation or any change. Any contact you have with a child was also required to be reported as was any change of address.

1. On 13 November 2024, the Victoria Sex Offender's Registry confirmed that you had not reported:

(a) Child contact. When police attended your home in Greenvale on 11 July 2024 to confirm you were living at that address, two children aged nine and seven were observed. Further enquiries established that the father of the children lived at your address and that the children had been staying with their father for the week of the July school holidays. You did not report your contact with the children to police within one day of that contact occurring as required by the SORA.

(b) Your use of email address You had not reported your use of email address [omitted]@gmail.com. You did not report the use of this email address as required when your Motorola phone revealed that you had used this address last on 12 September 2024.

(c) Your use of eight usernames You also did not report your use of eight usernames. There were several Telegram names, Instagram names, Signal username, a Meetme username, a Wechat username, a Likerro & Badoo username and a Dating Account username. The last use of the usernames was on 12 September 2024.

Charge 3 - Possess child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service

1. Charge 3 covers 72 child exploitation files that had been downloaded and saved to the media gallery of your Motorola phone. These comprised 28 images and three videos classified as category 1 child abuse material and 40 images and one video classified as category 2 child abuse material.
2. The child abuse material consisted of male and female children ranging in age from infants to pubescent children posing sexually both clothed and naked and engaging in sex acts with adults including oral, vaginal, digital and anal penetration. Sample descriptions of the material were provided in the Opening but due to the degree of depravity of some descriptions I will not repeat those here.

1. In terms of the related summary offence of failing to comply with reporting obligations, on 5 August 2024 highway patrol members executing an outstanding bench warrant observed that you were driving a motor vehicle with registration ending PK. Subsequent enquiries revealed that you were issued with the PK registration plates after returning your old ones but you did not report the acquisition of these new registration plates within seven (7) days of this occurring.

1. You were born in Melbourne to parents of Turkish origin who are both now deceased. You grew up in in Flemington, raised by your parents in a housing commission flat. You have one brother who is some 20 years older than you. Your brother ceased all contact with you when you were first charged with offending relating to child abuse material in 2018. You lived with your mother until she died and you described her as caring and a good mother although she was often 'emotionally unavailable' due to her anxiety and depression. You did not have a close relationship with your father, who you said was violent and would physically abuse you and your mother. You reported that he used drugs and alcohol. Your father entered a nursing home in 2007, and he died in 2019.
2. When your mother died, the housing commission flat was transferred to you, but you lost the flat when you were incarcerated. Since then, you have lived in rental accommodation, usually share houses.
3. You reported being sexually abused by the mother of one of your friends when you were 11 years old. She subsequently sexually abused you for about two years. You also report having been sexually assaulted by a man in a public toilet when you were about 12. You did not report either incident.
4. You said that you were bullied significantly during primary school and the first two years of high school experiencing sexual harassment and physical assaults. One assault when you were 13 led you to lose consciousness and suffer a head injury. You had friends but they would bully you or encourage you to use substances and engage in 'dumb' behaviour. You were transferred to a special school when you were in Year 8 and you were diagnosed with a learning difficulty there. You did not complete high school.
5. You have a very limited employment history. You reported that you went to TAFE as part of an automotive apprenticeship as cars are your passion, but you left after three months due to bullying. You did some cooking training but left after a few months. You have never been employed for longer than a few months in any position.
6. You have not worked for around 12 years after you lost your licence for drink driving. You have been in receipt of a Disability Support Pension for many years, and you also support yourself by buying, repairing and reselling cars. You have had an NDIS package since 2018.
7. In custody you do screen printing and complete as many courses as are available including in business management and creative writing. You wish to start your own powder coating business in the future.
8. You have had two significant relationships both of short duration, with the first involving family violence perpetrated by you. You are single and do not have any children.
9. You have had significant substance abuse issues. You started drinking alcohol regularly when you were a teenager but were introduced to alcohol at 11 and you have drunk alcohol excessively for most of your life. You have used cocaine, steroids, methamphetamines and GHB. You said you started using cocaine at age 10 after accessing your father's supply and then receiving it from your peers and you used steroids when involved in fitness training in your early teens and then again in your thirties but ceased in 2018. You started using methamphetamines in 2023. You said you were using substances extensively prior to your current remand including cocaine around four times a week, methamphetamines twice weekly and GHB once or twice a week. You have not had any sustained periods of abstinence from drug use. You have tried to cease your drug use because of the problems it causes you socially, interpersonally and occupationally but have been unsuccessful. According to Dr Tso, your substance use increases your sexual arousal, emotional lability and neurodiversity.
10. You were released from prison in 2022 and at the time of your offending, you had no family support, no friends or social supports and you were living in boarding house type accommodation funded by the NDIS. You reported that at the time of this offending you were engaging in very heavy substance use, you were extremely isolated, and you do not have a clear recollection of much of the offending.

1. The applicable principles and factors in sentencing for offending involving child abuse material are uncontroversial and well settled. I have listed those sentencing principles in my remarks and I will not repeat those here.
2. I have also had regard to the matters applicable in sentencing for Commonwealth offences. Section 16A(1) of the Act provides that a court must impose a sentence that is of an appropriate severity in all the circumstances of the offending and s16A(2) sets out a non-exhaustive list of factors that must be taken into account as far as these are relevant and known to the Court. I have had regard to the following factors set out in s 16A(2):

16A(2)(a) Nature and circumstances of the offending

1. In terms of the Commonwealth offending, your offending is clearly very serious. You have pleaded guilty to two charges involving two different types of child abuse offending namely, transmitting and possessing child abuse material. In terms of the State offending, you have also pleaded guilty to an indictable charge of failing to comply with your reporting obligations and to a similar but less serious summary charge. As discussed below you have relevant prior convictions.
2. Starting with Charge 2, the State charge of failing to comply with your reporting obligations, this is a 'rolled up' charge encompassing several instances of offending each capable of constituting a separate offence, so the criminality involved in the charge is greater than with a charge involving only one episode of criminal conduct.[2]
3. Between around 11 July and 19 September 2024 you did not report that you had contact with two children who were staying at your house with their father; you did not report your use of an email address; and you did not report your use of eight social media type usernames.
4. Your failure to report these usernames in compliance with your SORA reporting obligations facilitated the commission of the present offences, noting that you last used some of those usernames on 12 September 2024.
5. You were convicted previously of the same offence in 2019 and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. Past punishment has clearly not had any deterrent effect on you. You well understood your reporting obligations and you had the ability to comply yet made a conscious decision not to. This reflects a deliberate breach of conditions which you knew had been put in place to control your behaviour and the disregard you have shown for the reporting requirements reflects no concern for the harm that your offending causes.[3]

1. The importance of compliance with reporting obligations cannot be overstated as

non-compliance undermines the efficacy of the system and the purpose of the legislation. A primary purpose of the SORA scheme is to provide for the protection of the community, and the requirements exist to lessen the risk of re-offending by the commission of a further serious offence and thus harming or endangering members of the community. Compliance with reporting conditions enhances that protective function and contravention tends to undermine it.[4]

1. Further, compliance with reporting obligations is crucial to improve the accuracy of police child sex offender intelligence; assist in the investigation and prosecution of child sex offences committed by recidivist offenders, to provide a deterrent to reoffending; to monitor high risk child sex offenders, to assist in the management of child sex offenders in the community and to provide child abuse victims and their families with an increased sense of security.[5]

1. In terms of Charges 1 and 3, the content of the child abuse material you transmitted and possessed can only be described as abhorrent and highly depraved. Some material features infants and some depict children as young as seven being sexually penetrated by adult men and on occasion by more than one man.
2. Charge 1 is also a 'rolled up' charge encompassing several instances of separate offences of transmitting child abuse material. You transmitted 19 category 1 child abuse images and 6 child abuse videos to 22 individual users, generally unsolicited, with some recipients being horrified to receive your communication. You also sent written communications to users that constituted text-based child abuse material. This written material featured a common theme of you inflicting sexual abuse on young female children. Your written messages were also sometimes accompanied by child abuse videos or images.
3. As your counsel accepted, the written communications you sent to others that constituted written child abuse material, featured extreme and appalling content. He submitted however that the contents were fictitious, and notwithstanding the activities described, you have never committed any offence against an actual child. Of course, I do not sentence you on that basis. I am cognisant that despite repeated references in your communications to vile acts being committed against children, there were no actual children harmed or sexually abused because of this aspect of your offending. As held in Heels v The King,[6] the fact that an actual child is not harmed or sexually abused is a relevant factor in assessing the objective gravity of offending involving child abuse material.
4. But this is not to say that your offending involving text-based material was not serious. Text-based child abuse material exchanged with others for sexual gratification '...has the tendency to normalise or encourage child sex abuse', to encourage reciprocal communications or victim participation[7], relegates children to objects, it undermines society's abhorrence of child sexual abuse and ignores the harm that the fantasised activities cause real child victims.[8] As stated in R v Edwards[9], written child abuse material is not victimless and written child abuse material may fuel a demand for material involving real child victims.[10] There is also a risk that such communications can be further disseminated to others.
5. Your offending was not opportunistic or isolated and extended over two months. The analysis of your mobile showed that you were offending the day before the device was seized.
6. In terms of Charge 3, you were in possession of 72 items of child abuse material comprising 68 images and 4 videos.
7. Whilst numerically the number of items you possessed is towards the lower end compared to other cases involving much larger collections, it must be stressed that quantity is a secondary indicator of the seriousness of offending. The primary indicator is the type of material and its degree of depravity[11] and the material you accessed and possessed was highly depraved as your counsel accepted.
8. Many different real children were depicted being sexually abused in the material and each of those children is presumed to have suffered harm. These children were harmed to fuel a market for child abuse material - a market that individuals like yourself help to maintain with your desire for material.
9. Although the prosecution noted that you were also in possession of over 60,000 other items that were not checked by police, I do not have regard to these as it would be pure speculation for me to conclude that they also contained child abuse material or, if they did, how many items there were.
10. I accept that you did not profit by selling child abuse material which would aggravate your offending.
11. The seriousness with which Parliament views your offending is clear from the fact that Charges 1 and 3 carry a maximum of 15 years' imprisonment with a mandatory minimum head sentence, subject to s 16AAC, of four years' imprisonment.[12] The purpose of the introduction of these mandatory minimum head sentences was to increase the sentences imposed for repeat offenders.
12. In your case, mandatory minimum head sentences of four years' imprisonment apply to Charges 1 and 3 because pursuant to s16AAB Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) you are a person convicted of two Commonwealth child sexual abuse offences who has previously been convicted of child sexual abuse offences. This arises from your conviction on 5 September 2019 for offences of knowingly possessing child abuse material and charges of distributing child abuse material. You were sentenced at that time to 306 days' imprisonment and placed on an 18-month Community Correction Order (CCO). You were ordered to comply with the reporting requirements of the SORA for life.
13. You subsequently contravened that CCO and on 4 June 2020 you were resentenced to an aggregate of 12 months' imprisonment for the offences of knowingly possessing and distributing child abuse material.
14. You had breached the CCO by committing further offences, namely failing to comply with your SORA reporting obligations and knowingly possessing, producing and distributing child abuse material. On 4 June 2020, you were sentenced to three years' imprisonment in respect of these further offences, with a non-parole period of two years imposed.
15. As the Crown submitted, in Hurt v The King; and Delzotto v The King,[13] the High Court determined that sentencing for a statutory mandatory minimum sentence should be approached in the same way as a statutory maximum penalty, in that they both fix 'ends' of the sentencing yardstick - the mandatory minimum sets the beginning of the yardstick within which a court is to exercise its discretion to determine the appropriate sentence.[14] As a yardstick, the mandatory minimum imposes an increased starting point for the appropriate term of imprisonment for an offence in the least serious circumstances and operates to increase the appropriate term of imprisonment generally for that offence.[15]

Possible reductions to mandatory minimum head sentences

1. I may use ss 16AAC(2) and (3) of the Act to impose a sentence less than the mandatory minimum where it is necessary to do so to give adequate recognition to your plea of guilty and/or cooperation of the kind specified in s 16AAC(2)(b) of the Act[16]. The provisions allow a maximum reduction to the minimum term of 25 per cent to allow for a guilty plea pursuant to s 16A(2)(g) of the Act, and by up to 25 per cent to allow for any cooperation, where the level of offending prevents these discounts being applied.

54 In Hurt and Delzotto,[17] the majority held that it is 'legitimate' for a Court to first determine a 'prima facie sentence with the use of the prescribed minimum sentence as a yardstick, prior to considering the discount'. In other words, the Court should first engage in an instinctive synthesis of all relevant factors, except for the plea of guilty and any

co-operation; it should then proceed to separately consider ss 16A(2)(g) and (h) factors; and only then determine whether the s 16AAC is required to move below the prescribed mandatory minimum term. Accordingly, a s 16AAC reduction will ordinarily only be appropriate where the prima facie sentence determined falls within, or close to, the 'least serious circumstances'.[18]

1. The principles relevant to the setting of minimum terms have not been altered by the introduction of the mandatory minimum sentencing regime.

1. You pleaded guilty to the charge at an early stage. You did not run a committal hearing. Your plea warrants a clear reduction in sentence to reflect its utilitarian value in saving the community the time and expense of a trial and witnesses from having to give evidence, and to reflect its demonstration of acceptance of responsibility, willingness to facilitate the course of justice and remorse. I am not satisfied however that you have demonstrated any remorse for your offending over that reflected by your plea alone. Indeed, you appear apathetic and have no insight at all into the harm your offending causes to the children featured in that material and have not displayed any contrition.

1. Specific deterrence, denunciation, punishment, and protection of the community are very important considerations in sentencing for offending involving child abuse material.[19]
2. In your case, there is a strong need to deter you personally from further offending of this type. You have a prior conviction for possessing child pornography material and past punishment has not deterred you from reoffending. You then reoffended when you were subject to sex offender reporting obligations. I was told that you undertook some offending behaviour programs as part of your CCO, but these did not prevent you from reoffending. You knew what you were doing was wrong, yet you still offended in largely the same way. I accept you are remorseful but, in my view, this does not diminish the strong weight that must be given to specific deterrence in your case.
3. The offences I am sentencing you for represent your third conviction for offending involving child abuse material. Again, in 2019 you were convicted of knowingly possessing child abuse material and distributing child abuse material. In June 2020 you were convicted of knowingly possessing child abuse material and producing and distributing child abuse material. You were also convicted at that time of failing to comply with your SORA reporting obligations and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment for that offence. These convictions also represented a contravention of the CCO that had been imposed on you. You have also breached another CCO imposed in 2018 for driving offences and a charge of stalking.
4. I have also had regard to the requirement that you be adequately punished for your offending and to denounce your offending.

1. As noted earlier, general deterrence is the primary sentencing consideration for offending involving child abuse material given the prevalence and ready availability of this material and the need to protect children from sexual abuse.[20] Where general deterrence is primary, personal mitigatory factors such as prior good character, age, prospects of rehabilitation et cetera must therefore be given less weight than might otherwise be given.[21]

16A(2)(m) Character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition

1. You were 42 at the time of the offending and are now aged 43.
2. As noted above, you have relevant prior convictions. You have no subsequent or outstanding matters.
3. I have had regard to the psychological report of Dr Loretta Evans dated 6 August 2025 (Exhibit 1) who was engaged to assess you for the presence of any underlying neurodevelopmental disorder after this possibility was raised in an earlier psychological report of Dr Dawson in December 2023. Dr Evans noted that you failed all six tests of symptom validity which pointed to you not being motivated to genuinely answer the questions. She determined that continued testing was futile, and the assessment was terminated. Dr Evans opined that your linear focus and resistance to psychometric testing meant it was not possible to complete a thorough neuropsychological assessment of you and a definitive opinion on possible cognitive deficits you may have secondary to an underlying neurodevelopmental disorder, past substance abuse or underlying mental conditions. Dr Evans could however offer tentative clinical observations that:

a) There was no evidence of traumatic brain injury or actively psychotic features.

b) In all likelihood you do present with a neurodevelopmental disorder given the combination of features she outlines in paragraph 30 of her report. However given some of the skills you do have, the level of your adaptive functioning was likely to have been compromised to a mild degree.

c) The impact of your social skills, level of psychological maturity and capacity for empathy, in her opinion, have been more serious contributors due to a combination of your alcohol and drug use since your early teens and the possibility of schizophrenia presenting in your early 20s. It is these factors that would have been present when you offended but they are presently controlled by medication and custody.

d) Dr Evans said you have a particular focus or preoccupation on what you call your 'porn addiction' and you have difficulty articulating the impact of this on others, you have difficulty articulating methods or considering methods of avoiding the factors underlying your offending or to change your behaviour. You struggle to think about the consequences of your actions and to engage in problem solving, and you are immature and self-absorbed which likely impact on your ability to regulate your behaviour. Dr Evans opined that your ability to control your impulses and think about the consequences of your actions is likely to be further affected if you are overwhelmed, substance affected or emotionally dysregulated.

1. I have also had regard to the psychological evaluation conducted by Dr Melissa Tso dated 7 September 2022 (Exhibit 2). You clearly have a long and complex history of engagement with mental health services and have received numerous diagnoses[22]. Dr Tso concluded that you meet the criteria for

a) Paedophilic Disorder with an attraction to adults as well as to pre and post pubescent female children.

b) Compulsive Sexual Behaviour Disorder which arises from your inability to control intense sexual impulses or urges and your repetitive engagement in masturbation. This is enduring activity which significantly impairs your personal and legal functioning given your repeated accessing of child abuse material and re-offending.

c) Stimulant Use Disorder which has been enduring and exacerbates your sexual arousal.

d) Autism Spectrum Disorder which is evident from impairments in your problem-solving abilities, attention, working memory and planning and your difficulty in concentrating on plans for being offence and substance free in the future.

e) You did not report symptoms of schizophrenia, nor have you been medicated for this since your remand. You may however experience some negative symptoms of schizophrenia, but these may also indicate Major Depressive Disorder.

f) Dr Tso opined that diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder arising from your sexual assault and rape when you were a child.

g) Further, Major Depressive Disorder indicated by pervasive depressed mood, recurrent but occasional suicidal ideation, weight gain, insomnia and feelings of worthlessness.

h) Generalised Anxiety Disorder which is evident in your excessive anxiety and concern about your sentencing hearing and the prospect of additional imprisonment.

1. Dr Tso considered that your attraction to children and compulsive sexual behaviour and your inability to manage these symptoms have a direct relationship with your offending as your fantasies and urges lead you to look for child abuse material. She opined that your substance misuse also indirectly contributes because it increases your sexual arousal and lowers your disinhibition to behave pro-socially. Accessing child abuse material also provided you with a social outlet to feel connected to others by exchanging or discussing child abuse material. Dr Tso indicated further that you have a lack of insight into the harm your offending causes to victims with statements such as 'No one got hurt' and a lack of empathy towards victims, with you believing the children were not harmed as they 'seemed to enjoy' the sexual abuse.
2. Your autism, anxiety and depression and any symptoms of schizophrenia also increase your chances of reoffending if you do not have strategies to manage these symptoms. Dr Tso said that when all these factors are combined along with your lack of awareness of how to deal with your symptoms in a healthy manner led you to developing maladaptive coping strategies like accessing child abuse material to relieve your urges and symptoms.
3. Because you have had autism and neurodevelopmental difficulties for most of your life and cognitive problems since 13, Dr Tso considered it unlikely that these factors would have directly impacted on your offending as you started accessing child abuse material around five years ago. Dr Tso concluded that your '...high levels of sexual arousal, deviant sexual fantasies, substance use and mental health issues (anxiety and depression)...are the core components and contributors' to your present offending.
4. In terms of the application of limbs 1, 3 and 4 of R v Verdins; Buckley; Vo[23] to reduce your moral culpability for the offending or the weight to be given to the principles of general and specific deterrence, as I understood, your counsel accepted that, based on the opinion of Dr Tso, your autism and cognitive difficulties did not enliven any of the limbs. It was also accepted that your deviant sexual fantasies did not give rise to Verdins reductions. He submitted however that your mental health difficulties and substance abuse were such as to enliven limbs 1, 3 and 4, albeit any reduction would not be 'weighty'.
5. The prosecution contended that none of limbs 1, 3 or 4 applied in your case. In terms of your moral culpability, it was argued that it would be illogical for an offender who has a deviant sexual interest in children to be viewed as less culpable for their offending when they act on their deviant urges. Further, it was argued that the fact that offending occurs in the context of a person being depressed or substance affected may explain their disinhibition, but it does not reduce their moral culpability. In terms of general and specific deterrence, the prosecution argued that neither were reduced by virtue of your various conditions, indeed, specific deterrence plays a prominent role in sentencing you given your prior history.
6. I accept the prosecution submission. Whilst yours is a difficult case because there are said to be various contributors to your offending, after carefully considering the evidence along with your level of recidivism and the objective features of your offending, I do not consider that limbs 1, 3 or 4 of Verdins are applicable in your case. It seems to me that the central contributors to your offending are your Paedophilia and your Compulsive Sexual Behaviour Disorder, and to the extent that it could ever be a reason to reduce your moral culpability, I repeat what was said recently in this regard in DPP (C'th) v Knipe[24]

Thus, even if an offender's moral culpability can be reduced because of a paedophilic disorder, that diagnosis cannot reduce the objective gravity of the offending or the need for paramount emphasis on general deterrence in the sentencing exercise. And, the need for specific deterrence and protection of the community will almost inevitably outweigh any mitigation arising from a reduced moral culpability.

1. This is not to say I given no consideration at all to the other possible contributors to your offending or to your personality or mental health difficulties generally. These are relevant factors to consider pursuant to s 16A(2) of the Act and I take your cognitive impairment, autism and your anxiety and depression into account as providing some context to the circumstances in which your offending occurred, most importantly to their effect on your ability to develop insight and empathy. In terms of your loneliness and use of substances when you offended, I do not consider these to be of any mitigatory value. Many people are lonely and wish to make friends and may use substances to assist them deal with their isolation or to help them reach out to others, but their subsequent communications do not focus on sexual activity with children.
2. I accept, as did the prosecution, the opinion of Dr Evans that Verdins limb 5 applies in your case and `imprisonment may be more burdensome for you than on another prisoner given that although you can comply with rules, your personality is such that you may negatively draw attention to yourself unless you are appropriately placed in prison, which it appears you are. Dr Tso made a similar finding that your psychological profile makes you more vulnerable than the average prisoner.
3. Dr Tso also opined that there is a likelihood that your mental health will deteriorate in custody thus enlivening limb 6 of Verdins. Dr Tso considered your symptoms of depression, anxiety and PTSD could likely deteriorate, and your suicidal ideation increase especially as you are fearful of being assaulted, have reported being sexually assaulted in custody and these matters could potentially increase the trauma symptoms you have from your previous sexual assault and rape. The Crown did not accept the applicability of Verdins limbs as there was no evidence of a serious risk that imprisonment will have a significant adverse effect on your mental health. Based on Dr Tso's evidence I consider there is a serious risk that the length of the term of imprisonment I intend to impose will have a significant adverse effect on your mental health and I make allowance for this in the sentences I ultimately impose.
4. Your counsel submitted that because of your PTSD that arose from your childhood sexual abuse and somewhat violent upbringing, the principles in Bugmy apply to reduce your moral culpability for the offending and the weight to be given to general deterrence. The prosecution did not disagree but argued any reductions should be minimal. I have moderated the weight I give to general deterrence slightly to reflect your upbringing and accept that your moral culpability for the offending is reduced but only slightly given you knew exactly what you were doing, that it was wrong, and you are a repeat offender.

1. As noted earlier, you have prior convictions for offending related to child abuse material and for failing to comply with reporting obligations and past punishment has not deterred you from reoffending. You reoffended when you were subject to sex offender reporting requirements. In addendum submissions filed by your counsel, I was told that during your last two terms of imprisonment you attended weekly sex offender treatment sessions for around one year, but you instructed that you found these of little assistance as they were group, and not individual, sessions. Clearly, these treatment sessions did not prevent you from reoffending and whilst you may have benefitted from individual sessions, you did have some treatment, you knew what you were doing was wrong, yet you still offended in largely the same way. When sentenced in September 2019 you also did not engage with conditions of your CCO that you attend for assessment by the Sex Offender program (SOATS) and other conditions, and you had not done so by the time you were returned to prison in December 2019.
2. As the prosecution submitted your entire attitude towards child abuse material and insight into its harm is wrong and this affects the assessment of your moral culpability, prospects of rehabilitation, the weight to be given to specific deterrence and the need for protection of the community. You were given chances in the past when you were released after time served and placed on a CCO, but you breached this order by similar offending and after your release you again reoffended.
3. Dr Tso opined that you present with a moderate to high risk of engaging in further offending related to child abuse material. Dr Evans concluded that she was 'pessimistic' about your prospects of rehabilitation in view of your fixed method of thinking, egocentricity and possible mild cognitive deficiencies. She said your risk of reoffending presently is likely to be extremely high given your history, lack of motivation to participate in the assessment or to actively try to change your behaviours, your apathy and the likelihood of drug relapse after your release.
4. In my view, your prospects of rehabilitation will depend very much on your ability to obtain offence specific treatment especially appropriately tailored treatment (in view of your autism and cognitive impairment) to assist you to develop insight into the reasons for your offending and the harm it causes victims. It is concerning that you instruct that you do not understand why you engage in sexually deviant communications or seek out child abuse material other than because you were inebriated, you do 'stupid things' when inebriated and you do not know how to talk to people. This ignores the very salient fact that you have been diagnosed with paedophilia and compulsive sexual behaviour disorder, and you require significant treatment for these conditions. Your lack of insight into the harm your actions cause to the children in the material is similarly alarming. You have been assessed as presenting with a moderate to high and extremely high risk of reoffending.
5. Your prospects of rehabilitation also depend very much on your abstinence from drug and alcohol use and obtaining treatment for your general mental health given your offending appears to be triggered by disinhibition due to substance abuse driven by isolation and depression. You have no real family or pro social supports, and it is very concerning that you have reoffended in the same way twice before despite past punishment and some degree of treatment. I am also not convinced by your counsel's submission that you are currently willing to engage in treatment. The report of Dr Evans would suggest the opposite as you did not genuinely participate in your assessment, as would your past failure to engage in CCO treatment conditions. I assess you as having poor prospects of rehabilitation at this point given your diagnoses, your risk of reoffending, your prior convictions and your complete lack of insight into the reasons for your offending.
6. I have had regard to section 16A(2AAA) of the Act which provides when sentencing for a Commonwealth child sex offence (here both Charges 1 and 3), I must have regard to the objective of rehabilitating you and I do so. You have engaged in little individualised sex offender treatment yet and it is imperative that you do so if you are to achieve any rehabilitation. You still do not seem to understand the harm your offending causes and you have expressed no real remorse. You also require treatment for substance abuse and major depression. Whilst I do have regard to the need to rehabilitate you, I note that the objective of rehabilitating you does not operate to swamp the primacy to be given to principles of general and specific deterrence and the need to protect the community and I must also impose a sentence which adequately reflects the seriousness of your offending.

1. Section 19(5) of the Act provides a presumption in favour of full cumulation between sentences imposed for Commonwealth child sex offences (here, Charges 1 and 3), although s 19(6) permits the court not to impose full cumulation if, in all the circumstances, this will still result in appropriately severe sentences. I will not impose complete cumulation between the charges, nor did the prosecution suggest I should do so, as to do so would breach the principle of totality and I am able to construct a sentence of appropriate severity without needing to impose wholly cumulative sentences.
2. I intend to impose a modest degree of cumulation between the sentences imposed to reflect the different and discrete types of offending each having different elements and involving different vices. I do so mindful of the principles of totality and proportionality and the need to avoid imposing a crushing sentence.

1. I was provided with a table of six intermediate appellate sentences for offences involving mandatory minimum sentences which I have had regard to. These sentences are of assistance in illustrating the relevant sentencing principles, and they are of some utility in the present sentencing exercise. However as frequently occurs, it is very difficult to find cases of sufficient factual similarity to be of any substantive assistance and so each case must ultimately be decided on its own facts and circumstances.

1. Your counsel accepted that in your case a mandatory head sentence of four years' imprisonment applies to each charge. He submitted however that the sentences I impose could go below the prescribed mandatory minimums by up to 25 per cent to reflect your plea of guilty. I note that you did not co-operate with authorities indeed you lied to police about your ownership of the mobile device that contained the child abuse material, so this potential reduction is not applicable.
2. The prosecution submitted that the objective seriousness of your offending on each charge is not at the lowest end or minimum level of seriousness and accordingly it is not necessary for me to utilise the reductions available in ss 16AAC(2) and (3) of the Act to move below the mandatory head sentence. The prosecution accepted that you entered a plea at the earliest opportunity however the applicable sentencing yardstick of between four and 15 years provides sufficient scope to accommodate the objective considerations and all mitigating factors you rely on without needing to go below the mandatory minimum head sentence.
3. I have endeavoured to balance the serious nature of your offending, your poor prospects of rehabilitation, risk of reoffending and the very strong need for general and specific deterrence, just punishment and protection of the community with your guilty plea and the need to promote your rehabilitation. I have also modestly reduced the weight to be given to general deterrence given the application of Bugmy and whilst I accept your moral culpability is also marginally reduced, it is nevertheless still towards the high end. You had no intellectual disability or significant mental illness that would have impacted on your knowledge that your offending was wrong. This is your third conviction for offending involving child abuse material.

88 In determining the sentences to be imposed on Charges 1 and 3, which both carry mandatory minimum head sentences of four years' imprisonment, having regard to the relevant sentencing principles, the objective seriousness of your offending and the subjective mitigating factors you rely on, the overall seriousness of your offending on both charges falls above that which may be contemplated to be in the 'least serious circumstances' and I do not need to use 16AAC to impose a sentence below the prescribed mandatory minimum head sentence. I can accommodate discounts for your plea of guilty under s 16A(2)(g) within the available sentencing yardstick of four to 15 years for each charge. I will now proceed to sentence.

1. On State Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment. I direct that the sentence commences today, 12 November 2025.
2. I set a non-parole period of nine months' imprisonment on the State charge.
3. On Commonwealth Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to five years and three months' imprisonment. I direct that the sentence commences at the expiration of the State non-parole period on Charge 2.
4. On Commonwealth Charge 3, you are convicted and sentenced to four years and three months' imprisonment. I direct that the sentence commences two years after the commencement of the sentence on Charge 1.
5. This results in a total effective Commonwealth sentence of five years and three months' imprisonment.
6. I set a non-parole period of three and a half years' imprisonment for the Commonwealth offending.
7. For the summary offence of failing to comply with reporting obligations you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment. I direct that this sentence be served concurrently with all other sentences imposed in this case.
8. The total effective sentence therefore is seven years' imprisonment.
9. The total effective non-parole period is four years and three months' imprisonment.
10. I declare pursuant to s 18E of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), that you have served 415 days' pre-sentence detention, from your remand on 23 September 2024, excluding today.
11. You are presently subject to the SORA reporting obligations for life. Your conviction for the present class 2 offences in addition to your previous convictions for one or more class 2 offences means you are required to comply with the SORA reporting requirements for life.67
12. Pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), but for your plea of guilty, I would have imposed a total effective head sentence of eight and a half years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and three months' imprisonment.
13. So, Mr Kenny, Ms Kelly, just to go over that again because I have read quickly. What I intend to achieve is a total effective sentence of seven years with a non-parole period of four years and three months.
14. On the State charge, a separate charge of 18 months' imprisonment with a non-parole of nine months.
15. On the first Commonwealth charge, that will start when the non-parole period finishes on the State charge, and that will be five years and three months.
16. On the second one, to effect some degree of cumulation, I have ordered that that sentence on Charge 3 starts two years after Charge 1. So that should be five years and three months for the Commonwealth and I have set a non-parole of three and a half for that. So the three and a half non-parole for the Commonwealth with the nine months for the State, gives four years and three months' imprisonment.

[1] s16AAB Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)

[2] R v Richard [2011] NSWSC 866, at [65(f)]; R v De Leeuw [2015] NSWCCA 183, [116].

[3] DPP v Beck [2021] VSCA 88 at [54].

[4] Director of Public Prosecutions (Vic) v SM [2019] VSC 466 at [22].

[5] See Bisiker v R [2022] NSWCCA 110.

[6] [2024] VSCA 133, [40]

[7]Innes v R [2018] NSWCCA 90; Meadows v The Queen [2017] VSCA 290; The Queen v Hancock [2011] NTCCA 14 at [42].

[9] [2019] QCA 15, [60-61]

[10] See also McEwen v Simmons (2008) 73 NSWLR 10; [2008] NSWSC 1292; Innes v R [2018] NSWCCA 90

[11] DPP v Latham [2009] TASSC 101, [35].

[12] Elias v R [2013] HCA 31; (2013) 248 CLR 483, [27]. See also Markarian v The Queen (2006) 228 CLR 357, [30-31].

[13] [2024] HCA 8 (Hurt and Delzotto).

[16] That is, for cooperation with the investigation of the offence for which the person is being sentenced or another Commonwealth child sex offence, but it does not include future cooperation.

[19] Walker v The Queen [2008] NTCCA 7 at [34]; R v Gent [2005] NSWCCA 370; (2005) 162 A Crim R 29 at [65].

[20] DPP (Cth) v Garside [2016] VSCA 74; R v De Leeuw [2015] NSWCCA 183 at [116].

[21] Heathcote (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2014] VSCA 35 [at 35]; Gajjar v R [2008] VSCA 268; (2008) 192 A Crim R 76.

[22] See Report of Dr Loretta Evans, Clinical Neuropsychologist, 6 August 2025 at paras 12-17.

[23] [2007] VSCA 102; (2007) 16 VR 269.

[24] [2025] VSCA 228, [94].