46. The Director thus invited the Court to clarify its position in relation to the mitigating effect of good character in sentencing those convicted of child pornography offences. To that end, it should be made clear that Fowler must not be understood as allowing good character to be given greater effect in respect of such offences than that which it has uniformly been afforded by other intermediate appellate courts throughout Australia. Indeed, Fowler merely affirms the uncontroversial proposition that, insofar as it exists, good character is always a relevant factor that must be taken into account by a sentencing court. The weight to be attached to an offender's good character will depend, of course, on the circumstances of the offending. However, as the decisions referred to above make clear, in cases involving the possession of child pornography, the need for general deterrence will frequently operate as a strong, and indeed sometimes overwhelming, countervailing factor, and thereby render nugatory any submission as to prior good character, or, at least, of limited weight. Fowler should not be understood to stand for any different proposition.