R v Lanham [2014] ACTSC 128

(a) a probation condition that he be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for a period of two years or such lesser period that the person delegated to supervise him considers appropriate;

(b) that he obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise him especially as to his participation in therapy or counselling to address sexual offending;

(c) that he report to the office of ACT Corrections at Eclipse House, London Circuit, Canberra City on or before 4:00 pm on Monday 28 April 2014;

(d) that he perform one hundred and fifty hours of community service work within twelve months from today.

5. Mr Lanham be convicted of using a carriage service to transmit material which was child pornography material between 24 October 2012 and 31 October 2012.

6. Mr Lanham be sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 24 November 2014, that is to be cumulative as to eight months on the sentence for possessing child pornography.

7. Mr Lanham be released upon giving security in the sum of $1,000 to be of good behaviour for a period of three years from today and that he be under the supervision of a probation officer appointed by the Director-General for a period of two years from today or such lesser period as the person appointed to supervise him considers appropriate and that he obey all reasonable directions of the person appointed to supervise him.

8. I convict you of using a carriage service to access material that is child pornography between 25 October 2012 and 5 November 2012.

9. I sentence you to three months' imprisonment to commence on 24 October 2015, that is to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for using a carriage service to transmit child pornography.

10. Mr Lanham be released upon giving security in the sum of $300 to be of good behaviour for three years from today.

1. There can be no doubt that one of the obligations of a community is to take care of its vulnerable members. Of those, perhaps children are amongst the most vulnerable.

2. In recent times, it has become recognised that the internet is a great source of risk to children, particularly through sexual advances made to them but also through the dissemination of pornography that demeans children and, in some cases, is made by subjecting them to abhorrent practices. The wide distribution of such material may also be used to normalise such objectionable behaviour or desensitise people to the unacceptable conduct.

3. Now appearing before me for sentence in relation to three child sex related offences is Stephen Ross Lanham who has pleaded guilty to

• using a carriage service to access material being child pornography material, contrary to ss 474.19(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) which provides for a maximum penalty of fifteen years imprisonment.

• using a carriage service to transmit material, being child pornography material, contrary to ss 474.19(1)(a)(iii) of the Criminal Code Act for which the same maximum penalty, namely fifteen years imprisonment, is provided.

• possessing child pornography, contrary to s 65(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) which provides for a maximum penalty of 700 penalty units (that is a fine of $77,000), or imprisonment for seven years, or both.

4. As the courts have made clear, the maximum penalty is an important guide to the seriousness with which the legislature requires courts to take offences. See, for example, R v Oliver (1980) 7 A Crim R 174 at 176.

5. The origin of the detection of these offences occurred when a police officer working undercover from the Bedford County Sheriff's Office, Forest, Virginia in the United States of America conducted an under-cover session on an Internet Relay Chat (IRC) in one of the chat rooms which, omitting some initial symbols, was entitled "dad&daughtersex".

6. IRC is a protocol for real-time internet text messaging or "chat", designed for group communication and discussion forums. It provides an additional feature giving users the ability to conduct one-on-one communication.

7. The undercover officer, posing as a twelve year old female using the screen name "Haleygirl", received an instant message from a user with the screen name "Aussie-dad".

8. Aussie-dad inquired of Haleygirl her age and when he was advised she was twelve, he continued to engage in sexually explicit chat, including discussing sexual activity between them.

9. Investigations showed that the internet protocol address of Aussie-dad was the accused, Mr Lanham.

10. Further investigation showed that, on 27 September 2012, Aussie-dad initiated a conversation with "Cyndy13", also an undercover identity by the United Kingdom Police Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

11. When Aussie-dad asked Cyndy13 whether she liked older men, he was advised by an automatically generated message that the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre had logged a record of the conversation due to a violation of sections of UK legislation relating to grooming a child under sixteen for the purpose of having sexual intercourse with them. Mr Lanham said that he did not really see the message or take notice of it, as messages frequently appeared on the screen.

12. Aussie-dad, however, immediately concluded the chat with Cyndy13.

13. On 24 October 2012, the Australian Federal Police Internet Policing Team conducted a number of undercover operations in relation to the same chat room when an officer, posing as a father of three daughters, received a message from Aussie-dad in which he stated that he was the father of three children and had sexually assaulted his daughter by "touching, fingering and oral".

14. On 31 October 2012, a further undercover session was conducted on the same chat room when an AFP officer, posing as a thirteen year old female using the screen name "AusHolly1999", received a message from Aussie-dad and an internet private chat session was conducted during which Aussie-dad told AusHolly1999 that he would "love to kiss you and touch you" and that he "would love to try now but I am pretty big 9"/23cm and very thick, I don't want to hurt you". He then stated he wanted to be the first man inside her, even if only a little way. There was further discussion about Aussie-dad meeting AusHolly1999 and him offering to take her somewhere to eat, suggesting that they then engage in sexually related activities.

15. A search warrant was subsequently executed on premises where Mr Lanham conducted his business.

16. A conversation was recorded with Mr Lanham in which he admitted using the IRC programme and actively engaging in conversations with persons who held themselves out to be under the age of eighteen years. He was co-operative with police.

17. Mr Lanham provided AFP officers with various email addresses that he used and passwords for the computers and email accounts. He said that he was the sole user of one computer on which the logs were located. He said that he chatted on fantasy chat rooms in which he engaged with people he believed all to be adults adopting different personas, often adopting personas of children under the age of eighteen years. He said that the personas people adopt could be of people aged anywhere between ten years and twenty-three, twenty-eight or thirty years old. He agreed that the chats involved describing sexual acts involving children. He denied ever engaging in any physical sexual contact with children.

18. He said that his conversation with AusHolly1999 was conducted on the assumption that AusHolly1999 was an adult and that their discussion was "something between two adults". He said he did not expect that any thirteen year old would be on the fantasy chat room because he understood that IRC was an "older person's thing", that it pre-dated all of the modern social media and he did not think that it would be something children today would be aware of.

19. He was not aware that "child pornography" included text depictions of sexual acts with children.

20. He denied obtaining sexual gratification from participating in the chats and said it was a fantasy where he provided other people what they wanted, listening for clues or what they say and build them a fantasy scenario. He said that if any child pornography came up on his screen he would "just click away from it".

21. Mr Lanham's computer was seized and the contents analysed.

22. An analysis showed that there were fourteen image files saved on the hard drive. Forensic analysis showed that three of these files were opened by the user of the computer. They were subsequently identified as child pornography images and classified as Level 1 on the CETs scale, that is images that showed children in sexual poses, nude or with an emphasis on the genital area.

23. CETS is the Child online Exploitation Tracking System used to categorise the level of seriousness of child pornography. It is based on the well-known "Oliver scale" which was so named after the scale propounded by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in R v Oliver [2003] 1 Cr App R 28. It follows the general description used in the Oliver scale but adds some useful guidance and a sixth level for Animation, cartoon or computer generated child pornography at any of the earlier five scales.

24. Further analysis showed three hundred and thirty four IRC chat sessions stored on Mr Lanham's computer, some with names suggestive of highly problematic child pornography including "childrapetorturebrutality" and "childslavesex". Those chat logs showed three were at CETS 3 Level, two hundred and ninety seven at CETS 4 and thirty-four at CETS 5.

25. I have set out the CETS scale as an appendix to these reasons, showing the levels and the relevant type of pornography as well as the guide.

26. I was shown a selection of the material produced during the chat sessions. They showed discussion of very explicit sex activities, especially penile/vaginal intercourse with children as young as twelve years old as well as oral sex. It was material that, given the apparent involvement of children was of a very disturbing kind.

27. Even though the form of what was done was text, it is, for the purposes of the offences under the Criminal Code Act, child pornography. Material is defined in s 473.1 for Pt 10.6 in which s 474.19 appears, as including "material in any form, or combination of forms, capable of constituting a communication". There is, in my view, no doubt that the texts messages sent in these discussions in which Mr Lanham was involved, were within the definition of "material".

28. Child pornography material is then defined in the same section as follows:

(a) Material that depicts a person, or a representation of a person, who is, or appears to be, under 18 years of age and who:

• (i) is engaged in, or appears to be engaged in, a sexual pose or sexual activity (whether or not in the presence of other persons); or
• (ii) is in the presence of a person who is engaged in, or appears to be engaged in, a sexual pose or sexual activity;

and does this in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive; or

(b) material the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of:

• (i) a sexual organ or the anal region of a person who is, or appears to be, under 18 years of age; or
• (ii) a representation of such a sexual organ or anal region; or
• (iii) the breasts, or a representation of the breasts, of a female person who is, or appears to be, under 18 years of age;

in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive; or

(c) material that describes a person who is, or is implied to be, under 18 years of age and who:

• (i) is engaged in, or is implied to be engaged in, a sexual pose or sexual activity (whether or not in the presence of other persons); or
• (ii) is in the presence of a person who is engaged in, or is implied to be engaged in, a sexual pose or sexual activity;

and does this in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive; or

(d) material that describes:

• (i) a sexual organ or the anal region of a person who is, or is implied to be, under 18 years of age; or
• (ii) the breasts of a female person who is, or is implied to be, under 18 years of age;

and does this in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive.

29. Having read the material, I am satisfied that it is child pornography material as proscribed by s 474.19.

30. Mr Lanham was born fifty-five years ago, one of four children. His father was a senior public servant with significant demands on his time, leaving little opportunity for family life during Mr Lanham's childhood.

31. Mr Lanham's father died five years ago and his mother, aged eighty-nine, is living independently but requires considerable support from Mr Lanham and his eldest brother.

32. Mr Lanham recalls his childhood as secure though he was not particularly close to his siblings, in part because there are significant gaps between their ages. He was a somewhat shy and isolated child both at home and at school. Although he had a small circle of reasonably close friends of his own age, his isolation was increased by his absorption into learning and playing the piano.

33. He became aware of his homosexual orientation at about the age of fifteen and although making one abortive attempt at a heterosexual relationship has remained exclusively homosexual since then. He experienced some initial rejection, particularly from his mother, but has become accepted by his family and friends as a gay man.

34. He was educated to Year 12. After school, he worked for a number of years as a professional musician, but had to undertake other occupations to maintain himself. He finished up working full-time in information technology where he has been working for twenty-five years and is now the network administrator of three computers at his business. He has been employed continuously since leaving school.

35. He now works full-time in IT in software development. His partner and he established a building management company seven years ago and while it has flourished, it has involved him in long hours of work.

36. The reality, as acknowledged by Mr Lanham, is that the likely publicity and other future communicating of these offences will almost certainly result in the demise of Mr Lanham's business, which employs him, his partner and a full-time employee. He has made proper arrangements for generous redundancy for those affected and commenced steps to wind up the business.

37. Mr Lanham met his current partner when he was twenty-one; his partner is twelve years older than he is. They have been in a stable, committed relationship for approximately thirty years.

38. Mr Lanham has some physical and medical problems. He suffers from a form of migraine characterised by cluster headaches, but this is managed by a neurologist. In the last seven years he has experienced periodic irregularities of his heart rhythm which have been sufficiently serious to require hospitalisation on three occasions and which he remains under medical observation.

39. Mr Lanham does not abuse drugs or drink alcohol to excess. His financial situation is secure.

40. He has no convictions and is generally of good character, though I did not have any references to attest to what has been called "positive good character" as in Goundar v Goddard [2010] ACTSC 56; (2010) 240 FLR 176 at 184; [44]- [47].

41. Following his arrest in December 2012, Mr Lanham became very depressed. More recently his depression has improved though not resolved. He did have suicidal ideation but this is now largely in abeyance.

42. Mr Lanham was examined by Professor Paul Mullen who provided a detailed and helpful report.

43. Professor Mullen expressed the view that Mr Lanham is an intelligent and articulate man who runs a successful business.

44. His explanation to Professor Mullen of his offending broadly corresponded to that given to police officers when he was first questioned, to what he told the author of the Pre-Sentence Report and to what he told me in his evidence.

45. He first became involved in IRC twelve years ago through a Canberra gay site. He became one of the moderators of the site, but it died out as did many others as alternative technologies for internet communication became easier and more sophisticated.

46. As with many other IRC users, he often entered other chat rooms which caught his attention; one of these was what he described as a "father daughter sex site". He said he could not recall why he entered that site other than being "just curious". He was initially disapproving when contacted by a message identified as from "lisa13" but reported that the response he received was to the effect that he was a "dumbass" and that this was a role-playing and fantasy site.

47. As was noted above, Mr Lanham claimed that "all the people that I think I have ever chatted to have been, as far as I am aware, adults posing as a fantasy" and maintained the view that he believed he was involved with other adults in a fantasy role-playing game. He acknowledged that his own persona that he had constructed involved engaging in sexual acts with children but denied ever having sexually touched a child; it was a pure fantasy. Indeed, his persona was quite different from his reality; he is not a male heterosexual father with children.

48. He said it never occurred to him that other users of the chat room would be children; he believed they were all adults wanting to play fantasy games. He denied becoming sexually excited let alone masturbating when creating these fantasies. He says that one of the motivators was that he took satisfaction in "doing it better than the straight guys" and, no doubt, being "really good at it" reinforced his participation.

49. It was somewhat troubling that Mr Lanham had, he acknowledged, engaged in the activity for some years, accumulating three hundred and thirty-four IRC chat sessions.

50. He said that he started to engage in the activity because his cluster headaches would become a problem for him soon after he went to bed for the night. Thus, the chat fantasy gave him some reason for delaying going to bed as well as an opportunity to wind down after the long hours he worked.

51. He said that the main attraction was the opportunity to be a participant in the fantasy at a better level than the heterosexual participants and those whose lifestyles were closer to their assumed personas than was his. He enjoyed the accolades he received after participating in the fantasies.

52. He noted that initially he waited to be contacted but subsequently began to initiate contact with individuals entering the chat room. He has now been involved with such chat rooms for at least eight years, perhaps a decade.

53. While I can accept much of what was said, it does not seem to me to be the whole story for two reasons: a complete list of the chat sessions shows that they were frequently at the end of the day, they were also often, however, at the beginning also and many were during ordinary working hours, though I could not say that these were not at weekends. The timing does suggest, however, that his participation was significantly more than just at the end of a long, hard day, when he was putting off going to bed.

54. As to the accolades, that may well be true, but a number of the chat sessions were with homosexual participants, such as "buildersboyu", "Kirkboy" and "DadandSon" to mention just three.

55. While I do not discount his explanation, it does seem to me that there was an addictive quality to his participation, beyond the limited explanation he gave. That will need to be addressed in sentencing.

56. Regrettably, Professor Mullen did not address this issue. He did say that Mr Lanham told him that he had no sexual interest in children, that he did not become sexually excited and never masturbated. Professor Mullen appeared to accept that these were correct assertions.

57. Professor Mullen also reported that, Mr Lanham having been questioned by police officers, it raised in him a new perspective on the activities, now realising how grotesque they were. He said, "It now seems so absurd, so sordid, I just don't understand how I let it evolve to that extent".

experience tends to produce scepticism towards accounts which deny, minimise or attempt to normalise the activities of those accused of sexual offences. In this case, however, there is in my opinion a degree of plausibility and consistency to Mr Lanham's account. Mr Lanham is correct in asserting that IRC chat rooms are most unlikely to appeal to those who began using social and communication media on the internet in the last decade. I am informed that some groups of young people (not children) do use IRC. This, however, is because it offers greater security and more restricted access than other forms of social media when communicating about such matters as fringe social events.

59. Professor Mullen's opinion, which was helpful, was

There is no literature of which I am aware which covers the relationship between participating in IRC sites such as the father daughter sex chat room and previous or subsequent contact abuse of children or adolescents. There are, however, a number of reasonably well conducted studies of those known to have accessed child pornography on the internet. These studies indicate only a minority of those accessing child pornography have a history, or acknowledge, sexually molesting children. In most studies it is a small minority. The follow up studies demonstrate re-offense[sic] rates usually between 3% and 10% with most studies in the lower range.

Most re-offenses [sic] involve returning to accessing child pornography, with the minority being contact offences. The re-offense [sic] rates are highest in those with criminal and antisocial histories, substance abuse, unemployment, and a lack of a stable sexual relationship. Mr Lanham has none of these risk factors for reoffending or progressing to contact offences against children.

60. This is consistent with the opinion of the author of the Pre-Sentence Report, who opined:

In Mr Lanham's case however it would appear there was little actual intent or desire to cause harm through child sexual exploitation. Rather his involvement represented the use of an aberrant coping routine to avoid headaches reinforced by the ego boost he received from his 'audience'. This said, even by his own admission, a concerning element of his offending was the degree of deviance involved in the exploitative dialogue as reported in these offences.

61. There is no doubt that these offences are serious. The maximum penalties attest to that, but the attitude of the community, as acknowledged by Mr Lanham when he was confronted with the enormity of what he was doing, is that they are not only entirely unacceptable but abhorrent.

62. Of course, as with any offences, there is a range of seriousness and it is important for sentencing that an attempt is made to locate the actual offences within that range.

63. In a very helpful analysis, R A Hulme J in Minehan v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 140; (2010) 201 A Crim R 243 at 260-1; [94], identified thirteen matters which may be relevant to an assessment of the objective seriousness of such offences. Those that are relevant here are:

(a) Whether actual children were used in the creation of the material;

(b) The nature and content of the material, including the age of the children and the gravity of the sexual activity portrayed;

(c) The number of images or items of material - in a case of possession, the significance lying in the number of different children depicted;

(d) In the case of possession, the offender's purpose, whether for personal use or for sale or dissemination;

(e) In a case of dissemination/transmission, the number of persons to whom the material was disseminated/transmitted.

64. So far as the access offence is concerned, it involves three images which are at the lowest level of the CETS scale. As with all child pornography, its access or possession remains serious, because without people accessing and possessing such images, the market disappears and there is no need for the exploitation, degradation, violation and abuse of children: R v Liddington (1997) 18 WAR 394 at 403; R v Gent [2005] NSWCCA 370; (2005) 162 A Crim R 29.

65. The offence, while a serious offence in itself, is at the lowest end of the spectrum for such offences.

66. The possession offences involve text-based child pornography. No real children were used in the creation or use of the pornography. Thus, no children were directly harmed. In R v Whiley [2010] NSWCCA 53 at [66]- [68], the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal referred to the basis of the effect of such material by reference to what had been said by McCombs J in the Ontario Court (General Division) in R v Paintings, Drawings and Photographic Slides of Paintings (1995) 30 CRR (2d) 124

The evil of child pornography lies not only in the fact that actual children are often used in its production, but also in the use of which it is put. Although behavioural scientists disagree about the reliability of scientific studies, there is general agreement among clinicians that some paedophiles use child pornography in ways that put children at risk. It is used to 'reinforce cognitive distortions' (by rationalising paedophilia as a normal sexual preference); to fuel their sexual fantasies (for example, through masturbation); and to 'groom' children by showing it to them in order to promote discussion of sexual matters and thereby persuade them that such activity is normal.

67. None of the material is suggested by the Crown to have been shown to children or directly involved them. It is, of course, not known what motivated the other party to the chats and how they reacted to their involvement or with what consequences.

68. The number of logs possessed is a very significant number and they have been in his possession for quite some time. They also reached the highest level of seriousness on the CETS scale, including references to sadism and bestiality.

69. The Crown submitted that Mr Lanham had a high level of interest in the material possessed, but I am not satisfied that this was so. There is no evidence of any sexual gratification by Mr Lanham and the evidence that there is suggests to the contrary. I accept, however, that his continued possession was at least curious, though I can accept, on the basis of the explanation he gave as to the motivation he had, that the records were a kind of trophy for him. I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that his purpose was an aggravating feature.

70. The transmission offences were on each occasion only to one person and, in fact, the recipient was an undercover police officer. That is no mitigation.

71. The offences were part of a course of conduct over a lengthy period and this makes them the more serious.

72. It does not seem to me that, apart from the images in the access offences, there are no actual victims to consider.

73. Mr Lanham entered a plea of guilty at the first opportunity. That is very much to his credit and entitles him to a discount on the sentence to be imposed.

74. He also co-operated with the police, providing access to his computer, including providing the password, and made admissions in the interview they conducted with him.

75. I have set out Mr Lanham's personal circumstances above and I take them into account.

76. I have also addressed the seriousness of the offences and that inevitably requires a deterrent sentence. I do not consider that, with appropriate consequences for which I will make provision, specific deterrence need play a significant role in sentencing Mr Lanham, though general deterrence, denunciation and punishment remain very relevant considerations that must form part of the sentence imposed.

77. Mr Lanham has been assessed as at a low risk of re-offending and this is an important factor. The Crown submits that he has shown limited insight into his offending. I would prefer to describe it as "evolving insight". That is, he clearly had no concept when engaged in these activities of the seriousness of what he was doing. His arrest has become a significant trigger for a realisation that, in his words, what he was "sordid" and "absurd". These are, perhaps, at the lower end of the proper description for the activities in which he engaged, but it is a far cry from his complete ignorance of the impropriety that pervaded his approach prior to his arrest. That it was merely fantasy did not in any significant degree suggest to him the seriousness of the conduct, which he is now starting to understand.

78. I also take into account Mr Lanham's good character which, while still relevant, has a somewhat limited effect as explained in R v Cooper [2012] ACTCA 9 at [46].

79. I accept that there is some extra-curial punishment that Mr Lanham will suffer through the closure of his business, though in the circumstances, this can have very limited effect.

80. I also note that police first attended at Mr Lanham's business on 10 December 2012, nearly eighteen months ago and that, as prior to that time, he has not since come to the attention of police.

81. The Crown submitted that the offences were at the lower to mid-range objective seriousness, an assessment with which I do not disagree.

82. I accept, too, that there is a need for at least partial accumulation between the offences for they are separate, though there are some common elements, for which I must ensure that Mr Lanham is not punished twice. See what Buchanan JA, with whom Nettle JA agreed said in R v Fulop [2009] VSCA 296; (2009) 236 FLR 376 at 379; [11]- [12].

83. I have been assisted by some comparable sentences described in a number of other cases. For example, there is much that is similar in Director of Public Prosecutions v Langsford (Unreported, Victorian County Court, Punshon CCJ, 8 March 2013), Director of Public Prosecutions v Dawson (Unreported, Victorian County Court, Mullaly CCJ, 11 April 2013) and R v Shelford [2013] NSWDC 102.

84. While the decision in R v Bolbot [2013] SASCFC 110 left undisturbed a more serious sentence in somewhat similar circumstances, there were, in my view some significant differences and I do not consider that it mandates an immediate custodial sentence. The same applies in respect of Dodge v The Queen [2002] WASCA 286; (2002) 134 A Crim R 435 and R v Whiley where, again, there were distinguishing features.

85. I note that Mr Lanham has been assessed as suitable for a community service work condition of a good behaviour order and that there is work available to him.

86. I also note that he has been assessed as suitable for periodic detention.

87. I consider, however, that the only sentence appropriate to the offending is a prison sentence.

1. I convict you of intentionally possessing child pornography on 20 December 2012.

2. I sentence you to fifteen months' imprisonment from today. Had you not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced you to twenty months' imprisonment.

3. I suspend that sentence today for a period of three years.

4. I require you to sign an undertaking to comply with the offenders good behaviour obligations under the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT) for a period of three years with the following conditions:

(a) a probation condition that you be under the supervision of the Director-General or her delegate for a period of two years or such lesser period that the person delegated to supervise you considers appropriate;

(b) that you obey all reasonable directions of the person delegated to supervise you especially as to your participation in therapy or counselling to address sexual offending;

(c) that you report to the office of ACT Corrections at Eclipse House, London Circuit, Canberra City on or before 4:00 pm on Monday 28 April 2014;

(d) that you perform one hundred and fifty hours of community service work within twelve months from today.

5. I convict you of using a carriage service to transmit material which was child pornography material between 24 October 2012 and 31 October 2012.

6. I sentence you to twelve months' imprisonment to commence on 24 November 2014, that is to be cumulative as right months on the sentence for possessing child pornography. Had you not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced you to sixteen months' imprisonment.

7. I order that you be released upon giving security in the sum of $1,000 to be of good behaviour for a period of three years from today and that you be under the supervision of a probation officer appointed by the Director-General for a period of two years from today or such lesser period as the person appointed to supervise you considers appropriate and that you obey all reasonable directions of the person appointed to supervise you.

8. I convict you of using a carriage service to access material that is child pornography between 25 October 2012 and 5 November 2012.

9. I sentence you to three months' imprisonment to commence on 24 October 2015, that is to be cumulative as to two months on the sentence for using a carriage service to transmit child pornography. Had you not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced you to four months' imprisonment.

10. I order that you be released upon giving security in the sum of $300 to be of good behaviour for three years from today.

I certify that the preceding eighty-eight (88) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Acting Chief Justice Refshauge.

Solicitor for the Crown: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

Solicitor for the defendant: Ben Aulich & Associates

Nudity, surreptitious images showing underwear/nakedness, sexually suggestive posing, explicit emphasis on genital areas, solo urination

Non-penetrative sexual activity between children or solo masturbation by a child

Explicit sexual activity not involving an adult

Non-penetrative sexual activity between child(ren) and adults

Mutual masturbation and other non-penetrative sexual activity

Penetrative sexual activity involving child(ren) or both child(ren) and adult(s)

Including, but not limited to, intercourse cunnilingus and fellatio

Sexual imagery involving pain, humiliation or animals

Any animation, cartoon, drawing or computer generated imagery depicting any of the CETS scales (1 - 5)