Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Bremner

[2023] VCC 51

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT Melbourne

CRIMINAL DIVISION

Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

COMMONWEALTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

GRAEME BREMNER

---

JUDGE:	Her Honour Judge Davis
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	1 February 2023
DATE OF SENTENCE:	6 February 2023
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP (Cth) v Bremner
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VCC 51

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW

Catchwords:              Use carriage service to transmit child abuse material (1 charge) – possess child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service (1 charge)

Legislation Cited:      Crimes Act 1914 (Cth); Criminal Code 1995 (Cth); Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic)

Cases Cited: DPP (Cth) and DPP v Garside [2016] 50 VR 800; DPP (Cth) v James [2022] VCC 327; DPP v Adams [2022] VCC 1671; DPP v D’Alessandro (2010) 26 VR 477; DPP v Frangou [2022] VCC 1651; DPP v Paul Bradley [2022] VCC 414; DPP v Latham [2009] TASSC 101; DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215; Mouscas v R [2008] NSWCCA 181; R v Aniezue [2016] ACTSC 82; R v Asplund (2010) 216 A Crim R 48; R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89; R v Cardwell [2021] QCA 112; R v Cashin [2016] ACTSC 351; R v Gajjar (2008) 192 A Crim R 76; R v Gent (2005) 162 A Crim R 29; R v Hogan (2015) 252 A Crim R 409; R v Kennedy [2000] NSWCCA 527; R v Padberg (2010) 107 SASR 386; R v Pham [2015] HCA 39; R v Tootell ex parte AG [2012] QCA 273; R v Turvey [2017] SASCFC 28; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; Western Australia v Collier (2007) 178 A Crim R 310.

Sentence:                  Total effective sentence of 19 months’ imprisonment released after 6 months on recognisance release order with conditions

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the CDPP	Ms K Holdsworth	Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr J Barreiro	James Dowsley & Associates

HER HONOUR:

1Graeme Bremner, you have pleaded guilty to two charges under the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) (“the Code”): one charge of Use Carriage Service to Transmit Child Abuse Material, and one charge of Possess Child Abuse Material Obtained or Accessed Using a Carriage Service. The maximum penalty for each charge is 15 years’ imprisonment.

Details of Offending

2The details of your offending were set out in the Summary of Prosecution Opening on the Plea, and I sentence you on the basis of the facts contained in that document. I summarise the offending briefly.

3On 14 April 2021, police executed search warrants at your residence and on your vehicle. You were not home, however your mother and brother who were present were served with a copy of the warrant. After making enquiries and determining that you were at work at a factory premises in Mount Waverley, you were subsequently located sitting in your parked vehicle in the Endeavour Hills Shopping Centre, deleting child abuse material from your mobile phone. You were served with a warrant, and a phone in your possession was examined by police. The image gallery of the phone was open and some of the images contained files of child abuse material. You were then arrested and later charged.

4Charge 1 concerns two transmissions of child abuse material made by you via the ‘Wickr Me’ application on your phone to one person at 11:47am and 12:37am on 10 April 2021. The first transmission was of an image of a prepubescent female with a close-up view of her vagina. The image depicted the female with her legs spread apart with a white liquid around her vagina and anus. The second image was of two prepubescent girls and a young boy. The image depicted the boy lying on his back on a bed with one of the females straddling the boy with his penis inserted into her vagina, with the second female with her head placed near the first female’s chest.

5Charge 2 concerns child abuse material located on your mobile phone. The material comprised 238 images and 154 videos. Of the 154 videos, 48 were unique. According to the Interpol Base 4 Tier Categorisation System, the material was classified as follows: 141 Category 1 images; 15 Category 1 videos; 97 Category 2 images, and 39 Category 2 videos.

6The images included:

(a)   Children and infants with the focus on the genital or anal region of the person depicted;

(b)   Children and infants in sexual poses including being intimate together;

(c)   Adults urinating on children;

(d)   Children masturbating including using implements to penetrate themselves;

(e)   Children masturbating adults;

(f)    Adults performing fellatio/cunnilingus on children;

(g)   Children performing fellatio/cunnilingus on adults;

(h)   Children engaging in sexual acts with each other including masturbation and fellatio/cunnilingus;

(i)    Adult males ejaculating over a child’s face and children with ejaculate over their bodies;

(j)    Adults digitally penetrating children vaginally and anally;

(k)   Penile penetration of children by children;

(l)    Penile penetration of children both anal and vaginal by adults;

(m)     Penile penetration of adults by children;

(n)   Penile penetration of infants by adults;

(o)   Vaginal penetration of infants using implements;

(p)   Adults performing fellatio/cunnilingus on infants;

(q)   Children masturbating and performing fellatio on animals;

(r)   Canines performing cunnilingus on children including whilst one child is restrained with straps and hands tied; and

(s)   Canine performing cunnilingus on adult whilst children are watching.

7The videos included footage of:

(a)   Naked children in sexual poses;

(b)   Children masturbating including the use of implements;

(c)   Children masturbating adults;

(d)   Adult male urinating on naked child in bath;

(e)   Children performing fellatio on adults including adult ejaculating in child’s mouth;

(f)    Children performing fellatio on children;

(g)   Adults performing fellatio/cunnilingus on children; and

(h)   Penile penetration of children both anal and vaginal by adults.

Record of Interview

8After your arrest, you participated in a record of interview and made a number of admissions, including that you understood that possessing child abuse material is against the law; that you possessed child abuse material on your phone obtained through ‘Wickr’; and that you were in the process of deleting child pornography from your phone when approached by police. You said that the images and video files on your phone include sexual penetration of adults with children, and children with children, as well as animals with children. You also told police your account names and passwords, as well as what details you could remember about those you communicated with. During the interview, you also expressed regret and shame for your actions, stating ‘I hate myself’.

9You also told police that you:

(a)   Came to have the child pornography files on your phone by receiving it from “other contacts” on Wickr, and you then saved it on your mobile phone;   

(b)   Access child pornography on Wickr sometimes every day, other times only two, three times a week;

(c)   Last received an image of child pornography the previous day;

(d)   Have been interested in child pornography for 3 – 4 years and particularly in the last 12 months;

(e)   Do not have any contact with children;

(f)    Do not believe that the people you engage with online are children;

(g)   Believe the people you chat with on Wickr are adult males in their fifties and older;

(h)   Were introduced to Wickr through a Facebook group called ‘Silver Daddies’;

(i)    Have met up with adults you met through Wickr to have sex and watch child pornography; and

(j)    First watched child pornography in your early twenties and then there was a very long break where you did not watch it until you became involved with Silver Daddies.

Guilty Plea

10You entered a plea of guilty at the first committal mention on 30 July 2021. You are on bail pending sentencing. You have not reoffended since being arrested.

Legal Principles

11For Commonwealth child sex offences committed after 23 June 2020, there is a statutory presumption that offenders will serve some period of actual imprisonment unless there are exceptional circumstances that justify the offender being released immediately forthwith on a Recognizance Release Order (‘RRO’).[1]

[1]        Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 20(1)(b)(ii).

12This amendment to the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) is intended to ensure “that child sex offenders receive sentences that reflect the exceptionally serious nature of their crimes”,[2] and is consistent with the position of intermediate appellate courts that have repeatedly recognised that a term of immediate imprisonment will usually be expected for offending of this type.[3]

[2]        Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures)

Bill 2019 (Cth), Explanatory Memorandum (House of Representative), [290]-[294].

[3]R v Padberg (2010) 107 SASR 386; R v Hogan (2015) 252 A Crim R 409; DPP (Cth) and DPP v Garside [2016] 50 VR 800, 819 [62]; Priest JA at 824 – 825 [86] – [87].

13What constitutes exceptional circumstances is not defined in the legislation and no appellate court has considered this provision. In considering a like provision within Queensland’s Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), the Queensland Court of Appeal observed that:[4]

We must construe “exceptional” as an ordinary, familiar English adjective, and not as a term of art. It describes a circumstance which is such as to form an exception, which is out of the ordinary course, or unusual, or special, or uncommon. To be exceptional, a circumstance need not be unique, or unprecedented, or very rare; but it cannot be one that is regularly, or routinely, or normally encountered.

[4]        R v Tootell ex parte AG [2012] QCA 273 [18].

14General deterrence is the primary sentencing consideration for offending involving child abuse and child exploitation,[5] because there is a paramount public interest in protecting children from sexual abuse,[6] in circumstances where child abuse material is prevalent on the internet, yet hard to detect due to the anonymity  provided by the internet, and where  conduct involving the access and possession of child abuse material creates a market for the continued corruption and exploitation of children as children continue to be sexually abused and degraded to supply the market.

[5]        R v Cardwell [2021] QCA 112; DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215, [23]; DPP v D’Alessandro (2010) 26 VR

477, 483, [21] and the cases considered therein.

[6]        R v Gajjar (2008) 192 A Crim R 76, [27]; R v Aniezue [2016] ACTSC 82, [34]; R v Cashin [2016] ACTSC

351, [50]. See also R v Kennedy [2000] NSWCCA 527; R v Gent (2005) 162 A Crim R 29 (‘Gent’); R v Asplund (2010) 216 A Crim R 48, [50].

15It must be remembered that due to the nature of the internet, the evolution of remote storage devices using internet networks, the continued accessing and possession of child abuse material, and the difficulty in permanently or fully removing images from circulation, the images may be recirculated or published and stored around the world for many years resulting in re-victimising abused children.

16For this reason, personal mitigatory factors such as prior good character, age, and prospects of rehabilitation must be given less weight than might otherwise be given, as such offenders generally have similar backgrounds and are of prior good character.[7]

[7]        See also DPP (Cth) and DPP v Garside [2016] 50 VR 800; Western Australia v Collier (2007) 178 A

Crim R 310.

17Specific deterrence, denunciation, punishment, and protection of the community are also very important sentencing considerations. The Court must also consider the seriousness of the offending;[8] your plea and remorse; your personal circumstances, as well as the personal circumstances of any victim of the offence; as well as any injury loss or damage resulting from the offence.[9]

[8] Ibid ss 16(2)(d), (e).

[9]        Although none of the children abused in the material have been able to be identified, these are not

victimless crimes because the material cannot come into existence without the exploitation and abuse of children somewhere in the world: see R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89, [40]-[42].

18The objective seriousness of offending of this kind is ordinarily determined by reference to a number of factors. Firstly, the nature and content of the material, the age of the children and the gravity of the sexual activity depicted, including the extent of any cruelty or physical harm occasioned to the child or children involved in the material. On the authorities, this factor is the primary focus.[10]

[10]        See DPP v Latham [2009] TASSC 101 [35] (‘Latham’);

19Secondly, the number of items or images possessed.

20Other factors include: the length of time for which the pornographic material was possessed; the number of children depicted and thereby victimised; whether the material was for the purpose of sale or further distribution; and whether the offender will profit from the offence, which includes payment or other material benefit (such as the exchange of child pornographic material).[11]

[11]        Gent [65]; DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215 at [23].

21The offending is not mitigated by the fact that an offender did not profit from the offending, did not pay for material or to access a child abuse website or was not involved in the distribution or sale of child abuse material.

22In accordance with the High Court’s decision in R v Pham,[12] the need for sentencing consistency throughout Australia when sentencing an offender for a federal offence requires the court to:[13]

have regard to sentencing practices across the country and to follow decisions of intermediate appellate courts in other States and Territories unless convinced that they are plainly wrong.

[12] [2015] HCA 39.

[13] Ibid [43].

23There is a presumption of cumulation, unless otherwise ordered, which applies to the sentences imposed upon you.[14]

[14]        Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 19(5).

Your Personal Circumstances

24Your personal circumstances were set out in the psychological report of Peter Hanley dated 28 January 2023,[15] who assessed you for six hours over three consultations. You were born in Scotland and have five siblings. Your family migrated to Australia when you were 10 years old. You struggled academically at school, and left school mid-way through Year 10. You then worked as a salesman at a shoe shop in Dandenong for 37 years. After that, you worked in a number of sales jobs, as well as part time at the Queen Victoria Market. At the time of the offending, you were working full time as a commercial cleaner.

[15]        Exhibit A.

25You have only had one significant relationship, marrying a female colleague from the shoe shop. That marriage was initially happy but broke down after some seven or eight years when you realised you had a sexual interest in men.

26You currently live with your elderly mother and brother, who are both aware of your offending. You have been a heavy drinker for many years, and Mr Hanley considered that you suffer from Severe Alcohol Use Disorder, which has led to your suffering from liver disease, and to your loss of your driver’s licence in mid-2021. You attended Alcoholics Anonymous meetings on two or three occasions but felt you did not need to be there. You have had some other serious health issues in the past including a blood clot (five years ago) and heart surgery last year. You are currently being managed for other medical conditions, including: peripheral vascular disease, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia.[16] Mr Hanley’s report presented you as a sad, socially detached, directionless man, of below average intelligence, with deficits in identity, intimacy, and empathy, who has withdrawn from healthy social interactions. He considered that you meet the criteria for Persistent Depressive Disorder, which may have been brought on by a leg injury you suffered five years ago. You had psychological treatment at that time. On a few occasions last year you attempted by phone to arrange psychological or psychiatric treatment, but did not persist with those attempts. Mr Hanley also felt that you presented with features of Avoidant Personality Disorders.

[16]        Report of General Practitioner Dr Nicholas Spanos dated 10 May 2022 (Exhibit B).

27You told Mr Hanley that you had been viewing child abuse material since your twenties and felt that there was no harm looking at it. You masturbated to the child abuse material and were sexually aroused by it. You fantasised that the children in the material were enjoying themselves. You told Mr Hanley that you regretted becoming involved in the online group, that having sex with children was disgusting, but looking at it “it’s just fascination”.[17]

[17] Exhibit A [47].

28Mr Hanley concluded that you meet the diagnostic criteria for Paedophilic Disorder and assessed you as a moderate risk of recidivism, which was likely to take the form of online offending in the context of social isolation, and untreated depression and alcohol problems.  He noted that you showed little insight into the relationship between your sexual interests and history, and your offending behaviour. He indicated that in order to improve your risk profile, you require sex offender treatment aimed at developing insight into your paedophilic interests and managing your sexual fantasies and behaviour according to a better understanding of child sexual development and the harmful nature of sexual violence towards children. You also require effective treatment of your depression and Alcohol Use Disorder, as well as expansion of your social support network.

29Mr Hanley expected that if imprisoned, due to your depressive symptoms and avoidant personality, you “would be particularly vulnerable to bouts of major depressive episodes and possible suicide attempts”.[18]

[18] Ibid [65](i)

Crown Submissions

30While accepting that mitigating factors include your early plea of guilty, which has spared the community the expense and inconvenience of a trial, expression of remorse, assistance to police during your record of interview, lack of prior convictions, and that you will find imprisonment more burdensome than other prisoners due to your persistent depressive disorder, the Crown submitted that Mr Hanley’s report was insufficient to make out limb 6 of Verdins.[19]

[19]        R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269.

31The Crown submitted that, having regard to the authorities, the proper application of Part 1B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) (“the Crimes Act”), and the nature and circumstances of the offending, the only appropriate sentencing disposition is a term of imprisonment involving an actual period of time to be served in custody. It was submitted that your personal circumstances do not reach the threshold of “exceptional circumstances” so as to permit a disposition involving immediate release forthwith on a RRO.

32In addition, it was submitted that some measure of cumulation between the sentences imposed on each charge is warranted to reflect the distinct and different forms of offending and the presumption in favour of cumulation in s 19(5) of the Crimes Act.

33The Crown provided a table of comparable appellate decisions from around Australia, which each involve an early plea of guilty and an offender with no relevant prior convictions. These decisions provide only a guidepost to sentencing but reflect the general proposition that a period of imprisonment is ordinarily likely to be required in cases involving child abuse material offending.

34The cases referred to in the defence submissions are not appellate court authorities, are not binding, and would only provide guidance where there are no decisions of intermediate appellate courts of assistance. That is not the case here.

Defence Submissions

35Whilst acknowledging the inherent seriousness of the offending, your counsel submitted that a number of factors reduced the objective seriousness of the offending: the number of images and videos was not particularly high; you did not seek to profit from the offending, which was not part of any organised network; the charged period covers a single day; you only interacted with a small number of people in the context of your offending; the material which was exchanged with others (charge 1) was not possessed primarily for that purpose; and that although you used an encrypted application, the offending was not overly sophisticated.

36Your counsel relied on the following matters in mitigation: you are a 65-year-old first offender who pleaded guilty to the charges upon arrest, assisted police during your record of interview; expressed remorse to them and to Mr Hanley;[20] your offending was limited in time and extent; and you have a strong work history; the candid admissions you made to police indicate some insight on your part and increases your prospects of successful rehabilitation. In addition, moderation of the sentence is required due to your depressive disorder, which enlivens both limbs 5 and 6 of Verdins.

[20]        Exhibit A [47]: “They’re only just children. Their bodies haven’t developed properly. To have sex with

them I find quite disgusting, but when you’re looking at it, it’s just fascination…I think the real reason I held onto [the CAM] was to fit in with the rest of [the group] … I knew I was doing the wrong thing keeping these images on my phone…I absolutely hate myself. I can’t believe I allowed myself to get involved in such filth. I think about it every day”.

37Your counsel submitted that the principle of totality requires some cumulation between sentences on the two charges. It was submitted that the conduct in charge 1 was not objectively very serious.

38Whilst conceding that a custodial sentence must be imposed on you, your counsel submitted that if the Court finds exceptional circumstances, the relevant sentencing purposes can be met with your being released immediately on a RRO.  Your counsel cited four recent decisions of judges of this Court, where this was the disposition.[21]

[21]        DPP v Adams [2022] VCC 1671; DPP v Frangou [2022] VCC 1651; DPP v Paul Bradley [2022] VCC

414; DPP (Cth) v James [2022] VCC 327.

39It was submitted that this case involves exceptional circumstances, because the amount of material was relatively limited; many common aggravating features are absent; and imprisonment would not assist in deterring you from your offending conduct or rehabilitating you, nor protect the community.

Analysis

40I turn first to the seriousness of your offending. I consider that the offending involved in charge 2 is a serious example of the possession offence, for the following reasons.

41Firstly, the age of the children and the gravity of the sexual activity depicted. While the volume of material may be regarded as moderate when compared with other cases, a significant part of the material itself in this case is particularly depraved.[22] All of it involved real children. It included real infants being sexually penetrated by adult males and by objects as well as children being subjected to degradation and torture, including an image of a child restrained with straps tied to her hands while a dog performed cunnilingus on her. Another video depicted adult males urinating on naked children. The nature of the material possessed has particular significance in this case given the very serious level of depravity.

[22]        Latham [35].

42Secondly, the number of images: you possessed a total of 392 images and videos with creation dates between 10 February 2017 and 1 March 2021.

43Your personal interest in the material is relevant to the assessment of the gravity of the offence.[23] You told Mr Hanley when assessed that you were sexually aroused when viewing the material and that your perception of the material was characterised by the fantasy that the children were enjoying themselves.

[23]        R v Turvey [2017] SASCFC 28, [138].

44Where the motivation for the offending arises from some degree of sexual interest, successful rehabilitation will depend on the extent to which the offender recognises a disorder and has taken steps to overcome it. In this regard, I note a number of  observations of Mr Hanley in his report dated 28 January 2023, including that you: meet the criteria for Paedophilic Disorder;  are considered to fall into the moderate risk category of future offending of a similar nature and are assessed as having a much higher risk of recidivism than that of a typical first-time offender undergoing online only charges; have demonstrated little insight into the relationship between your sexual interest and history, and your offending behaviour; and have little motivation to manage your sexual behaviour according to prosocial norms. In addition, your Severe Alcohol Use Disorder enhances your risk for sexual recidivism and while you are eager to receive support for your alcohol abuse issues, the presence of personality dysfunction and Persistent Depressive Disorder may limit your motivation to attend meetings and engage constructively in a therapeutic relationship. Finally, there are several anticipated challenges to your engagement in treatment, including potential defensiveness, difficulties trusting your treating practitioner, and difficulties expressing your emotions.

45According to Mr Hanley, the assessment of rehabilitative prospects is contingent upon future extensive sex offender treatment, none of which has been undertaken to date. However, I note that offence specific treatment to address the deviancy and motivation behind the offending is now a mandatory condition to be imposed on a RRO in the case of Commonwealth child sex offenders pursuant to s 20(1B) of the Crimes Act.

46Given the matters raised in Mr Hanley’s report, I reject your counsel’s assertions from the Bar table concerning your insight, prospects of rehabilitation and limited role to be played by specific deterrence in the sentencing process.

47Rather, on the basis of the matters outlined by Mr Hanley, I consider that due to your limited insight, your lack of sex offender treatment thus far, and your moderate risk of reoffending, that your prospects of rehabilitation are very guarded. These factors alone distinguish this case from the circumstances the subject of the appellate decisions to which I was referred by the Crown. These factors alone give specific deterrence an important role to play in the sentencing process in your case.

48I accept that the offending in charge 1 was limited to transmission of two images to one recipient over a one day period but, as a rolled up charge reflecting two discrete incidents, it involves greater criminality than a charge limited to one episode of criminal conduct. This offending involved the use of an encrypted application, demonstrating a degree of sophistication. Encrypted applications with self-deleting messages, such as Wickr, make offending more difficult for police to detect. This shows that you knew your conduct was wrong, and so increases your moral culpability. However, I accept your counsel’s submission that this offending was at the lower end of seriousness for this type of offence. 

49I accept that you have no prior convictions of any kind. For the reason outlined above at paragraph 16, less weight is to be given to prior good character as a mitigating factor.[24]

[24]        Gent [65]; DPP (Cth) v D’Alessandro (2010) 26 VR 477, 483 [21]; Mouscas v R [2008] NSWCCA 181,

[37]; Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 16A(2)(m).

50However, you are entitled to the benefit flowing from having pleaded at the earliest opportunity. Beyond the remorse which inheres in your early plea, I accept that you expressed limited remorse to Mr Hanley for the children depicted in the material who were exploited for its production. I also take into account your cooperation with police when interviewed. In addition, I consider that Mr Hanley’s conclusions are sufficient to enliven both limbs 5 and 6 of Verdins, and I take these matters into account in imposing sentence upon you.

51On the material before me, I do not consider that there are exceptional circumstances in your case which permit a disposition not involving a term of immediate imprisonment.

Sentence

52Mr Bremner, please stand.

53On charge 1, Use Carriage Service to Transmit Child Abuse Material, you are sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment.

54On charge 2, Possess Child Material Obtained or Accessed Using a Carriage Service, you are sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment.

55The total effective sentence is one of 19 months’ imprisonment. I direct, contrary to the presumption of cumulation, that one month of the sentence imposed on charge 1 be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed on charge 2. I consider this sentence to be of appropriate severity in all the circumstances of the case when taking into account your mitigating factors.

56The sentence on charge 1 is to commence from today, 6 February 2023, and the sentence on charge 2 is to commence one month later on 6 March 2023. Pursuant to s 20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act, I direct that you serve a pre-release period of 6 months’ imprisonment before you are released on a Recognizance Release Order upon giving security by recognisance in the sum of $1,000 on the condition that you are of good behaviour for a period of 2 years.

57You are also required to comply with the mandatory conditions required under s 20(1B) of the Crimes Act for a period of 2 years. These conditions include being subject to the supervision of and obeying the reasonable directions of a probation officer, not travelling interstate or overseas without written permission from a probation officer, and undertaking such treatment or rehabilitation programs reasonably directed by a probation officer.

58In addition, you are required to report to Dandenong Community Corrections by 4pm within two clear working days after your release, report to and receive visits from a Community Corrections officer, and notify an officer of any change of address or employment within two clear working days after the change.

59Finally, in order to ensure that you attend sex offender treatment to reduce re-offending, you are required to attend for assessment, and if deemed suitable, treatment for sex offending within two years.

60If you breach the conditions of the order, you may be brought back to the Court to be dealt with for that breach. One consequence of a breach is that you may be required to serve the remaining 13 months’ of the 19 month sentence imposed upon you today.

61Further, as you have committed two class 2 offences under the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic), you must comply with the reporting obligations for a period of 15 years.

62In making these orders, I will ensure that you are given written notice of your reporting obligations, and the conditions of your Recognizance Release Order.

63I indicate pursuant to s 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) that, but for your plea of guilty, the sentence I would have imposed would have been one of 2 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months’ imprisonment.