Director of Public Prosecutions v Maum (a pseudonym)

[2025] VCC 250

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication

AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

JAI MAUM (A PSEUDONYM)

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE BLAIR
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	1 November 2024, 12 February & 7 March 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	11 March 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Maum (a pseudonym)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 250

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing

Catchwords:              Sentencing – Imprisonment - Sexual penetration of a child under the age of 12 – Family hardship – Deportation – Delay – Class 1 Offence - Sex Offenders Registration

Legislation Cited:      Sentencing Act1991 (Vic), Migration Act1958 (Cth), Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic)

Cases Cited:Brown v The Queen [2019[ VSCA 286, Markovic v The Queen [2010] VSCA 105. Tobin (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] VSCA 180, McPherson v The Queen [2021] VSCA 33, DPP v Arnold (a pseudonym) [2021] VCC 1943, R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102

Sentence:Total effective sentence of five years and nine months imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years and two months.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Ms M. Arceri (Plea) Ms Chan (Sentence)	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr R. Chaudhuri	Paul Yale Criminal Law

HER HONOUR:

1Jai Maum,[1] following a trial by jury on 16 August 2024, you were found guilty of one charge of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 12 contrary to s49A of the Crimes Act1958. 

[1] A Pseudonym.

Circumstances of offending

2In determining the circumstances of your offending for the purposes of sentencing, I have had regard to the evidence led at trial.  Consistent with the jury verdict, I find that the jury must have acted on the following factual basis. 

3Your offending occurred when you were aged between 40 and 43 years.  The victim, Ella Fahey,[2] was born in 2015 and was between the ages of 4 and 6 years and lived with her family. You had known the victim's father since 2014 as you had worked for him as an electrician whilst in Malaysia. Both families moved to Australia in approximately 2016 and are both part of the Hakha Chin community living in the south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne.  Your children attended the same primary school as the victim, and you were known to the victim as 'Bubba Ong' or 'Uncle'.

[2] A Pseudonym.

4In approximately 2020, the victim's parents purchased a table tennis table to assist one of their sons who has cerebral palsy.  The table was set up in a double garage which was next to a double carport at their family home.  The victim's family allowed access to the garage and the table tennis table to the Hakha Chin community.  You would visit the victim's house from time to time for this purpose.

5On about two or three occasions when you were at the victim's home and no-one else was around, you asked the victim to come to you and put your penis in her mouth.  This occurred in both the garage and the carport at both day and night-time.  The victim could not remember any specific details about these occasions.  This evidence was led as tendency evidence at trial and provides context to your offending.

6Between 18 August 2019 and 22 January 2022, you were at the victim's home during the day to play table tennis.  The victim was inside watching TV and some of her siblings were also at home.  Her parents were at work delivering Uber Eats. You called the victim to the garage which did not contain the table tennis table where you were listening to music.  The victim went into the garage where she was alone with you.  At the time you were wearing black jeans, black shoes and a T-shirt and sitting on a chair. 

7You asked the victim to come over to you and showed her your penis.  You used your hands to open her mouth and put your penis inside.  The victim described this as being 'similar to sucking ice-cream' and described your penis as 'kind of hard'.  After some time you stopped, and the victim went back inside.

8On 23 January 2022, the victim's 17-year-old brother, Patrick,[3] was at home in the living room with the victim.  The victim told her brother words to the effect 'that Bubba Ong makes me suck his dick'.  Patrick asked if she was telling the truth and said there would be problems if she was lying.  The victim responded by saying that 'yes, I am telling the truth and it happened a week ago'.  Patrick told her that they needed to tell their parents. 

[3] A Pseudonym.

9At about 7.30 pm, Patrick had a further conversation with the victim where she said 'Kapa Ong asked me to come over and suck his dick'. Patrick relied 'did you do it?' and the victim said 'yeah I did'. She also told Patrick that he was the first person that she had told. 

10At about 8:00PM, the victim's mother came home, she was washing the dishes in the kitchen when the victim came in and spoke to her in Hakha Chin language.  The victim said words to the effect that 'Kapa Ong made me suck his penis several times and pushed my head towards him.  He told me not to tell my parents and I wasn't ready, but now I'm ready.’  She could not remember how many times it happened, but it was more than two and it didn't happen today or yesterday. 

11The victim's mother told her father, and the police were called.  The victim also spoke with her father and told him 'Kapa Ong opened his pants and told me to touch his penis with my hand and put his hands on the back of my head and pushed my head into his penis and into my mouth.  Kapa Ong licked my vagina in the carport'.

12Your wife and her brother attended the victim's home and spoke to the victim in the presence of her mother.  When your wife asked the victim what happened, the victim told her words to the effect 'that you had asked her to suck your penis and that it happened three or four times'. When the police arrived at the house, your wife and her brother were present but left shortly after. 

13A policewoman spoke to the victim who said there was some sort of abuse and that 'you had pulled down your pants and made her suck on your pee pee and that it happened about a week ago'.  This conversation and some of the other conversations were recorded on body worn camera and played to the jury.

Victim impact statement

14The court received a victim impact statement from the victim's mother who described that she felt shocked, sad and angry when she found out about your crime.  These feelings were made worse because what was done was by a person that was trusted by her family.  The victim's mother is constantly worried about what others think of her daughter and has had emotional difficulties and problems sleeping. 

15Your offending has caused her and her family to have limited engagement with Hakha Chin community for the last two years.  She has felt depressed and suicidal.  It is her hope that her family can participate in the community and social activities in the future.  She is sorry for the impact of what has happened on your family and hopes the decision of the court will help to heal her family's sadness. 

16I have taken the contents of the victim impact statement from the victim's mother into account in sentencing you. 

Nature and gravity of offending

17Sexual offences against children are among the most abhorrent, depraved and serious matters heard by the courts.  The law is clear that protection of children from exploitation by those with more power and maturity is a paramount consideration for our community.  All sexual offences against children carry with them a presumption of long-term and serious harm both physical and psychological.[4]  The charge of sexual penetration of a child under 12 is punishable by 25 years' imprisonment.  This is the yardstick by which the gravity of your offending is to be measured.

[4]Clarkson v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157.

18In formulating an appropriate sentence, I must have regard to the particular nature of your offending.   Your victim was very young, aged between 4 to 6 years.  You were in a position of trust, having a brother-like relationship with her father and an uncle-like relationship with the victim.  You offended at the victim's home where she ought to have been safe.  Further, what you did was not isolated, but rather occurred against a backdrop of at least two uncharged acts.  You do not fall to be sentenced for such acts, however they add context to your offending and it cannot be said that your offending occurred on a one-off occasion.

19I accept that your offending lacked aggravating features sometimes seen with offending of this type.  Specifically, your offending did not involve any threats, any force, physical injuries or additional violence.  Further, there was no additional vulnerability of the victim such as a cognitive impairment and there was only one victim. 

20In my view, your offending is very serious.  You were significantly older than the victim and you abused your position of trust and power.  In light of the jury verdict, I consider your moral culpability to be high. 

Standard sentencing

21The charge of sexual penetration of a child under 12 has a standard sentence of 10 years' imprisonment.  The standard sentence only takes account of the objective factors affecting the relative seriousness of the applicable offence.  Standard sentences are to be taken into account as legislative guideposts in the sentencing process. 

22In considering the impact of standard sentencing on your case, I have considered the decision of Brown v The Queen.[5]  In particular, when sentencing for a standard sentence offence, I must take the standard sentence into account as one of the factors relevant to sentencing. The standard sentence is not to be viewed as a starting point and it does not affect the established instinctive synthesis approach to sentencing.  It does not require or permit two-stage sentencing and does not otherwise affect the matters which I may or must take into account in sentencing.  Accordingly, I have taken the standard sentence detailed above into account as one of the factors to consider in my instinctive synthesis of all of the relevant factors and I will reflect this in the sentence I impose. 

[5] (2019) 59 VR 462.

23Further, so far as consideration of current sentencing practices are concerned, section 5B(2)(b) of the Sentencing Act requires the court, when considering current sentencing practices for a standard sentence offence, to only consider sentences previously imposed where the relevant offence was subject to the standard sentencing scheme.[6]

[6]Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s. 5B(2)(b).

Personal background

24I turn now to your personal circumstances.  You were born in 1978 in a village in Myanmar and are a part of the Hakha Chin ethnic group.  As Christians, your parents were part of a minority group who experienced persecution, discrimination and other mistreatment. You were born at home and fortunately there were no complications with your birth.  Your parents were hardworking and religious people with whom you enjoyed a good and supportive relationship.  Your village survived by farming and fishing. 

25Of the six children in your family, you are the eldest. You attended school until Year 8.  Academically, you struggled with English and maths, but you had good relationships with other students and teachers and did not get into trouble.  You were unable to stay at school as it was expected that you would care for your younger siblings and support them to obtain an education. You left school and took up this role as caregiver and you felt proud that your siblings were able to achieve an education. 

26In addition, you worked in farming, fishing and construction.  Most of your income went to your parents for the support of the family. Whilst in Myanmar you met and married your wife.  She is also from the Hakha Chin community. 

27From time to time the Burmese military would come to your village.  They would force the villagers including yourself to be porters and to carry their belongings.  You had to do this on two occasions when you were younger for two days on each occasion.  During that time, you were given no food and only allowed a small amount to drink.  You were very scared of the military and at times they would kick and hit you and tie up your hands.  The Burmese military were known to kill other villagers that they had captured, and this knowledge added to your fear. 

28Shortly after this experience, at the age of 29, you were in fear of your life, and you fled to Malaysia with your wife.  Your journey to Malaysia was very difficult and took over one month.  At times during the trip you felt that you might die and relied on prayer for courage to cope.  Upon arrival in Malaysia, you registered as a refugee with the United Nations.  Your refugee status was not approved until three years later. During the intervening period you had no rights to access healthcare and limited legal standing.  Your brother had been arrested and sent back to Myanmar and you worried that this would also be your fate. 

29In total, you spent six years in Malaysia living in a community of Chin refugees.  After a time, you were able to rent a room and gained work as an electrician.  You did not have skills or training but learnt the work from others.  At night you worked in a restaurant.  Despite your hard work, there was often not enough money to support your family.  At these times, you and your family relied on the Chin community. 

30Eventually in 2016 you and your family were accepted into Australia.  You spent three months unemployed and undertook English classes at this time.  You then obtained employment in a furniture factory where you worked for three years.   This work was heavy and hard, and you damaged your shoulder, requiring surgery. You were unable to continue in this work, so you moved to caravan building and obtained employment painting caravans.  Again you worked in this vocation for three years.  Your work ceased as a result of COVID.  Fortunately, you were able to get work in a metal factory and at the time of your remand, you had been working there for around four years.  You have always been the sole breadwinner and financial provider for your family.  In addition, you would support your extended family by sending money to them in Myanmar. 

31In 2021, the village and your parent's house were bombed and destroyed.  In total, 11 people died including some of your family.  Your parents and three of your younger brothers now live in refugee camps.  They have little food, poor shelter and limited access to much needed healthcare.  Both your mother and father are elderly, and your mother is in particularly poor health.  You continued to support your family in Myanmar by sending them what money you could. 

32As I have mentioned, you married your wife whilst you were still living in Myanmar.  You now have a son and daughter who are young teenagers.  Your wife does not enjoy good health and has been diagnosed with cardiomyopathy.  This condition afflicted her sister who passed in 2019.  In 2020, your wife had a defibrillator inserted to assist with her heart health.  When in the community, you are effectively the sole financial provider for your family.  This includes paying the mortgage for your home which you purchased in 2022.  In addition, given your wife's ill-health, you have also been very active within the home, cooking, cleaning and caring for your wife and children.

33I turn now to matters in mitigation. 

Family hardship

34Your counsel, Mr Chaudhuri, relied on the exceptional family hardship that would result from your incarceration.  He submitted that you were the sole or major breadwinner in your family and your wife would be unable to financially support herself and your children in your absence.  Documents from Centrelink and tax returns were tendered to support this submission. I accept that your wife and children will suffer financial hardship as a result of your incarceration.  They will no doubt be relying on Centrelink benefits and community support. 

35Further, your counsel submitted that your wife was in poor health and would struggle to care for your teenage children without your support. Mr Chaudhuri conceded your wife had community support but submitted that she did not have family support to assist her in this regard. I note on your plea at least 50 members of the Hahka chin community attended to support you and your family.  A patient health summary from your wife's GP was tendered which briefly documented her current medication and active past history of medical complaints, some of which I have already referred. 

36On the state of the evidence before me, I accept that hardship would result as a consequence of your incarceration and consequent separation from your wife and your children, but I do not consider that this rises to the level of exceptional circumstances required for the exercise of mercy.  I do however take such hardship into account in a general way.

37As discussed during the plea hearings, and as the Court of Appeal made clear in the case of Markovic,[7] the effect upon an offender of such hardship can cause any term of imprisonment to be more burdensome.  I accept that in your case, such a burden has occurred and is likely to continue throughout your term of imprisonment.  Dr Emily Stevenson, from Forensicare, in her report dated 28 January 2025, detailed that not being able to provide for your immediate or extended family has caused you significant stress.  You have struggled with feelings of sadness and worry and have had difficulty sleeping.  You have coped with your situation by phoning your wife and praying together and reading your bible.

[7] Markovic v The Queen [2010] VSCA 105.

38I note that Dr Stevenson also describes that you have a lengthy history of providing for others.  First, as the eldest child in your family.  Next, in the refugee camps of Malaysia and also here in Australia.  You not only provide for your own wife and children, but also your family overseas.  I accept in these circumstances that you have a strong history as a family provider and that your incarceration has resulted in you suffering significant worry for the welfare of your family.  Further, I accept that the anguish you now suffer as a result of being unable to care for your wife, your two teenage children and your parents and siblings overseas is something I can take into account as a mitigating factor.  I am satisfied that this will make the experience of prison more burdensome for you.[8]

[8] Ibid [20].

Delay

39You first became aware that this matter had been reported to police on the night the victim first complained to her parents on 23 January 2022.  You were interviewed in October 2022 and charged in March 2023.  You were committed for trial in August 2023 and after all pretrial procedures in this court, a special hearing was conducted on 31 July 2024.  Your trial commenced on 7 August 2024 and concluded with a finding of guilt on 16 August 2024.  Now at the time of sentence it is over three years since you first became aware of the allegations against you.

40There are two ways in which delay is relevant to sentencing.  First, it is relevant to rehabilitation that has occurred during the delay and the effect that has in turn on specific deterrence. Second, delay is relevant in the sense of the anxiety and uncertainty or prospect of a sentence hanging over one's head during the period of delay.  This is akin to punishment itself.[9] 

[9] Rodriguez v DPP (Cth) [2013] VSCA 216 [36].

41I consider delay to be a mitigatory factor in your case.  This matter has been hanging over your head whilst you have been waiting for resolution.  I appreciate this would have made life difficult to plan and you have lived with a sense of not knowing what your future holds, particularly given the prospect that a term of imprisonment was likely to be imposed should you be found guilty for this type of offending.

42Further, I accept that you have not offended since your arrest and have otherwise been a productive member of your community.  In this, you have demonstrated the capacity for reform. 

Deportation

43Mr Maum, you are not an Australian citizen.  You are therefore very much at risk of deportation, not just because I will impose a sentence greater than 12 months, but also because of the nature of the offence for which you fall to be sentenced, that is, a child sex offence. 

44As noted previously, you have lived in Australia since 2016 when you were aged 38 years.  You came to Australia from Myanmar via Malaysia with your wife and children.  You have built a life in Australia and have significant ties and connections here.  You have worked hard whilst in Australia.  You have a house and mortgage.  You are well-entrenched in the Hakha Chin community, your local church and your children attend local schools and have spent the majority of their young lives in this country.

45As discussed at the plea hearing, a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment or more and the nature of your offence, triggers the mandatory cancellation provision of the Migration Act and places you at risk of deportation.[10]   I accept that the prospect of deportation will make the time you serve in gaol more onerous.  I also accept that deportation should it occur would constitute an additional punishment because it would destroy the opportunity for you to settle permanently in this country. The courts have recognised that the impact of deportation may vary depending on the offender's circumstances.  I consider that in your case the impact will be great.  Australia has been your home since 2016.  Your wife and your children are settled here. 

[10]Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 201.

46You cannot safely be returned to Myanmar.  You have no family or supports there.  I take into account the likely consequences and uncertainty created by the risk of deportation in your case.  I note however that such consequences cannot replace or stand as proxy for the imposition of an appropriate sentence reflecting the nature and gravity of the offending before this court.[11]

[11]Guden v The Queen (2010) 28 VR 288’ Allouch v The Queen [2018] VSCA 244; Ong v The King [2023]

VSCA 116

Mental health

47A psychological report dated 29 November 2024 authored by Alison Mynard as tendered by your counsel.  Ms Mynard detailed that you suffer psychological symptoms such as nightmares, intrusive thoughts, anxiety, anger and flight response due to the bad memories you experienced in Myanmar at the hands of the Burmese military. Over the years you have also suffered from periods of depression. 

48Ms Mynard's opinion was that you have reached the diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder and generalised anxiety disorder.  However, given that you denied the offending, Ms Mynard was not able to give an opinion as to the relationship between your mental health issues and your offending.

49Notwithstanding this, it was Ms Mynard's opinion that you will not likely cope well in custody and that your PTSD symptoms are likely to be easily triggered and your mental health is likely to become much worse.  If treatment is provided, then this could reduce the PTSD symptoms and improve your mental health. 

50Based on the RSVP risk assessment, Ms Mynard concluded that you are low risk of reoffending.

51At your initial plea hearing, I sought a further psychological report from Forensicare.  As previously mentioned, the court received a report from Dr Emily Stevenson.  Dr Stevenson conducted her assessment in an interview over Webex via a Hakha Chin interpreter.  Although the connection was good, you were seated some distance from the camera which made it difficult for Dr Stevenson to read your facial cues.  Further, Dr Stevenson had difficulty in obtaining responses from you that appropriately answered many questions she asked.  As a result, Dr Stevenson struggled to obtain a robust clinical history and cautioned that as such the contents of her report were limited.

52In this context, Dr Stevenson could not confirm the diagnosis made by Ms Mynard, however, it was her opinion that you likely have an underdeveloped sense of self given the level of age-inappropriate responsibility you encountered as a young person.  Dr Stevenson considered that you have likely developed the belief that the needs of others are more important than your own and you suppress your own emotions due to being busy attending to the needs of others.  You identify as the provider in most of your key relationships and utilise avoidance when dealing with stressors. 

53Dr Stevenson recommended that you would benefit from diagnostic exploration for PTSD and also that you would benefit from treatment with a psychologist who either speaks Hakha Chin or at least has an understanding of, or experience working with, people from minority cultures.  It was also her opinion that you should be immediately linked in with in-custody mental health supports. 

54In relation to the question of risk, Dr Stevenson also assessed you as a low risk of reoffending. 

Verdins

55Mr Chaudhuri submitted, based on the report of Ms Mynard, that limbs 5 and 6 of Verdins[12] are enlivened in your case. Ms Arceri, for the prosecution, initially conceded limb 6 of Verdins was enlivened.[13]  In her further submissions dated 12 February 2025, Ms Arceri noted that the Forensicare report did not support such a finding and, as I understand her submission, she withdrew her previous concession.  Ms Arceri did, however, submit that your background should be taken into account in a general way in considering the appropriate sentence to be imposed. 

[12]R v Verdins [2007] VSCA 102.

[13]Ibid.

56In my view, given the limitations encountered by Dr Stevenson, I prefer the opinion of Ms Mynard with respect to your mental health. On balance, I accept that your mental health is likely to mean that a sentence of imprisonment will weigh more heavily upon you than it would on a person in normal health and that imprisonment is likely to have a significant adverse effect on your mental health.  Further, I accept that your history of persecution and suffering, and your background generally, must be taken into account by me in the sentencing process. 

Burden of imprisonment

57In addition to the burden of imprisonment brought about by your worry for your family, deportation and mental health, I accept that you are also likely to encounter further difficulties as a result of your general isolation and limited ability to communicate in English. Although you have been placed near another Hakha Chin speaking prisoner, your ability to access services, counselling and general connections within the prison are compromised by your limited ability to speak English language. 

58In this regard, I have received a letter from the Assistant Commissioner of Sentence Management and an attachment which details Corrections' policy for dealing with prisoners from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.  Notwithstanding the best efforts that are made and the fact that interpreters are provided for important meetings, the reality is that on a day-to-day basis you will not have access to such support.  I note you are undertaking English language studies.

Good character

59At your first plea hearing, a letter from Pastor Hung[14] dated 31 October 2024 was tendered.  Pastor Hung spoke of your concern for the welfare of your family.  Further, he stated that he had never known you to display interpersonal violence or behaviour either within the church community or elsewhere.  Pastor Hung recognised that you had worked as a church volunteer, cooking, cleaning and helping at youth camp.  He considered you to be a good church member. 

[14] A Pseudonym.

60At your second and third plea hearings, it was apparent that you had considerable support from the Hakha Chin community.  In the vicinity of 50-60 people attended court on each occasion to support you and I note that they are present again today for sentence. Last Friday I heard from one of the deacons from the church, Although he did not know the precise details of the charge that you had been found guilty of, he was aware that it involved sexual offending against a child.  Notwithstanding the finding of guilt, he told the court that you were a really good man and that you were active in the church and that you had worked really hard in fundraising for the church. 

61I take this evidence into account and note that you are otherwise a person of good character.

Rehabilitation

62In my assessment, you have very good prospects for reform.  I have based this assessment on several factors, including your previous good character, your lack of prior history, save for a previous driving offence, your strong work history, your considerable community support, your previous hard work for your church and your community, and the assessments of both Dr Stevenson and Ms Mynard that you are a low risk of reoffending.

Sentencing principles

63I consider that the relevant sentencing principles that must be applied in your case are general deterrence and just punishment.  In addition, your offending must be denounced by the court, and I do so in the strongest possible terms. Further, I take into account the principles of parsimony and proportionality.  That is, essentially, I must impose a punishment that fits the crime, and I must do no more than is appropriate to punish you.  In my view, considerations of specific deterrence, whilst still important, are lessened due to your lack of prior convictions.  I am confident that the sentence I impose will deter you from further offending.

Current sentencing practices and comparable cases

64In coming to the appropriate sentence in your case, I have had regard to the table of cases helpfully provided by prosecution counsel, Ms Arceri, and have considered the cases of Tobin, McPherson and Arnold.[15] I have been assisted by these cases in determining the sentencing landscape for cases of this kind.  I do however note that each case must be decided dependent upon its own unique circumstances.  Taking into account the nature and gravity of your offending, including the maximum penalty and the applicable standard sentence, the matters advanced in mitigation, the victim impact statement, the sentencing landscape and the submissions of both counsel, I have arrived at what I consider to be an appropriate sentence in your case.

[15] Tobin (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2021] VSCA 180; McPherson v The Queen [2021] VSCA 33; DPP v Arnold (a pseudonym) [2021] VCC 1943.

65Mr Maum, ordinarily I would ask you to stand, but just remain seated.  So in relation to the charge of sexual penetration of a child under 12, you are convicted and sentenced to five years and nine months' imprisonment.  As this is a standard sentence matter, I must impose a non-parole period which is not less than 60 per cent of the head sentence, unless I am satisfied that it is not in the interests of justice to do so.  For a combination of reasons, including the impact upon you of deportation, family hardship, your mental health, your previous good character, lack of relevant prior history and good prospects for rehabilitation, I am satisfied it is in the interests of justice to provide for a lesser non-parole period of 55 per cent. I therefore order that you serve three years and two months before being eligible for release on parole.  To be clear, I have sentenced you on the basis that you may serve every day of the head sentence I have imposed. 

66I declare that you have served 130 days by way of presentence detention. 

Sex Offender Registration

67Charge 1 is deemed to be a Class 1 offence under the Sex Offenders Registration Act.[16]  Given the circumstances of your offending, you are to be registered as a sex offender and the applicable registration period is 15 years.  There is material that the court must provide to you detailing your reporting obligations and this will be forwarded to you in due course.  This is something that I think Mr Chaudhuri and also your solicitor will need to go through with you in some detail.

[16]Sex Offender Registration Act 2004 (Vic).

68HER HONOUR:  Dr Lianching, can I thank you very much for your assistance throughout this matter, throughout the trial also. I appreciate it would have been a very difficult task for you to interpret this today.  So I thank you for your continued assistance.