Director of Public Prosecutions v Watson (a pseudonym)

[2025] VCC 117

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

AT WARRNAMBOOL

CRIMINAL DIVISION

 Revised
Not Restricted
 Suitable for Publication

Case No. CR-24-01157

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

 BRADLEY WATSON (A PSEUDONYM)

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE WRAIGHT
WHERE HELD:	Warrnambool
DATE OF HEARING:	5 February 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	13 February 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Watson (a pseudonym)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 117

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW – Sentencing.

Catchwords:              Plea of guilty – Sexual penetration of a child under 16 years – No prior criminal history – Historic offending – Relationship of genuine affection– Reduced moral culpability – Excellent prospects of rehabilitation. 

Legislation Cited:      Crimes Act 1958 s 45(1); Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 s 11A.

Cases Cited:DPP v Dalgliesh (a Pseudonym) [2016] VSCA 148; Clarkson v The Queen (2011) 32 VR 361; DPP v Bahaja and Heathcote [1998] 4 VR 540.

Sentence:                  Imprisonment for a period of 2 years, wholly suspended for a period of 2 years.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Ms C Duckett (Plea) Mr P Ironside (Sentence)	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr R Casey	Melville Orton and Lewis Solicitors

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

1Bradley Watson,[1] you have pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual penetration of a child under 16 years contrary to s 45(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.

[1]A pseudonym.

2You have no prior criminal history.

Circumstances of the offending

3A prosecution opening was tendered on the plea and may be summarised as follows:

4The victim in this matter is Vanessa Pocock[2] who at the time of the offending was 14 years of age. She is now 35.

[2]A pseudonym.

5You are now 40 years of age; you were 18 and 19 at the time of the offending. Your ex-partner is the victim in this matter.

6You and the victim met in 2003 through mutual friends. Afterwards, you and the victim would speak and meet up with one another. This included the victim going to your then residence located.

7The relationship developed into one of an intimate nature. You engaged in consensual sexual intercourse at the victim’s then residence.

8At some stage, you moved into the victim’s then family home, for about three months. The intimate relationship continued between you both. You engaged in consensual sexual intercourse whilst residing at the victim’s family home.

9Throughout this period, you were aware of the victim’s age (14 years) and that she was in Year 9 at high school.

10You have pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual penetration of a child under 16, with Charge 2 being a rolled-up count comprising of two occasions. For the avoidance of doubt, the prosecution case is that the sexual relationship was ongoing between you and complainant between 1 January 2003 and 27 June 2003, however the prosecution does not rely on any further charged acts beyond those alleged on the indictment.

Circumstances of Charge 1

11Between 1 January 2003 and 28 February 2003, you and the victim were at your then residence.

12Whilst together in your bed, you introduced your penis into the victim’s vagina. You were not wearing protection and ejaculated inside of the victim.

13The victim described the encounter as painful stating: ‘I remember the pain when he inserted his penis into my vagina … I remember it just being so uncomfortable, but I just wanted to please him’.

14At the time of this offending, the victim was 14 years of age, and you were 18 years of age.

Circumstances of Charge 2

15Between 1 January 2003 and the 27 June 2003, you moved into the victim’s then family home, for about three months. The victim was 14 years of age, and you were 19.

16During this period, on a date between 1 March 2003 and 31 March 2003, you and the victim were lying in bed at night together cuddling. You started touching the victim by moving your hands down towards her vagina. The victim was wearing underwear, but you reached underneath and introduced your finger into her vagina (Charge 2).

17Shortly after, the victim was sitting on top of you, and you introduced your penis into the victim’s vagina. You were not wearing protection and ejaculated inside of her (Charge 2 continued).

18In June 2003, the victim was constantly unwell, vomiting and suffering nausea. Her mother suspected that the victim may be pregnant. A pregnancy test later confirmed the victim was pregnant with your child. The victim’s mother and father decided the pregnancy would be terminated.

19On 27 June 2003, the victim underwent a termination of the pregnancy at the Geelong Hospital. It was noted that the gestational age of the foetus was thirteen weeks. This pregnancy is attributed to Charge 2 on the indictment.

20Afterwards, contact between the victim and you ceased until the complainant turned 16 years old; you reconnected with the victim, and a consensual sexual relationship resumed. The victim soon fell pregnant. The relationship broke down but in December 2005, she gave birth to your son Elijah.[3]

[3]A pseudonym.

Arrest and interview

21On 12 April 2022, the victim attended the police station and disclosed historical sexual offending perpetrated by you to Sergeant Joshua Coombs. She provided a statement on 4 July 2022 in relation to the offending.

22On 24 October 2023, you attended the police station for a formal record of interview conducted by Detective Senior Constable O’Brien and Detective Senior Constable Lee Brown.

23Upon your arrest, you told investigators that you had an 18 year old son, with the victim and said, ‘What’s the problem. I’ve done nothing wrong’.

24You sought legal advice prior to being interviewed  and answered ‘no comment’ to all questions asked by investigators during the formal record of interview.

Nature and gravity of offending

25Sexual offending against young people is inherently serious. It is well settled that the absolute prohibition on sexual activity with a young person is founded on a presumption of harm.[4] However each case must be assessed on its own facts and in this instance the circumstances in which the offending occurred, are relatively unique.

[4] DPP v Dalgliesh (a Pseudonym) [2016] VSCA 148, [47], referring to Clarkson v The Queen (2011) 32 VR 361, [3].

26The victim was aged 14 at the time of the offending. In relation to Charge 1 you were 18 years of age and in relation to Charge 2, you were 19. As is noted in further detail below, you were in a relationship with the victim that commenced when you were around 18 years old, and you began staying at her family home. The victim’s mother seemed to condone the relationship, including its sexual nature. Further, you were at the time drinking heavily and would often drink alcohol with the victim’s mother in the home. The relationship ended when the victim fell pregnant and had an abortion, however you renewed your relationship two years later, once she turned 16. The victim moved in with you and again fell pregnant.

27While consent is often seen to reflect a significant age difference or power imbalance and therefore relevant to an offenders abuse of trust or authority, in this instance, the relationship was one of genuine affection, and the relationship resumed once the victim had turned 16. As noted in Clarkson v The Queen, in such exceptional cases where the age difference is relatively close and consent is a reflection of the genuine affection between the two, the court is likely to view the offence as less grave and the offenders culpability as reduced.[5] While I accept that this is one of those cases I must also take into account features of your offending including that you did not use protection, resulting in the victim falling pregnant following the conduct attributable to Charge 2.

[5] Ibid, [3]-[7].

28Considering the victim impact statement, while it cannot be said that the victim has not suffered a degree of emotional harm, I nonetheless accept that given the unique circumstances of this case, including your immaturity, your underage consumption of alcohol at the time, the fact that the relationship was consensual in nature, and that the victim’s mother allowed you to move into the victim’s home condoning the nature of the relationship, in my view demonstrates that your culpability is able to be reduced to a degree.

Victim impact statement

29A victim impact statement prepared by Vanessa Pocock was tendered and read out on the plea. I have taken the contents of this statement into account. 

30In her statement Ms Pocock details the emotional impact that your offending has had on her identifying that she has changed the way she lives and parents her teenage children. She mentions suffering from long periods of isolating depression and anxiety which has held her back from achieving consistent employment and pursuing the career she wanted.

Personal circumstances

31You were born and raised on a farm in Western Victoria in a sibship of two boys. You had a very close relationship with your older brother which matured into a close friendship into adulthood. Your brother died in 2010 in a car accident which deeply affected you and is something you are still processing.

32Your parents separated when you were approximately two years old, and you have no memory of them being together.

33Your father re-partnered shortly after, and you resided with him and your step-mother until the age of 16. You note that your relationship with your father and your step mother was positive, however report ‘not feeling good enough’ in the eyes of your father from a young age.

34Your mother also re-partnered and had two further children. You have little contact with your mother or either of your half siblings.

35You completed your secondary education up to year 10 admitting that school was not a positive experience for you and that you had trouble connecting with your teachers and peers. When you left school you were told by your father that you could no longer live at home and consequently you left the family home at age 16. After a period of ‘couch surfing’, you obtained a rental home and commenced working.

36You obtained employment in a variety of unskilled labouring roles across Victoria before returning to your childhood region to work on a farm. You then began working in construction maintenance for a telecommunications company before subsequently moving to another company to operate machinery. You demonstrate a good work ethic in your roles and report that you love your job and how it allows you to provide for your family.

37Throughout your adult life you have experienced multiple serious medical difficulties including a bowel infection, collapsed lung, and a subsequent hernia that required surgery on two occasions between 2002 and 2023. You experienced multiple complications during this first surgery and were airlifted to Geelong post-recovery as you suffered from a collapsed lung due to an infection.

38A psychological report of Dr Michael Davis dated 7 November 2024 was tendered on the plea and provides a comprehensive personal and psychological history. In your discussions with Dr Davis you report first experiencing a depressed mood at a fairly young age. When asked if you had ever experienced suicidal ideation, you state that you have had thoughts about ploughing into a tree and of not wanting to be here.

39Dr Davis opines that your psychological symptomology as expressed through clinical scales shows a person with significant unhappiness and tension. He reports that this is likely to lead to difficulties concentrating and making decisions, which when combined with your feelings of hopelessness and stress may place you at an increased risk of self-harm.

40Dr Davis further elaborates that you meet the criteria for a number of inter-related diagnoses including Major Depressive Disorder and Generalised Anxiety Disorder noting that your ‘constellation of mental health difficulties have occurred on a foundation of some maladaptive personality features that have been complicated by less than ideal childhood attachments and early-onset alcohol misuse’.

41You first began consuming alcohol at the age of 16, noting that when you left home you ‘hit drinking pretty hard’. You admit that at the time of the offending you were drinking very heavily, consuming around a slab of beer a day. You would often drink with the victim’s mother. Your drinking became problematic again early last year but you report you have now reduced your alcohol consumption to a couple of beers on the weekend. Dr Davis is of the opinion that you meet the formal criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder in early remission.

42Your relationship with the victim commenced when you were around 18 years old and you began staying at her family home. You got along well with the victim’s mother and would drink together. As noted, the relationship ended when the victim fell pregnant and had an abortion however you renewed your relationship two years later. The victim moved in with you and again fell pregnant.

43After falling pregnant the victim left for Geelong leaving you unaware if she was keeping the pregnancy. You discovered she had kept the pregnancy on the day your son Elijah was born.

44You were obstructed from seeing Elijah for many of his early years until DHS became involved and you obtained custody. Elijah lived with you and your ex-wife until he was 15 and returned to live with his mother. You are currently estranged from Elijah.

45Regarding your offending behaviour, Dr Davis further outlines that you do not meet the formal criteria for Paedophilic Disorder, noting that your offending occurred in a very particular situational context. You and the victim were in a romantic relationship at the time which resumed after the victim reached the age of 16.

46In terms of risk, Dr Davis conducted a number of psychometric tests concluding that you pose a low risk for general or sexual offending which was underscored by the fact that you have resided in the community offence free for some 21 years since the commission of the offences.

47You have been in three serious romantic relationships post offending, the first of which commenced when you were approximately 21 years old. You were married to your second partner and together you share two children whom you speak lovingly of. This marriage ended after over 15 years together which you credit to a range of relationship and communication difficulties.

48You are currently in a relationship with Ms Eileen Spokes[6] and reside together. Ms Spokes has two sons of her own who you report get along well with your own children.  In a telephone interview with Psychologist Dr Davis, Ms Spokes spoke on the nature of your relationship with her children noting that they both have ADHD and Autism and speaks of your patience for them both. In a letter provided to the court, Ms Spokes also attests to your good character explaining the support you have offered her and her children throughout her mother’s diagnosis of late stage Huntington’s disease.

[6]A pseudonym.

49A number of other character references were tendered on the plea which, taken together, present a united view that you are a kind and loving father, with your children being your number one priority.

50Your ex-wife notes your devotion to your children explaining how they miss you immensely during your shared custody.

Sentencing considerations

51Mr Casey who appeared on your behalf relied on a number of matters in mitigation.

52First is your plea of guilty. Your plea is an early plea which has saved the court the time and expense of a trial. It has also avoided the need for the victim and other witnesses to give evidence. Your acceptance of responsibility has brought the matter to an early conclusion, thereby promoting the course of justice.

53Turning to your prospects of rehabilitation, I note that apart from a very minor matter for which you received a fine without conviction when you were 19, you have no prior convictions. You have strong family support and are committed to the care of your children and the children of your partner. You have a stable work history and are highly regarded in your social circle. Relevantly, you are a low risk of reoffending, supported by the fact that this offending occurred more than 20 years ago. In all the circumstances I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as excellent.

54General deterrence is the most prominent sentencing consideration in cases such as this. While the circumstances you found yourself in at the time you offended were somewhat unique, your conduct remains prohibited criminal conduct and has the potential to cause significant harm. Others must be remined that such conduct will not be tolerated.

55While it was conceded by Mr Casey that your conduct requires the imposition of a term of imprisonment, it was submitted that in all the circumstances, the relevant sentencing considerations are able to be met by a wholly suspended sentence. Ms Duckett who appeared on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions, submitted that in all the circumstances a wholly suspended sentence is within range. In my view, the seriousness of the offending does call for a term of imprisonment however, I too am of the view that the relevant sentencing considerations can be met by a wholly suspended sentence. As noted by the Court of Appeal in in DPP v Buhagiar & Heathcote[7] in relation to the utility of suspended sentences:

Whilst the purpose of the criminal law is to bring wrongdoers to justice for the protection of the community and whilst that protection must be borne in mind as primary and paramount, there are cases where a judge may reach the view that suspension of a sentence is appropriate, not because it would be less unpleasant for the offender, but because it may be productive of reformation, which offers the greatest protection to society. A suspended sentence of imprisonment is not an unconditional release or a mere exercise in leniency. Rather it is an order made in the community's interest and generally designed to prevent re-offending. In deciding whether to suspend in whole or in part a term of imprisonment a judge is deciding whether, in all the circumstances, the offender should have the benefit of a special opportunity for reform, to rebuild his own life, or to make some recompense for the wrong done, or should have the benefit of the mercy … or for some other sufficient reason should have this particular avenue open to him, provided the conditions of the suspension are observed.

[7] [1998] 4 VR 540, 547 per Batt and Buchanan JJA (citation omitted).

Sentence

56Mr Watson, would you please stand.

57Bradley Watson, on Charge 1 sexual penetration of a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 12 months imprisonment. On Charge 2, the rolled up charge of sexual penetration of a child under 16, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. I direct that 6 months of the sentence imposed on Charge 1 be served cumulatively on the sentences imposed on charge 2 making for a total effective sentence of 2 years imprisonment. I further direct that the total effective sentence be wholly suspended for a period of 2 years.

58I am required to warn you that if you commit any offence punishable by imprisonment, whether in or outside of Victoria during the period of suspension, you will be brought back to this court to be dealt with.  In that circumstance, unless you are able to provide exceptional circumstances, the sentence will be restored and served.

59Pursuant to the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (‘SORA’), as Charge 1 and 2 are each Class 1 offences, you will be required to comply with reporting obligations for life. I note however that following the orders for sentence, you will apply for registration exemption pursuant to s 11A of SORA which I will hear as a separate application.