R v Bleyenberg - [2024] SADC 148

DISTRICT COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Criminal)
R v BLEYENBERG
Criminal Trial by Judge Alone
[2024] SADC 148
Reasons for the Verdict of her Honour Judge Schammer
12 November 2024
CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES
CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - PROPENSITY, TENDENCY AND CO-INCIDENCE - ADMISSIBILITY AND RELEVANCY - PROPENSITY EVIDENCE - EVIDENCE OF UNCHARGED ACTS
CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - CONFESSIONS AND ADMISSIONS - STATEMENTS - STATEMENTS MADE IN PRESENCE OF ACCUSED AND RELATED CONDUCT - PARTICULAR CONDUCT
CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - COMPLAINTS
CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - CREDIBILITY - GENERALLY
The accused is charged on Information dated 16 January 2024 with two counts of sexual abuse of a child pursuant to s 50(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 1935 (the Act).
The complainant in each count is JF, the accused’s former step-daughter.
The first count relates to alleged offending between 26 March 2012 and 31 December 2014, when JF was aged between 5 and 7 and was living with her mother, the accused and the accused’s young daughter, S, in Tailem Bend and Lucindale.
The second count relates to alleged offending between 1 December 2021 and 28 February 2023, when JF was aged between 14 and 15 and was living with the accused, S and her half-sister, C, in Murray Bridge.
JF’s mother, JM, commenced a relationship with the accused when JF was aged approximately four. Shortly thereafter they moved in to live with the accused and S in a rental property in Tailem Bend.
The accused and JM used cannabis, alcohol and methylamphetamine throughout the course of their relationship. They led an itinerant lifestyle, characterised by frequent moves.
Within a year, JF, JM, the accused and S (the family) had moved from Tailem Bend to Lucindale.
JF alleges that twice in Tailem Bend and once in Lucindale, the accused sexually abused her by indecently touching her vagina. On each occasion, he threatened to kill her if she told anyone what he had done. This is the offending in count 1.
After a short period living in Lucindale, the family moved interstate.
JF alleges that the sexual abuse continued interstate and became more invasive (the uncharged acts).
The family travelled for a period, sleeping in a tent during their travels, before settling in Queensland. They lived for short periods in Helensvale, Southport and Merrimac. With each move, JF moved schools. JF described incidents of sexual abuse in Southport and Merrimac, including an occasion in Southport, when JF was aged about seven and for the first time, the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with her.
The accused and JM purchased a caravan in Merrimac. They took JF out of school for about a year and travelled up and down the east coast of Australia, before finally settling in Mataranka, Northern Territory, where they lived on a cattle station, in their caravan. The accused and JM obtained work at the station. When the cattle season ended, they moved to Katherine, where they lived in the caravan at a Resort where JM worked.
JF described occasions when she was sexually abused by the accused in both Mataranka and Katherine, in particular, abuse that occurred when JF was at work in Katherine. This included anal intercourse.
In March 2018, JM gave birth to C, JF’s half-sister. Thereafter, the family, now including C, moved back to Queensland, where they lived in a different caravan, in Helensvale and Upper Coomera. When Covid struck, the caravan parks closed down and the family acquired emergency housing in Roma.
While in Roma, JM and the accused continued to use methamphetamine to excess. The accused’s drinking became worse. JF claims the accused gave her alcohol. The accused became physically violent towards JM.
JF described occasions when the accused sexually abused her in Helensvale, Upper Coomera and in Roma.
JM left the accused when they were living in Hervey Bay, shortly after he threw a Jim Beam bottle at her head, being an incident witnessed by JF. JM attempted to take the children with her, but the accused prevented her from doing so. JF was only 14 at this time. Thereafter, she assumed the role of mother figure within the family, cooking, cleaning and caring for the younger children.
The accused, JF, S and C then moved to Rockhampton, where they lived, at first, in a caravan and then for a short period in a villa. JF described the sexual abuse as becoming more frequent after JM left the family. The accused arranged for JF to see a doctor to be fitted with a contraceptive device. Thereafter, when the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with JF, he ejaculated inside her, as he had not done previously. JF claimed that on occasions, she was drunk when the accused abused her. She said that on one occasion, the accused gave her Ritalin, prescribed for S.
The accused then decided to return, with the three children, to South Australia. They eventually settled in Murray Bridge. JF was aged 15 and in Year 10 at high school.
JF described multiple occasions when the accused sexually abused her in Murray Bridge – in the caravan park where they first resided and then in the two homes where they lived in Owl Drive. The alleged offending included multiple occasions of penile vaginal intercourse, fellatio and digital vaginal penetration. On one such occasion, JF claims the accused gave her cannabis. This is the offending in count 2.
In November 2022, JF commenced a relationship with AW. In February 2023, JF ran away from the house in Owl Drive, to live with AW’s family. A few weeks thereafter, JF disclosed the offending to AW (the initial complaint). She reported the offending to police in late March 2023.
The prosecution relied on the uncharged acts to demonstrate that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act on that interest. The uncharged acts also served to provide context to the alleged offending in count 2, as demonstrating the progression of the sexual abuse, perpetuated by the accused against JF over time and the development of that abuse to include more serious, forceful and invasive acts.
JF also described occasions when the accused would smack her, or hit her with objects, leaving bruises or marks.
The prosecution sought to rely on alleged implied admissions and conduct said to evidence a consciousness of guilt on the part of the accused.
Part of the defence case was that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the alleged offending, namely as she was unhappy with the result of requests she made to the accused to return her personal property after she left Owl Drive and/or because the accused had banned AW from attending at Owl Drive.
In addition, it was submitted that JF’s account of certain alleged acts of sexual abuse was either implausible or impossible and/or that the Court could not be satisfied as to the reliability or credibility of her account of the alleged offending beyond reasonable doubt, having regard to various inconsistencies in that account.
The accused gave evidence denying the alleged offending and called evidence from his former girlfriend, GW.
Verdict:
The accused is guilty of counts 1 and 2.
Juries Act 1927 (SA) s 7; Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) ss 5, 49(1), 50(4)(b), 50(12), 56, 57(2); Evidence Act 1929 (SA) s 34M, referred to.
JJP v R (2021) 139 SASR 91; Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338; DPP v Roder [2024] HCA 15; R v Spencer [2019] SASCFC 70; Murray v R (2002) 211 CLR 193; R v Corrigan (1998) 74 SASR 454; Fergusson v The King [2024] SASCA 63, considered.

R v BLEYENBERG
[2024] SADC 148
[Criminal]
Introduction

The accused, Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg, is charged on Information dated 16 January 2024 with two counts of sexual abuse of a child, JF. The offending in count one is alleged to have occurred at a time when JF was aged between about five and seven. The offending in count 2 is alleged to have occurred at a time when JF was aged 14 and 15. JF is the daughter of the accused’s former partner, JM.
The accused elected to be tried by a judge sitting without a jury, pursuant to s 7 of the Juries Act 1927.
The Charges
First Count
Statement of Offence
Sexual Abuse of a Child. (Section 50(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 1935).
Particulars of Offence
Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg between the 26th day of March 2012 and the 31st day of December 2014 at Tailem Bend and Lucindale, maintained an unlawful sexual relationship with JF, a person under the age of 17 years, by engaging in two or more unlawful sexual acts with or towards her, namely:
(a)touching her genital area on more than one occasion.
Prescribed, Qualifying, Disqualification and/or Presumptive Disqualification Offence
This may be a ‘prescribed offence’ within the meaning of sections 5 and 38 of the Child Safety (Prohibited Persons) Act 2016.
This may be a ‘disqualification offence’ within the meaning of sections 18A and 18U of the Disability Inclusion Act 2018.
Second Count
Statement of Offence
Sexual Abuse of a Child. (Ibid)
Particulars of Offence
Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg between the 1^st day of December 2021 and the 28th day of February 2023 at Murray Bridge, maintained an unlawful sexual relationship with JF, a person under the age of 17 years, by engaging in two or more unlawful sexual acts with or towards her, namely:
(a)    causing her to perform an act of fellatio upon him on more than one occasion;
(b)    inserting his penis into her vagina on more than one occasion; and
(c)    touching her genital area on more than one occasion.
Prescribed, Qualifying, Disqualification and/or Presumptive Disqualification Offence
This may be a ‘prescribed offence’ within the meaning of sections 5 and 38 of the Child Safety (Prohibited Persons) Act 2016.
This may be a ‘disqualification offence’ within the meaning of sections 18A and 18U of the Disability Inclusion Act 2018.
Elements of the Charged Offences
As to each count, considered separately, for a verdict of guilty to be returned on that count, the prosecution must prove the elements of that count beyond reasonable doubt.
The four elements of the offence of Sexual Abuse of a Child are:
1.That the accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF.
2.In the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF.
3.That at the time the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF, JF was a child.
4.That at the time the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF, the accused was an adult.
JF’s date of birth is 27 March 2007.[1] The accused’s date of birth is 2 April 1984.[2] The alleged offending in count 1 is said to have occurred between 26 March 2012 and 31 December 2014 (the first relevant period). The alleged offending in count 2 is said to have occurred between 1 December 2021 and 28 February 2023 (the second relevant period).
[1] Exhibit P1.
[2] MFI P13 at p 1.
I am satisfied that during the first relevant period, JF was a child aged between 5 and 7 and the accused was an adult.
I am satisfied that during the second relevant period, JF was a child aged between 14 and 15 and the accused was an adult.
JF’s mother, JM, gave evidence, which was not challenged, that she met the accused in about May 2012 and that shortly thereafter, they started dating. JM gave evidence that about two weeks thereafter, she and JF, moved in with the accused at the home he was renting in Tailem Bend.
For various reasons, I will outline hereunder, I find that JM is slightly mistaken in terms of her recollection as to when she first met and moved in with the accused. I find that JM in fact met the accused and moved in with him, before 10 February 2012, at a time when the accused was still on home detention bail.
There is no dispute, and I find, that thereafter, JF lived with the accused at various locations until about late February 2023, during which the accused assumed the role of stepfather to JF.
There is no dispute, and I am satisfied, that during both the first relevant period and the second relevant period, the accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF.
The issue in dispute with respect to both counts is whether any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred.
An ‘unlawful sexual act’ is an act that constitutes or would constitute (if particulars of the time and place at which the act took place were sufficiently particularised), a sexual offence.[3]
[3] Section 50(12) Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (CLCA).
A ‘sexual offence’ is defined to mean:[4]
(a)an offence against Division 11 (other than sections 59 and 61) or sections 63B, 66, 69 or 72; or
(b)an attempt to commit, or assault with intent to commit, any of those offences, or
(c)a substantially similar offence against a previous enactment.
[4] Ibid.
Pursuant to s 50(4)(b) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (the Act), it is not necessary for me to be satisfied of the particulars of any unlawful sexual act as if that act had been charged as a separate offence. However, I must be satisfied as to the general nature or character of those acts.
As to each count, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the elements of the ‘sexual offences’ relied upon as rendering the alleged acts ‘unlawful sexual acts’.[5] As to count 1, those sexual offences are the offences of indecent assault. As to count 2, those sexual offences are the offences of unlawful sexual intercourse and indecent assault.
[5] JJP v R (2021) 139 SASR 91 per Doyle JA.
Indecent Assault
As to each count, the prosecution alleges that on each occasion the accused touched JF’s genital area, his conduct constituted the offence of indecent assault contrary to s 56 of the Act.
The elements of the offence of indecent assault are:
1.The accused assaulted JF.
2.The assault occurred in circumstances of indecency. It is a matter for me to consider whether the proven conduct of the accused is indecent by reference to reasonable contemporary standards. I must be satisfied that the conduct had a sexual connotation.
To prove the first element, the prosecution must prove four sub-elements:
·The accused applied force to JF.
·The accused intended to apply force to JF.
·The assault was unlawful.
·The accused knew that JF did not consent or was reckless about the absence of consent. However, as JF was under 17 at the time of each count, the law deems her incapable of consenting to such conduct.[6]
[6] Section 57(2) of the Act.
Unlawful Sexual Intercourse
As to count 2, the prosecution allege that the accused engaged in acts with JF which constitute the offence of unlawful sexual intercourse contrary to s 49(1) of the Act, namely by causing her to perform an act of fellatio upon him on more than one occasion and inserting his penis in her vagina on more than one occasion.
The elements of the offence of unlawful sexual intercourse are that:
1.The accused had sexual intercourse with JF; and
2.JF was under the age of 17 years at the time.
Sexual intercourse is defined to include any activity consisting of or involving penetration of a person’s vagina, labia majora or anus by any part of the body of another person; or fellatio; or cunnilingus.[7]
[7] Section 5 of the Act.
Summary of Prosecution Case
The prosecution case is that the offending in count 1 commenced within months of JF and JM moving in to live with the accused at Tailem Bend, when JF was aged 5. JF alleges that when she was in her bed, the accused would come into the room that JF shared with the accused’s daughter, S (who was then a baby), put his hand down JF’s pants and touch and rub her on the vagina. JF alleges that the very first time the accused did this, he told her not to tell anyone, or he would kill her. JF alleges that the accused did the same thing to her at Tailem Bend about three to four months thereafter, and again, about four months after they moved to Lucindale.
This is the offending in count 1.
The accused, JM, JF and S moved interstate in 2014, when JF was aged about six or seven. The family then lived at multiple different locations together until 2021, when JM left the accused. JF, S and C continued to live with the accused thereafter, initially in Queensland, until they returned to South Australia to live in 2022.
JF alleges that during the period she lived interstate with the accused, the sexual abuse continued, its frequency varied, but it became more frequent after she turned eight, occurring maybe four to five times in a two-month period. JF said the abuse never occurred when her mother was home, however the accused would often abuse her in her bedroom when her sisters were sleeping in the room next to her. [8]
[8] T 50.28-51.27.
JF alleges that she was seven when the accused first had penile vaginal intercourse with her and that she was nine when he first forced her to perform fellatio upon him. It is also alleged that when JF was in grade six, the accused started giving her alcohol and that he first gave her cannabis when she was 14. In addition, JF claims that the accused gave her drugs that were prescribed for S, namely Ritalin and Catapres.[9]
[9] T 40.33; T 42.23; T 134.23-24; T 137.3-4.
JF explained that when she was younger, she would tell the accused to stop when he was sexually abusing her but he would not listen. She also tried to wriggle away from him, but he would pull her and lay her on her back. She gave up trying to wriggle away when she was around eight.[10]
[10] T 52.21-33.
JF gave evidence that she got her first period a few months before she turned 14 when they were living in Hervey Bay. She said the offending continued thereafter but did not occur when she was on her period. JF explained that her periods were very irregular and sometimes would last as long as two to three weeks. JM gave similar evidence.[11] JF said the accused knew when she was on her period as he had to buy her pads, as her mum was working or at home.[12]
[11] T 263.32-263.38.
[12] T 98.15-99.2.
In about 2022, when she was living in Rockhampton with the accused, S and C, JF alleges that the accused initiated a discussion with her about the necessity for her to use contraception, so that she would not get pregnant. This was at a time she had started dating and had a boyfriend, albeit JF denied in cross-examination that she was sexually active with anyone, other than the accused, at that time.[13] Thereafter an intra uterine device (referred to by JF as a ‘bar’) was placed in her arm. After this, the accused would sometimes ejaculate inside of her, whereas he had not done that previously.[14]
[13] T 179.34-180.1. JM gave evidence that she was unaware that JF was using this contraceptive device; T 264.1-5.
[14] T 48.28-49.21; T 100.22-28.
Upon returning to South Australia in 2022, JF, S, C and the accused settled in Murray Bridge. JF alleges that while she was living with the accused in Murray Bridge, he sexually abused her on multiple occasions, including by engaging in penile vaginal intercourse with her, forcing her to perform fellatio upon him and touching her genital area. It is alleged the abuse only stopped at the end of February 2023, when JF ran away from the Murray Bridge house to live with her then boyfriend’s family. This is the offending in count 2.
Summary of Defence Case
The accused denied that any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred. Further, although not expressly outlined in the accused’s closing address, it was apparent that the accused’s case was also presented on the basis that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the offending.
Witnesses and Exhibits

The prosecution called evidence from the complainant, JF. In addition, evidence was called from:
·The complainant’s mother, JM;
·The complainant’s former boyfriend, AW;
·Professor Jason White;
·Brevet Sergeant B Wilson and
·Brevet Sergeant J Forbes.
The prosecution tendered numerous exhibits including a Statement of Agreed Facts[15] and a Further Statement of Agreed Facts.[16]
[15] Exhibit P14
[16] Exhibit P15.
The accused elected to give evidence at trial and called evidence from his former partner, GW. He tendered several exhibits, including text messages exchanged between him and JF on 20 and 21 March 2023.[17]
Legal Directions
[17] Exhibit D7.
General
The prosecution bears the onus of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. There is no onus on the accused to prove anything. It is not for the accused to prove that he did not commit the offence(s) as charged.
As to each count, the accused is presumed by law, to be innocent of the charge unless and until the evidence that I accept, satisfies me that every element of the offence has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Nothing short of proof beyond reasonable doubt will suffice.
There are two counts on the Information. I must assess these counts separately and only take into account the evidence that is relevant and admissible to the count under consideration.
As to each count, it is not sufficient for the prosecution to show a suspicion of guilt or to show that the accused is probably guilty. Before the accused is convicted of an offence, I must be satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt each element of that offence. I must reject beyond reasonable doubt the accused’s denial and any explanation(s) proffered by him.
In these reasons, if I use the words ‘proved’, ‘established’ or ‘satisfied’, I mean to a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. As to each count, considered separately, if I am satisfied that there is a reasonable explanation consistent with the innocence of the accused, or I am uncertain where the truth lies, then I must find that count has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
I must assess each witness as to their truthfulness and their reliability. I must determine whether I can rely upon the evidence that a witness gives. I can reject or accept all or a part of a witness’ evidence.
JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case as to each count. I must carefully scrutinise her evidence before I can be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of its truthfulness and accuracy.
JF gave her evidence at trial via closed circuit television, from the vulnerable witness suite and with the benefit of a court companion. The court was closed during her evidence and her evidence was recorded. JM gave evidence with the benefit of a screen between her and the accused. I must not draw any inference adverse to the accused because the evidence was admitted in this form, nor must I allow this to influence the weight given to that evidence.
Neither the complainant’s younger sister, C, or the accused’s daughter, S, were called to give evidence. I must not speculate about the nature of any evidence I have not heard. I simply do not know what evidence may have been given by any absent witness. I must decide the case only on the evidence before me.
The accused was under no obligation to give evidence. I should give him whatever credit I see fit for subjecting himself to cross-examination at trial. I must assess his evidence in the same way as I assess the evidence of any other witness. I remind myself that if I reject the accused’s evidence in its entirety, that does not bolster, nor strengthen the prosecution case. The prosecution must prove each element of the offences charged beyond reasonable doubt.
There was evidence that JF had consumed both alcohol and that the accused had been drinking alcohol in the hours immediately prior to some of the alleged offending in count 2 (and the uncharged acts).
Although there was no expert evidence on this specific issue, it is a common experience that intoxication can have an adverse bearing on a witness’ recollection of events and/or a person’s subsequent recall of relevant events. It is also a common experience that intoxication may reduce a person’s inhibitions, it may cause them to be more relaxed or more outgoing, and it may cause them to do things they may not do if they were not intoxicated.
As such, the intoxication of a witness by alcohol may affect the proper assessment of his or her reliability as a witness. It is a matter for me to make findings, based on the evidence that I have heard, as to the extent to which a witness may have been affected by alcohol and what effect that has had on their general reliability. This is particularly important in the case of JF’s evidence, as her evidence is critical to the prosecution case.
As to the making of inferences, I must not guess or speculate. There must be a logical and rational connection between the facts I find and the inferences I draw.
I must bring an open and unprejudiced mind to the case. I must make my decision without sympathy, without prejudice, or fear and must not be influenced by public opinion in relation to this matter.
Complaint Evidence
JF gave evidence that the first person she told about the alleged offending was her then boyfriend, AW. This evidence was admitted as evidence of JF’s initial complaint pursuant to s 34M of the Evidence Act 1929.
Evidence of the initial complaint made by JF is an exception to the rule which prohibits proof of prior, out of court, consistent statements. Complaint evidence is admitted to inform the trier of fact as to how the allegations first came to light and as evidence of the degree of consistency of conduct of the complainant.
Importantly, complaint evidence is not admitted as evidence of the truth of what was alleged and cannot be used as some form of independent evidence to prove what happened, as, only the evidence of the complainant as to the allegations of the specific offending against her, is able to prove that.
There may be many and varied reasons why an alleged victim of a sexual offence has made a complaint at a particular time or to a particular person. It is for me to determine the significance (if any) of the evidence in the circumstances of this case.
Forensic Disadvantage
JF’s evidence lacked specific detail insofar as she was unable to recall precisely when some of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred.
Had a timely complaint been made by the complainant, in each instance, of the alleged offending, the accused may have been able to provide a relatively contemporaneous recollection of the nature of his interactions with her at the time of each alleged unlawful sexual act. For example, he may have been able to prove that he was not present at the time of an alleged occasion (or occasions) of abuse as he was working, or away from the house/caravan for another reason.
I accept that in these circumstances, the accused has been deprived of the opportunity to properly identify the occasions of that alleged offending, to defend those allegations other than by way of a bare denial and to fully test the complainant’s reliability and credibility by reference to the surrounding circumstances of those alleged acts.
I have taken this forensic disadvantage into account when scrutinising the evidence and in assessing whether the prosecution has proved each element of the offences as charged beyond reasonable doubt.
Discreditable Conduct
Discreditable Conduct Notice dated 16 January 2024
The prosecution filed a Notice of Intention to Adduce Discreditable Conduct at trial (the Notice) whereby it advised of an intention to use certain evidence at trial for purposes which relied upon propensity reasoning.
Specifically, the prosecution sought to adduce JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending in count 1, in proof of the alleged offending in count 2, and vice versa.[18] It was submitted that, in each instance, the evidence was admissible to demonstrate that the accused had a specific sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act in furtherance of that interest.
[18] Items 1 and 2 as listed in the Notice.
There was no dispute, and I am satisfied, that the evidence as to counts 1 and 2 is relevant and cross admissible in proof of both counts.
If I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts said to comprise the conduct in count 1, I can use that evidence in my consideration of count 2 insofar as it demonstrates that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest.
Similarly, if I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts said to comprise the conduct in count 2, I can use that evidence in my consideration of count 1 insofar as it demonstrates that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest.
However, I must not use this evidence to reason that the accused is more likely to have committed any of the offences because of the multiplicity of allegations. I must not reason from this evidence that the accused is a person of bad character and is therefore the type of person who would have committed the offences and therefore he is more likely to have committed one or both of the offences.
In addition, the prosecution sought to adduce JF’s evidence of uncharged acts of sexual abuse committed against her by the accused interstate, in proof of counts 1 and 2, to demonstrate that the accused had a specific sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act in furtherance of that interest.[19]
[19] Item 3 as listed in the Notice.
I am satisfied that the probative value of this evidence outweighs any prejudicial effect it may have on the accused and that the evidence has strong probative value having regard to the particular issues at trial.
If I accept JF’s evidence as to the uncharged acts, I can use the evidence for the permissible purpose, that is, to demonstrate that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest.
The prosecution also sought to rely on the evidence of the uncharged acts to ensure the offending was considered in the full context of the accused’s interactions with JF, to show how the offending escalated over time and to demonstrate a pattern of grooming of JF by the complainant. The evidence was also relied upon to assist the Court to understand why JF did not complain about the alleged offending at an earlier time and/or why the accused was emboldened to commit brazen and serious offending against JF without fear of repercussion.
If I accept JF’s evidence as to any or all of the uncharged acts, I can use this evidence for the permissible purposes as outlined.
However, I must not use the evidence to reason that the accused is therefore more likely to have committed either alleged offence, because he has engaged in such conduct. I must not reason that because the accused is of bad character in having engaged in such conduct that he is the type of person who would have committed the offending alleged in either count.
Further, I remind myself, even if I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that any of these alleged uncharged acts occurred, I can only find the accused guilty of either count, if the prosecution has proved the specific elements of that count beyond reasonable doubt.
Other Discreditable Conduct Evidence
Evidence was led without objection, and was also the subject of agreed facts, about the accused’s criminal history. That evidence included details of his arrest (or report for) and conviction of various offences and time spent by him on remand in custody and on home detention bail. This evidence included details of the offending for which the accused was placed on home detention bail shortly prior to meeting JM (and JF).
The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to assist the Court to assess the credibility and reliability of aspects of the evidence given by the accused, JM and to a lesser extent, JF, in circumstances where the accused gave evidence that he had been compliant with his home detention bail and had been on home detention bail during some of the period the family lived at Tailem Bend.
Evidence was given by JM and the accused that the accused regularly used illicit drugs and sold illicit drugs to others from time to time. The evidence was relevant and admissible for permissible non propensity purposes, namely, to put the alleged offending into context insofar as it demonstrated the wider surrounding circumstances in which JF grew up and provided an explanation as to why it was that the family moved so frequently. In addition, the evidence was relevant and admissible to assist the Court to assess the credibility and reliability of the evidence given by both JM and the accused, given they were both often under the influence of drugs during the period that JF lived with the accused.
JF gave evidence of an occasion when the accused drove when he was drunk one New Years Eve. The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to give context to an occasion when JF alleged the accused had sexually abused her in Queensland, being an uncharged act.
JM and the accused gave evidence that during their relationship they were both in receipt of Centrelink benefits (despite living as a couple). The accused gave evidence that in Roma, they had separate bedrooms to give the impression they were not living as a couple. The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to put into context the living arrangements of the family from time to time, being relevant to a consideration of JF’s evidence as to the various acts of uncharged sexual abuse in Queensland.
JF gave evidence that the accused was physically violent towards her.
This evidence was relevant and admissible for permissible non propensity purposes, namely, to demonstrate the nature of the relationship JF had with the accused and to show the context in which the alleged offending occurred. The evidence was also relevant and admissible to explain why JF complied with his requests to perform various sexual acts (or did not resist those requests) and why she did not make an earlier complaint. It was also relevant and admissible to demonstrate why the accused was empowered to offend against JF, without fear of that offending being reported by JF.
Evidence was adduced that the accused was physically violent towards JM, that he threatened to kill JM if she took the kids with her at the time she left him and that a Restraining Order was served upon him at or about that time.
This evidence was relevant and admissible to demonstrate why JM left her relationship with the accused and why it was that for some time JF continued to live with the accused, S and C, instead of JM, after the couple’s relationship broke down. It was also relevant and admissible to demonstrate the context in which the alleged offending occurred and why it was that JF was fearful of the accused, such that she complied with his requests to perform various sexual acts (or did not resist those requests) and why she did not make an earlier complaint.[20]
[20] Although JF gave evidence that she was more scared of the accused after witnessing him be violent towards JM, she did not give evidence that this was a reason why she did not complain earlier about the offending. As such, I have not used this evidence for that particular purpose.
JF gave evidence that the accused gave her alcohol, cannabis and S’s prescription medication. This evidence was led without objection and was relevant and admissible to demonstrate the full context in which the alleged offending occurred, insofar as at times it was at times facilitated by JF being under the influence of alcohol or drugs supplied to her by the accused.
The accused gave evidence that prior to his arrest, the Department for Child Protection removed S and C from his care. This evidence was relevant and admissible to explain why the accused behaved in the way he did in the hours leading up to and immediately prior to his arrest.
If I accept some or all of the discreditable conduct evidence, I must only use the evidence that I have accepted for the permissible purpose or purposes as specified. I must not use that evidence to reason that the accused is more likely to have committed either count because of this conduct. Further, I must not reason from this evidence that the accused is a person of bad character and is therefore the type of person who would commit either of the alleged offences.
If any evidence of the uncharged acts and/or discreditable conduct is essential to my process of reasoning leading to a finding of guilt, the evidence cannot be used unless on the whole of the evidence, the facts in proof of which the evidence was admitted, are established beyond reasonable doubt.
Consciousness of Guilt
Officer Wilson and Officer Forbes gave evidence about the attempts police made to locate and then arrest the accused. The accused was eventually found hiding under a bed, up against the wall, behind a deflated blow-up mattress, at GW’s house.
I accept the evidence given by Officers Wilson and Forbes on this topic.
The prosecution relies on the accused’s conduct – in trying to hide from police upon him becoming aware of JF’s allegations - as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt on his part.
Evidence was led from JF, the accused and GW about the circumstances in which the accused acceded to JF’s request for him to return some of her personal belongings, that is, shortly after JF sent the accused a message threatening to report him to the police for raping her.[21] The prosecution also relies on this conduct as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt on the accused’s part.
[21] Exhibit D7.
Before I can use this evidence, in either instance, as evidence supporting an inference of the accused’s guilt, I must consider whether the evidence, or human experience, otherwise discloses a satisfactory innocent explanation for that conduct.
I must assess the relative probability, as a matter of human experience, of that conduct, in each instance, being associated with either innocence or guilt. If I accept any innocent explanation given by the accused for his conduct, in either instance, then that conduct will have no weight.
Lies
Insofar as it may be suggested that the accused lied either in his evidence or record of interview, I remind myself that whether the accused has told a lie or lies is a matter for me to determine. If I consider the accused has lied, this is relevant and can be used in my assessment of the accused’s credibility. However, I cannot use this as evidence of his guilt. If I find the accused has lied, it does not add to the prosecution case. It remains for me to determine, having regard to all of the evidence, whether the evidence is sufficient to satisfy me beyond reasonable doubt as to the accused’s guilt of a count or counts.
Motive to Lie
The accused contended that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the offending.
The first potential motive was because she was unhappy with the outcome of her requests to the accused for the return of her property when she left 34 Owl Drive. The second potential motive related to the accused having banned AW from attending at that property.
I must consider the possibility of a motive for JF to lie, as this is relevant to JF’s credibility.
Even if I reject the existence of any alleged motive to lie, the absence of any such motive does not strengthen the prosecution case, rather the position remains neutral.
JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case as to each count. As such, I must be satisfied that her evidence is both true and accurate. It is not for the accused to demonstrate or prove to me that she is wrong or lying. There may be many reasons that a witness may lie and I must not speculate about those. I must not treat JF’s evidence as being more credible or more believable, simply because there is no evidence to provide a reason for why she might be lying. I must carefully consider all of the evidence to determine whether I am satisfied as to her credibility and reliability.
Bad Character of Witnesses [JF, JM, AW]

GW gave evidence that AW was one of two persons responsible for smashing up a vehicle used by her, shortly after the accused’s arrest and that JF was present when this occurred. AW denied being involved in this incident and JF gave evidence that she was not present at a time when two cars were damaged outside 34 Owl Drive, nor did she know anything about any such incident.[22]
[22] Noting GW’s evidence was this alleged incident occurred outside her house in Lorikeet Avenue, not outside 34 Owl Drive.
The accused gave evidence that AW stole a bicycle, being an allegation denied by AW.
In text messages exchanged with JF in March 2023,[23] the accused stated that the police had come to his house about her shoplifting. JF was not questioned on any such allegation.
[23] Exhibit D7.
In those same text messages, the accused stated that JM had a warrant out for her arrest in South Australia. He also gave evidence to the effect that she had stolen money from her employer and had been involved with him, selling marijuana while staying in the caravan park at Knott’s Crossing. JM was not questioned on these allegations.
If I accept that a witness has a prior history of behaving dishonestly, or engaging in criminal conduct, this is relevant to my assessment of the credibility of the evidence given by such witness.
Of course, a person who may be considered to be of bad character may nevertheless give honest and credible evidence.
Prior Inconsistent Statements
In his closing address, counsel for the accused submitted that the evidence given in court under oath by JF differed in certain aspects from what she had told the police in her various statements and in her proofings with the Director, such that I should have doubts as to both her reliability and credibility.
Similarly, it was submitted that the evidence given by JM contained so many differences to that set out in her statement to police made on 21 June 2024, that I should have real doubts as to her reliability and credibility.
Out of court prior inconsistent statements are relevant and put before me to assist me to determine the reliability and credibility of the evidence given by the witness in court. However, before I have regard to a prior inconsistent statement there must be some evidence that the prior inconsistent statement has been made. I may use evidence that a witness has said something different on a previous occasion or omitted to say something on a previous occasion as evidence affecting the witness’s credibility and reliability.
I have considered those aspects of the evidence given by each witness, said to be inconsistent with earlier evidence (and/or out of court statements), in my analysis and findings with respect to the evidence.
Chronology
In order to understand the allegations, and the context in which they are made, it is important to make findings of fact on matters which were either agreed, or not seriously in dispute. Those matters include where the complainant was living from time to time, the details of those living arrangements and relevant dates relating to the relationship between JM and the accused.
JF had prepared a schedule, listing the various places she had lived from time to time, how old she was and what year she was in at school.[24] She said she completed that on her own, although some of the information in it (eg. the address of the house in Tailem Bend) had been told to her by her mother. She gave some of her evidence by reference to that schedule.
[24] Exhibit P2.
The accused did not dispute the accuracy of that schedule, save that the schedule did not include the fact that the family lived in Helensvale for a brief period of time when they first moved from Lucindale to the Gold Coast.
I make the following relevant findings of fact, based on all of the evidence:
1.JF (DOB: 27 March 2007) is JM’s oldest daughter. JF’s biological father is LF.[25]
[25] T 233.26-31.
2.On 9 March 2011, the accused was arrested for two counts of Aggravated Threatening to Kill. He was initially refused bail and remanded in custody. He was released on home detention bail to reside at 76 Clifftop Street, Murray Bridge on 21 March 2011. His home detention bail address was varied to 11 Webb Street, Tailem Bend on 6 June 2011. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced for this offending on 10 February 2012, at which time he was released on a suspended sentence bond and was not subject to home detention conditions on any other matter.[26]
[26] Exhibit P15 at [1]-[5].
3.Between 6 June 2011 and 10 February 2012, the accused committed the following offences:[27]
[27] Exhibit P16 at [6].
·One count of breach of bail on 20 June 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail);
·One count of breach of bail on 15 July 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail);
·One count of breach of bail on 5 September 2011 (attending Cash Converters without permission);
·One count of permitting a person to drive while unlicensed on 5 September 2011;
·One count of possessing a prohibited weapon, namely a flick knife, on 6 September 2011; and
·One count of breach of bail on 11 October 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail).
4.JM gave evidence that she and LF separated in about May 2012, that she met the accused about two weeks thereafter and commenced a relationship with him several weeks later. However, JM, JF and the accused all gave evidence that the accused was still on home detention bail when JM and JF started living with the accused, being within weeks of them first meeting. The accused was sentenced for the offence for which he was placed on home detention bail on 10 February 2012 and thereafter was not subject to home detention bail. As such, I am satisfied that JM is mistaken in this respect and that she must have separated from LF in either late 2011 or early 2012 and that she and JF moved in to live with the accused sometime prior to 10 February 2012.[28]
[28] T 233.38-234.7; T 234.20-25; Exhibit P15 at [1]-[5].
5.JF first met the accused during a visit to the train park in Tailem Bend. Although JF gave evidence that this was in 2012, when she was aged five and in Reception at school, I am satisfied it was slightly earlier than this, and that JF met the accused before 10 February 2012, and therefore when JF was still aged four.[29]
[29] T 23.31; T 24.3-10; T 34.1-4; T 234.15-17.
6.Sometime shortly prior to 10 February 2012, JF and JM moved in to live with the accused and his daughter, S, in a two-bedroom house he was renting in Webb Street, Tailem Bend.[30] S was only a baby, aged approximately one, at this time.[31]
[30] T 25.2; T 235.9-17.
[31] T 25.17-22.
7.JF, JM, the accused and S (the family) moved from Tailem Bend to live in Lucindale in mid-2013. They lived in a rented three-bedroom house which was immediately adjacent to the school. JF was in Year 1.[32] Neither the accused nor JM were working while the family lived at Lucindale.[33]
[32] T 54.2-15; T 237.1-9; Exhibit P2.
[33] T 57.9-10.
8.After Christmas 2013, the family left Lucindale to travel to Queensland to live. They travelled in a Commodore with a trailer on the back. JM and the accused slept in a tent during this period, while JF and S slept in a second tent. After travelling through various country towns, and spending a period of time living in Helensvale, the family settled in Southport, Queensland.[34]
[34] T 67.14-68.4; T 181.8-15; T 237.21-25; T 353.25-27; T 353.32-33.
9.The family lived in Southport, in a one-bedroom unit, for approximately six months. During this period, JF attended Southport Primary School and was in Year 2.[35] Neither the accused nor JM were working while the family lived in Southport.[36]
[35] T 68.4-13; T 237.34-238.4.
[36] T 68.14-16.
10.During 2014, the family left Southport and went to live in Merrimac, Queensland in a two-bedroom townhouse. JF shared a bedroom with S, where there were two single beds. JF attended Merrimac Primary School and was in Year 2.[37]
[37] T 71.35-72.11; T 72.22-28; T 74.1-2; T 238.14-20.
11.While the family lived in Merrimac, the accused was working ‘9 to 5’ as a mechanic.[38]
[38] T 26.32-38; 238.26-33.
12.The family lived in Merrimac for about six to eight months.[39] Thereafter, the family left Merrimac and during 2015, they travelled around the east coast of Australia in a 12-foot Millard caravan. JF did not attend school during this period.[40]
[39] T 72.4; T 238.34.
[40] T 74.7-10; T 74.17-28; T 238.36-37.
13.The family ended their travels in Mataranka, Northern Territory, where both the accused and JM found work on a cattle station.[41] The accused worked full time, from about 6:00 or 7:00am to 5:00pm, except during weekends. JM did general farmhand work on the station, feeding the animals.[42]
[41] T 74.11-16; T 75.7-20.
[42] T 75.7-16; T 241.28-36.
14.While in Mataranka, the family lived in the Millard caravan on the Cave Creek Station. JF slept on the top of a bunk bed and S slept on the bottom bunk. JM and the accused shared a double bed at the opposite end of the caravan. [43]
[43] T 75.27-76.20; Exhibit P5 (caravan labelled ‘Millard 1’); T 243.1-3.
15.The family lived in Mataranka for about 12 to 16 months.[44] They then moved to Katherine, where they lived for most of 2017 and some of 2018. While in Katherine, the family continued to live in the Millard caravan, and spent a period of time living at the Knotts Landing Resort, where JM had a full-time job working as a house cleaner and in the office. During this time, the accused also worked part-time as a maintenance man/gardener.[45]
[44] T 75.4-6; T 242.3-4.
[45] T 79.29-80.8; T 243.6-33.
16.C was born in Katherine on 3 March 2018.[46]A few weeks thereafter, the family moved to another caravan park. JM found work at the Katherine RSL as a maitre d’.[47]
[46] T 243.34-38.
[47] T 244.4-8.
17.JF attended the Clyde Fenton Primary School during the period the family lived in Katherine. S also attended school at this time.[48]
[48] T 80.9-18.
18.The family (which now included baby C) moved from Katherine to the Gold Coast in about 2019, They settled first in Helensvale, where they lived in a different caravan, an Imperial Roadmaster, at a caravan park.[49] Although there was a shower and toilet in that caravan, from time to time the family used both the shower and toilet in the external shower block at the caravan park.[50] Neither the accused nor JM worked while the family lived in Helensvale.[51]
[49] T 82.10-23; T 244.15-16; Exhibit P5 (diagram marked ’Roadmaster 2’).
[50] T 244.27-245.6.
[51] T 244.27-30.
19.The family lived in Helensvale for between three to six months.[52] In 2019, they moved to live in Upper Coomera, Queensland (also on the Gold Coast). The family continued to live in the Roadmaster caravan in a caravan park.[53] JM did not work while the family lived in Upper Coomera. The accused did not have an official job but earned money buying and selling cars.[54]
[52] T 85.22-24; T 244.25-26.
[53] T 85.25-34; T 245.25-28.
[54] T 245.36-38; T 276.14-19.
20.In the first half of 2020, the family moved to live in Roma, Queensland. They were unable to live in a caravan park due to Covid restrictions. The family obtained emergency public housing in a three-bedroom rental property.[55] JF attended Roma State College but also spent some time being home schooled during Covid. Neither the accused, nor JM were working while the family lived in Roma.[56]
[55] T 89.10-28; T 246.2-11.
[56] T 89.29-38; T 246.14-22.
21.At the start of 2021, the family moved from Roma to Hervey Bay, Queensland.[57] While in Hervey Bay, the family lived in the Roadmaster caravan in a caravan park.[58] JF attended Urangan High School and was in Year 8.[59] JM obtained employment working as a barmaid at the Torquay Hotel. The accused did not work while the family lived at Hervey Bay.[60]
[57] T 90.31-91.3; T 246.33-35.
[58] T 246.37.
[59] T 92.5-13.
[60] T 91.24-36; T 246.38-247.9.
22.JF first got her period when the family was living in Hervey Bay. She was aged 13, but about two months off, turning 14.[61]
[61] T 98.1-6.
23.In 2021, while the family were living in Hervey Bay, JM left the accused.[62] After JM left, JF, S and C remained living with the accused. At or about the time JM left, they spent a short period of time staying at the Maryborough Showgrounds, and then settled in Rockhampton, Queensland in (about) mid-2021 where they (that is, JF, S, C and the accused) lived for about a year.[63]
[62] T 254.21-255.3.
[63] T 29.28-36; T 101.30-36; T 356.9-13.
24.While in Rockhampton, the family (now no longer including JM), lived at the Pankhurst Caravan Park in the Roadmaster caravan for about eight months, before then moving to live in a villa. The accused was looking after the villa for some friends.[64]
[64] T 107.10-25.
25.While in Rockhampton, at the initiation of the accused, JF was fitted with a contraceptive device. She was aged either 14 or 15 at that time.[65]
26.In the second half of 2022, the family left Rockhampton and travelled by car, with the caravan, through the centre of Australia, via Alice Springs, to South Australia.
27.The family arrived in South Australia in the second half of 2022. They lived for a few months at the Murray Bridge Marina caravan park, before securing emergency accommodation in a house at 27 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge. JF was 15 and attending Murray Bridge High School in Year 10.[66]
28.In about November 2022, when JF was living at 27 Owl Drive, she started a relationship with AW.[67]
29.Several weeks after Christmas 2022, the family moved into another house at 34 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge.[68]
30.JF lived with the accused, S and C at 34 Owl Drive for between one and a half and two months. In about late February 2023, she ran away from home to live with AW’s family, who lived nearby. She did not return to live with the accused thereafter.[69]
31.JF first disclosed the alleged offending to AW in or about early March 2023, shortly after she started living at AW’s house.[70]
32.On Tuesday 21 March 2023 at about 3:30pm, JF attended the Murray Bridge Police Station where she reported the alleged offending.[71]
33.The accused was arrested at the Murray Bridge home of his then partner, GW, shortly after 12:30am on Friday 12 May 2023. He was found by police hiding behind a deflated blow-up mattress under a bed.[72]
Evidence led by the Prosecution
[65] T 179.34-180.1; T 449.9-26.
[66] T 114.10-35; T 116.19-33; T 356.34-357.20.
[67] T 117.30-33.
[68] T 123.3-16; T 357.32-36.
[69] T 127.14-33.
[70] T 143.36-144.11; T 310.9-311.5.
[71] Exhibit P14 at [3].
[72] T 227.3-229.16.
The Complainant, JF
Relationship with the Accused – Before the Offending
JF gave evidence that she thought the accused was a good person when she first met him. When she and JM moved to live with accused in Tailem Bend, he assumed the role of a father figure towards her. He took her to school and made sure her clothes were washed. He did the cooking and made sure she went to bed every night.[73] He would sometimes take her for drives to the shop and took her and S to the train park.[74] They had a good relationship as step-daughter and step-father.
Relationship with JM
[73] T 25.30-26.2.
[74] T 33.23-36.
JF gave evidence that her relationship with her mother when she was growing up was good but sort of distant, as the accused would not really let her mother do anything with her.[75] She said:[76]
So [the accused] wouldn’t let me go out with my mum to anywhere like the shops or to the park or anything, he would keep me by his side 24/7.
The Alleged Offending in Tailem Bend (Count 1)
[75] T 29.1-4.
[76] T 29.12-14.
JF gave evidence that the first time the accused sexually abused her occurred in her bedroom at Webb Street, Tailem Bend, about two to three months after she moved to live at that address with JM. She was in Reception and aged about five and a half.[77]
[77] T 30.18-25; T 33.16-22.
She said that she was lying in her bed, in the room marked ‘Bedroom 1’ in Exhibit P3. This room was originally used as a lounge room, but about two months before the first incident, it had become the girls’ bedroom.[78] S was asleep in her bassinet in that same room. She thought JM was asleep in the bedroom she shared with the accused.
[78] T 167.1-13.
JF gave evidence that the accused came into the room and lay down on the bed next to her. He stuck his hand down her pants and underwear and started molesting her, moving his hand in a circular motion, playing with her ‘clit’. She froze, was confused and too scared to say anything. She remembered the accused telling her to be quiet. After about ten minutes, he stopped touching her and said to her, ‘If you tell anyone, I will kill you’. He pulled up her pants and left the room.[79]
[79] T 34.8-32; T 35.2-16.
Thereafter, JF was scared of the accused. She did not tell anyone what had happened as he had said he would kill her if she did. The accused acted as if everything was normal.[80]
[80] T 35.35-36.6.
JF gave evidence that at the time of this first incident, she was wearing a blue ‘Chuggington’ top, purple trackpants and ‘My little pony’ underwear.[81] She said she was able to recall these details, and how the accused had touched her, as it was the first time this had happened to her.[82]
[81] T 34.34-35.1.
[82] T 36.7-11.
In cross-examination, JF initially disagreed with a proposition put to her that when she was initially interviewed by the police, she told them she was wearing a ‘Thomas the Tank Engine’ top and a pair of shorts at the time of this first incident.[83] After being shown a video recording of that interview, JF agreed she had said this, however she had later told the police about this mistake.[84] JF confirmed in re-examination, that when she spoke to police on 19 June 2024, she told them she was wearing a Chuggington top and purple coloured tracksuit pants at the time of this alleged offending.[85]
[83] T 167.20-27.
[84] T 189.19-25.
[85] T 221.23-36.
JF gave evidence that about four months later, while they were still living at the house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused abused her for the second time.[86]
[86] T 54.33-37.
She said on this occasion, exactly the same thing happened. It was nighttime and she was in bed wearing a T-shirt and shorts. She thought her mum had gone to the IGA to get some smokes. S was asleep in her cot. The accused came into her room and pulled her pants down to her knees. He removed her underwear at the same time. He then started playing with her ‘clit’ in a circular motion. She was really confused and scared and did not know what to do. After about ten minutes, he pulled her pants back up and said, ‘If you tell anyone I’ll kill you’ and then left the room.[87]
[87] T 54.38-56.15.
In cross-examination, JF said that she did not recall this second occasion as much as the first but she was sure that it had occurred.[88]
[88] T 167.29-35.
The accused did not abuse her again while they were living in Tailem Bend.[89]
[89] T 56.16-22.
In cross-examination, it was suggested to JF that she had previously told the police that when she was five years old, the offending ‘used to happen every second day or daily, or it happened weekly or fortnightly’. JF said when she said that to the police officer, she meant to convey how many times it had happened over the years, not at the house in Tailem Bend.[90]
[90] T 164.33-165.2.
Later in cross-examination, JF agreed that during an interview with police on 26 March 2023, she said that the offending had started six months after she turned five and that ‘after that it just happened all the time.’ She said:[91]
A.I said it happened all the time, not meaning that it happened all the time. It would happen at random times. Like I said in that bit before, it happened all the time. It used to just happen at random times.
Q.But even on your birthday.
A.Yes, that's what I was meaning. It was all the occasions. Especially after I turned the age of eight.
Q.Christmas, Easter, all of the holidays, happened all the time, is that what you said, isn't it.
A.Yes.
The Alleged Offending in Lucindale (Count 1)
[91] T 212.29-38.

JF said that they lived at Tailem Bend for about eight months and then moved to live in Lucindale. She remembered living in a rented modern three-bedroom house which backed onto the school. She was sharing a bedroom with S.[92]
[92] T 56.24-34; T 57.3-7; T 57.11-26.
JF gave evidence that about three months after they moved into the house at Lucindale, the accused abused her again. She said one afternoon she had been playing in the backyard with S on a toy tractor. She got bored so she decided to go back inside and lie on her bed. S was still playing in the backyard. She thought that JM had gone for a walk to go and get some petrol. The accused came into her room, laid down next to her on her bed, stuck his hand down her pants and her underwear and started playing with her clitoris.[93]
[93] T 57.33-58.4; T 58.25-59.9.
JF recalled that she was wearing a pink T-shirt, black jeans and underwear.[94] She was lying on the left side of the bed and the accused lay on the right side. She tried to push him away but he kept going, so she just gave up. He did not say anything to her during the incident, which lasted about five minutes. Afterwards he said to her, ‘I will kill you if you tell anybody, it’s our secret’. She nodded to agree with him.[95]
[94] T 58.12-19.
[95] T 59.10-34.
JF was asked how this incident came to an end. She gave evidence that it ended because her mum was coming home. She gave the following evidence:[96]
[96] T 60.5-23.
Q.When you say your mum was coming home, how did you know that.
A.Because I think he got a message from my mum saying that 'I'm on my way back'.
Q.Was it a text message, is that what you're talking about.
A.Yes, a text message.
Q.How did you become aware of that.
A.Because [the accused] looked at his phone and then he said 'Oh shit'.
Q.Did he say anything to you about what the text message said.
A.No.
Q.So how is it that you knew that your mum was coming home.
A.Because she appeared through the door not even five minutes later.
Q.What did you do after he left the room.
A.I just stayed on my bed and did not move.
In cross-examination, JF agreed with a proposition put to her that at the time of this incident, her mother had gone to the shop and said that was a little convenience store (not an IGA) located about ten minutes away.[97] It was suggested to her that she could not have known the message that the accused had received had come from JM. She gave the following evidence:[98]
[97] T 168.17-19; T 169.21-24.
[98] T 169.1-20.
A.Well, I saw the notification on his phone saying 'Mum' but I don't know if he was replying to mum or sending a message off to someone else.
Q.And when did you see that.
A.Just after the incident happened.
Q.And you say your mother came home five minutes later.
A.Yes.
Q.So you say you saw a notification that named - well, what did the notification say, did it say - what was the -
A.I do not recall.
Q.- the heading.
A.It was - I do not recall what the heading was. I don't remember what it was named under.
Q.And how can you say you know it was from your mum.
A.Because I know my mum's writing.
Q.It was an SMS message, was it.
A.Yes, and everyone types different on SMS.
Q.Can you remember what the message said.
A.I do not recall.
This was the only incident of abuse at Lucindale which JF could remember.[99]
[99] T 60.27-33.
JF denied that she could be mistaken about the alleged offending she had described as occurring in Tailem Bend and Lucindale.[100] She disagreed with a proposition put to her that while the family lived at Lucindale, a man called ‘Johnno’ lived with them for some time.[101]
Uncharged Acts – Interstate
[100] T 171.19-26.
[101] T 181.38-182.7.
JF gave evidence that the first time the accused abused her after they moved interstate occurred about four months after they had moved to live in Southport.[102]
[102] T 68.17-25.
JF gave evidence that they were living in a one-bedroom unit. There was a curtain erected in that bedroom to separate it into two rooms. It was about 9:00am and her mother was at a job interview. She did not know what the job interview was for but said her mother did not end up getting the job.[103] S was asleep in the bed next to her. The accused was lying on his bed. She went to tell him she was hungry. He asked her to come into his bed, so she laid down next to him. He then put his hands down her underwear and started rubbing her clitoris. After about two minutes, he stuck his fingers up her vagina and thereafter he stuck his penis into her vagina.[104] She said this hurt and afterwards, it stung really badly.[105]
[103] T 170.13-18.
[104] T 68.28-38; T 70.3-8; T 70.24-38.
[105] T 71.4-7.
This was the first time the accused had penile vaginal intercourse with her. He did not ejaculate inside her. [106]
[106] T 71.20-26.
JF gave evidence that the family moved from Southport to Merrimac, where they lived for about eight months. She said that the accused sexually abused her two times in Merrimac but she could only recall the details of one of those occasions. She said about four months after they moved to Merrimac, she was asleep in the bedroom she shared with S and JM had gone out with some mates. It was about 9:00pm. The accused came into the room and lay down next to her. He stuck his hand down her underwear and pants and started rubbing and playing with her clitoris. He then stuck his fingers in her vagina.[107] He used two fingers and it hurt. It stung for about 20 minutes thereafter.[108]
[107] T 73.29-74.13.
[108] T 73.6-30.
JF gave evidence that after leaving Merrimac, the family travelled up and down eastern Australia. She said there were no incidents of sexual abuse while they were travelling.[109] She described travelling through Cooktown, Bendigo and Mount Isa.[110] She gave evidence-in-chief that she did not go to school during the that period as ‘the government let me have a year off because I got picked on by my grade 2 teacher.’[111]
[109] T 74.17-35.
[110] T 74.7-10.
[111] T 74.27-28.
The family then lived in Mataranka for about a year, where the accused and her mother worked on a cattle station. JF recalled the accused sexually abusing her ‘probably about three’ times while they were living in Mataranka.[112] She could recall the details of two of those occasions.
[112] T 75.1-4.
JF gave evidence that the family lived in in a 12-foot Millard caravan during this period. She drew a diagram of that caravan.[113] She said she and S shared a bunk bed in that caravan and that she slept on the top bunk. Both incidents that she could recall, occurred in the caravan.
[113] Exhibit P5, diagram at bottom of page marked ‘Millard 1’.
JF said that the first incident occurred when her mother went to feed the cows at about 6:00am and also had to run into town. The accused was not working that day. She needed to go to the toilet and then get ready for school. When she came back from going to the toilet, the accused asked her to come over to him, so she did. He told her to lie down, so she lay down in his bed. He then started to play with her clitoris underneath her pants and underwear. After about five minutes, he took off her pants and underwear and stuck his penis in her vagina. He pulled out when he was ejaculating.[114]
[114] T 76.32-77.11.
When asked to describe the second incident, JF said this occurred about a month before the other incident. It was about 9:00pm and JM had gone for a shower. She was lying in her bed (the top bunk). S was asleep in the bottom bunk.[115] JF said:[116]
He decided to pull my butt off the bed. I was wearing underwear and a singlet that night because it was really hot and then he slid my underwear across but did not pull them off and then he stuck his penis into my vagina.
[115] T 78.36-38.
[116] T 77.22-26.
JF said that this happened for about ten minutes. It stopped when the accused heard her mum start to open the door. He then slid her underwear back, pushed her back onto her bed and went and sat down as if nothing had happened.[117] She tried to go to sleep. About an hour later, her mum left the caravan to go to the toilet. While she was gone the accused said to her, ‘I’ll kill you if you tell anyone’.[118] She did not tell anyone what had happened because she was really scared of the accused.
[117] T 77.27-31.
[118] T 78.7-12.
In cross-examination, JF estimated the bunk bed was about 50 cm away from the door of the caravan. She said she had heard her mother outside the door, hanging her up her towel, before she came back in.[119]
[119] T 196.27-38.
JF gave evidence that from Mataranka, the family moved to Katherine where they lived for about two years. Her little sister, C, was born in Katherine. JF said they lived in a caravan park for about two weeks and then moved to Knotts Crossing Resort, where JM worked as a house cleaner in the morning and as a bistro hand at night from around 4:30pm to 10:00pm, sometimes later.[120]
[120] T 79.1-80.4.
JF said the accused abused her multiple times when they were living at the Knotts Crossing Resort. She said:[121]
A.So sometimes he would pull me onto his bed when I was going to give him a hug goodnight because mum would be working at the restaurant, and then he would pull me into his bed, lay me on my back or on my side and start playing with my clitoris, putting his hands down my pants and underwear and then that would happen for about five minutes and then he would stick his finger up into my vagina for about another five and then he would stick his penis in my vagina and then there was another time where he did the same thing but instead, he flipped me on my side and then stuck his penis into my butthole.
[121] T 80.32-81.4.
This was the first time the accused had inserted his penis in her anus. He did it multiple times thereafter, until she was aged 14. She estimated this had occurred between 10 to 20 times.[122]
[122] T 81.5-17.
JF gave evidence that in Katherine, the accused would abuse her while her mother was at work. S would either be asleep or playing outside. The offending occurred in a similar way each time.[123]
[123] T 82.7-9.
JF gave evidence that the family, which now included C, moved from Katherine to the Gold Coast in 2019. The first place they lived was Helensvale, where they lived in a Roadmaster caravan at a caravan park for about three months. JF had drawn a diagram of that caravan.[124] JF said there was a triple bunk bed in this caravan. S slept on the top bunk and she slept in the middle bunk. C was meant to sleep on the lower bunk but refused to, so that area was mostly used for storage. C slept in the area marked ‘lounge’ instead.[125]
[124] Exhibit P5, diagram on top of page marked ‘Roadmaster 2’.
[125] T 82.10-37.
JF recalled an incident of abuse that occurred at the Helensvale caravan park. She said her mum had gone to have a shower in the shower block. She went to give the accused a hug goodnight as her sisters were already asleep. He then pulled her onto his bed and stuck his penis in her vagina. This went on for 20 minutes. After he ejaculated, she pulled her underwear and shorts back up and went back to her bed. Her mum came back about ten minutes later.[126]
[126] T 84.6-28; T 85.16-18.
JF gave evidence that the family moved from Helensvale to Upper Coomera in 2019. The family continued to live in the Roadmaster caravan. She recalled the details of three incidents of sexual abuse that occurred in Upper Coomera, one of which occurred in the caravan and two which had happened in the shower block.[127]
[127] T 85.25-86.16.
JF said the first time it happened, she and the accused walked to the shower block together. It was about 7:30am and JM was getting S ready for school. Instead of the accused going into the male shower block, he followed her into the female shower block. She tried to shut the door behind her but he pushed it open and came into the shower with her. The accused undressed and she had to get undressed too. He turned the shower on, they hopped into the shower and then he pushed her up against the wall and stuck his penis in her vagina.[128] By this time, it did not hurt as much when he did this, as she was starting to get used to it. She said it stung a little bit.[129]
[128] T 86.36-87.14.
[129] T 87.28-31.
JF said there no other people around at the time. She explained that there were two different shower blocks and some people had showers in their caravans. In fact, there was a shower in the Roadmaster caravan but they did not use it as the shower leaked and it was in the same area as the toilet. There was not enough room and it stank.[130]
[130] T 87.15-27.
JF described another incident in the shower block about four or five months later. It was about 8:30am and JM was in the caravan with S and C. The accused followed her into the female shower block again and the same thing happened.[131]
[131] T 87.35-88.14.
JF also recalled the details of an occasion when the accused abused her in the Roadmaster caravan at Upper Coomera. JM had taken C and S with her on a walk into town, meaning she was left alone with the accused. They were sitting in the caravan and the accused was watching television. He asked her to come and sit on the edge of his bed so she did. She said he pulled her towards the left side of the bed, put his hand down her pants and underwear and put his fingers into her vagina for about ten minutes. Then he stuck his penis in her vagina for about 20 minutes. Her mum came back about ten minutes later.[132]
[132] T 88.27-89.2.
JF said there were other times it happened in the same way at Upper Coomera, but she could not recall how many.[133]
[133] T 86.27-33.
JF gave evidence that when she was 13, the family moved from Upper Coomera to Roma. In Roma, they lived in a three-bedroom house, arranged through housing. Her mum and the accused each had their own bedroom and she shared a bedroom with C and S.[134]
[134] T 89.10-28.
JF gave evidence that the accused abused her about four to five times in a four-month period at Roma, with the abuse being the same on each occasion.[135] While C, S and JM were asleep, the accused would come into JF’s bedroom at night. He would roll her over onto her back, take her underwear and pants off and stick his penis into her vagina. This would happen for about 20 minutes, then he would ejaculate, by taking his penis out.[136]
[135] T 90.25-30.
[136] T 90.12-24.
In cross-examination, JF agreed that when she was living in Roma, she ran away from the home for about a month. She had not told the police about this in any of her statements as she did not think it was relevant.[137] JF was not questioned as to why she ran away, or where she ran away to or why she returned. She was not questioned as to whether, and if not, why not, she had complained to anyone about the alleged abuse during the period she was absent from the home.[138]
[137] T 182.31-183.13.
[138] Noting JF gave evidence that the first person she told about the alleged offending was AW, from which it can be inferred that she did not disclose the fact of either the alleged offending or the uncharged acts, to anyone, when she ran away from home at this time.
JF gave evidence that at the start of 2021, the family moved to Hervey Bay, where they lived for about six months in the Roadmaster caravan. JM had a job working as a barmaid at the Torquay Hotel, working lunchtime and sometimes nighttime shifts. The accused was not working but had the responsibility of looking after C.[139]
[139] T 90.31-91.38.
JF gave evidence that while they were living in Hervey Bay, there was a period when the accused abused her for about four days in a row, when JM went to work. She said her sisters would be asleep and she would go and give the accused a hug goodnight. He pulled her onto his bed, put his hand down her pants and rubbed her clitoris. He grabbed her hair, stuck his penis in her mouth and made her suck his penis. She said this would happen for about ten minutes, then he would flip her on her back and stick his penis in her vagina for another ten minutes. This did not hurt as she was used to it by then. [140]
[140] T 92.31-93.5.
JF first got her period about two months before she turned 14. She recalled there were two times when the accused had stuck his penis in her vagina at Hervey Bay and he had said to her, ‘I’m gonna get you pregnant. If you tell anyone, I’ll kill you. You say it’s some James at school’.[141] He did not get her pregnant, as he would pull out before ejaculating.[142]
[141] T 100.38-101.10.
[142] T 101.15-18.
JF explained that JM left the family because of the accused’s violence towards her, just before they moved to Rockhampton about halfway through 2021.[143] JF said that JM packed a bag of clothes, walked out, took her car and did not come back.[144]Thereafter, she pretty much became the mum for C and S. She had to shower them and make sure they were ready for the day and that C had fresh pull ups. She did not have the option of leaving with JM, as the accused refused to let her see her mum or talk to her.[145]
[143] See more detailed discussion below as to violence.
[144] T 102.10-15.
[145] T 106.8-23.
JF said the abuse got worse (as in, more frequent) after her mum left. Sometimes it would happen three days in a row, or sometimes once a week, or once every three or four weeks.[146] The accused started drinking a lot more[147] and she recalled several instances of abuse in Rockhampton which had occurred when the accused was drunk.
[146] T 106.27-107.5; T 107.33-37.
[147] See more detailed discussion below as to alcohol and drug use.
JF gave evidence that when they first moved to Rockhampton, they stayed at a free camp for about a week and then lived at the Parkhurst caravan park for about eight months, in the Roadmaster caravan. During the last two months they were in Rockhampton, they stayed at a villa which the accused was looking after for some friends.[148]
[148] T 107.10-25.
JF said that while they were living in Rockhampton, they had visitors at both the caravan and the villa. One of those visitors was a woman called Cassie, with whom the accused was in a relationship for about three months, including for some of the time they lived in the villa. JF agreed with a proposition that Cassie and her three children would regularly stay overnight during that relationship.[149] She was not asked, nor did she say, if this had happened at the villa or the caravan or both. She had not told the police about this as she did not think it was important.[150]
[149] T 208.25-209.7.
[150] T 209.8-13.
JF could recall ‘about three, four’ times the accused abused her at the Parkhurst caravan park.[151] She said the first time occurred on the accused’s bed. He had gone out drinking with some mates. She stayed at the caravan to babysit S and C. The accused came back from the pub about two hours later and was so drunk he could barely walk. S and C were asleep. The accused pulled her hair and put it over his penis. He made her suck his penis for ‘a good 20 minutes’ and then he made her get on top and ‘hop on his penis’, so that his penis went inside her vagina. He blacked out after ten minutes, so she put her clothes back on and went to bed.[152]
[151] T 108.10.
[152] T 108.12-26.
JF gave evidence that she could recall other incidents happening at the caravan park in Parkhurst similar to the one she had described. She recalled the specific details of another incident that she said occurred on New Years of 2022.[153] She said the accused had been drinking up at the hotel in the caravan park all day with a bunch of mates and she had also had a few drinks.[154]
[153] Noting that although JF said, at various times, this was New Years Eve 2022, she later confirmed that what she was describing occurred on 31 December 2021; see T 186.8-13.
[154] See further discussion below about the provision of alcohol to JF.

Another (potential) example of evidence which falls into a similar category is JF’s evidence about the Catapres.
JF gave evidence-in-chief that the accused gave her Catapres to help her sleep when she was aged 11, however in cross-examination she said she was aged eight at that time. There is an obvious unexplained inconsistency in that evidence.
Further both the accused and JM agreed that S was prescribed Ritalin and Catapres, albeit they both said these were prescribed to S from when was aged about four and a half (whereas JF recalled S was about six). Prof White confirmed Catapres was a sedative.
Importantly, JF said she was not abused on the occasion the accused gave her Catapres. It simply makes no sense for JF to make this detail up, if it is untrue (or, indeed, the evidence she gave about the Ritalin).
Notwithstanding there were aspects of JF’s account about the Catapres which may have been inaccurate, I accept that her evidence that there was an occasion when she was given Catapres by the accused to help her to sleep.
Similarly, I accept JF’s evidence that the accused gave her Ritalin on three separate occasions. JM’s evidence about the fact S was prescribed Ritalin and the unnecessary increase in her dosage lent support to this evidence, as did Prof White’s evidence as to the likely effects of Ritalin.
Further, JF gave evidence that the accused abused her on only one occasion after giving her Ritalin. She anchored that incident to when they were packing up the caravan to leave Rockhampton to return to South Australia. She described the Ritalin as making her to want keep cleaning. These details made that evidence compelling. I am satisfied JF was not making this up, nor could she possibly be mistaken about this.
There were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending in count 2.
JF gave very detailed evidence about the last time the accused sexually abused her. She said this was at 34 Owl Drive, one night after GW and her family had visited for dinner. The circumstances of that occasion are described at paragraphs 196 to 204 herein.
When initially describing what occurred, JF said the accused pulled her shirt off and that she was not wearing a bra at this time.[666] Later in her evidence, when asked what she had been wearing on that occasion, JF described wearing a sports bra underneath her shirt.[667]
[666] T 39.20-22.
[667] T 45.36.
JF said that this last occasion was in fact the last of a series of occasions when the accused sexually abused her, in a similar way, three days in a row. When she was initially asked if she had any specific memories of those other two occasions, JF said, ‘No, I do not’.[668] However she was able to recall that she had not been drinking nor had she consumed cannabis on either of those two occasions and that what occurred, in terms of the sexual activity, was similar to the last occasion.
[668] T 129.38.
It was submitted that this evidence was internally inconsistent insofar as it did demonstrate that JF had a recollection of the detail of those occasions, albeit she had prefaced her evidence by saying she did not.
I disagree with that submission. JF had given a very detailed account of what led up to the last occasion of abuse and what occurred. When she said she did not have any specific memories of the other two incidents, she may well have meant that she could not recall what led up to them, or what she was wearing. She was quite clear that they were similar to the last occasion in terms of the sexual activity which occurred. This may well explain why she no longer has other specific memories of those occasions.
Further, the very fact that there were these three similar incidents in a row, may provide a reasonable explanation as to why JF gave inconsistent evidence of whether she was wearing a bra on the last occasion of abuse.
JF also gave detailed evidence of another occasion of sexual abuse at 34 Owl Drive which had occurred after the accused had some mates over. The circumstances of that occasion are described at paragraphs 207 to 208 herein.
When initially describing that incident JF did not refer to sucking the accused’s penis. However, she was later asked by the prosecutor, how long she had sucked the accused’s penis on that occasion. She said she did this for about five to ten minutes and described the accused aggressively pulling her around and shoving her mouth on his penis.[669]
[669] T 132.15-24.
Given the frequency with which JF claimed to be abused, over such a long period of time, it is not unexpected that JF’s memory of an incident of abuse may incorporate some details which in fact relate to other similar occasions.
It is therefore not surprising that there were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s account of the details of various occasions of abuse. Simply put, it would be extraordinary if JF now had a perfect recollection of any alleged occasion of abuse, such that she could accurately say precisely what she was wearing, or the order of the sexual acts which occurred, or even which sexual acts may have occurred on a particular occasion.
Of the incidents of abuse she described in detail, JF was able to recall where she was living at the time and the context in which they occurred, as being features which had stuck in her memory. Her inability to recall precisely every detail of these occasions of abuse, or the fact that her account did, at times, contain inconsistencies, was in my view, consistent with her endeavouring to accurately describe real events, rather than reeling off a practiced, complex story.
Other Relevant Matters
Although it was submitted that JF’s account was exaggerated, when her evidence is considered at a whole, that submission is not made out.
For example, JF was clear that she was not sexually abused during the time the family travelled after leaving Merrimac and settling in Mataranka, despite there being the opportunity for such offending to have occurred.
She described the accused providing her with Ritalin tablets on three occasions, but only described him sexually abusing her on one such occasion. She said he did not abuse her on the occasion he gave her Catapres. Although she gave evidence about the accused giving her cannabis, she described him doing so only three times, and only one such occasion did she recall that he had abused her.
Another example is JF’s evidence about her periods. JF gave very candid evidence about experiencing lengthy and irregular periods. I accept that evidence. She also gave evidence that the accused did not sexually abuse her when she was on her period, meaning that there was, in fact, fewer opportunities (rather than more) for him to offend against her.
My impression was that JF was not exaggerating or embellishing her evidence.
There were some occasions, as outlined above, during JF’s evidence when her answers may not have been properly thought out and could potentially be described as ‘guesses’. However, many of these related to facts which were only ancillary to the offending, such as when the family arrived in Murray Bridge and precisely when they moved from the caravan park to 27 Owl Drive.
There were many features of JF’s account which were compelling and consistent with her recalling real life events which had happened to her, albeit viewed through her now perspective as a 17-year-old who has endured years of sexual abuse.
JF described the abuse as progressing over time, in terms of its seriousness (or invasiveness) and its frequency, consistent with the accused becoming more emboldened to offend, as he knew that JF would not complain about it.
JF described feeling confused and too frightened to say or do anything when the accused first touched her inappropriately in Tailem Bend. However, she tried to push him away when he touched her again in Lucindale, consistent with her then having an understanding of what he was about to do to her.
She remembered in detail the first occasion the accused inserted his penis in her vagina at Southport and said it hurt afterwards and stung really badly. Similarly, when he inserted two fingers in her vagina at Merrimac, it had also stung. However, over time as the accused sexually abused her more frequently, she no longer experienced pain during intercourse, as she became used to it. She stopped telling him to stop or trying to wriggle away from him as she knew there was no point in doing so. She simply succumbed to his advances.
JF’s evidence that the offending occurred more during the school holidays because the accused could drink and not have to drive anywhere, had a very real ring of truth about it, as did her evidence that when the accused was drunk, he was more aggressive when abusing her.
JF’s evidence that she continued to give the accused a hug goodnight before he went to bed, notwithstanding what he did to her, was also compelling, as was her explanation as to why she recalled the offending in Rockhampton on New Years Eve 2021, namely, ‘I could see what was happening to me. I felt it.’[670]
[670] T 187.38-188.1.
In addition, many of the circumstances as described by JF as being ancillary to the alleged offending were either supported by other evidence which I do accept, or not in dispute.
For example, there was no dispute that family did live in a one-bedroom unit in Southport. This was one of the features of JF’s account of the offending there, namely that there was a curtain separating the room into two and she had gone to speak to the accused, who was still in bed, as she was hungry.
The family did live in the Millard caravan from when they left Merrimac to the time they lived in Katherine. That caravan did not have a shower or toilet meaning there were times when JM left the van to have a shower, providing the opportunity for the accused to abuse JF. Similarly, although the Roadmaster caravan had a shower and toilet, JM’s evidence supported that of JF to the effect that they did not use the shower in the van.
The evidence JF gave about where and when the accused and/or JM worked at various times were also consistent with the evidence given by JM and the accused and was unchallenged. This was important as the fact JM worked when they lived at the Knotts Crossing Resort provided more opportunity for the accused to abuse JF, consistent with her evidence.
The accused did smoke cannabis and use methamphetamine as described by JF. He also drank alcohol to excess at times, particularly in Roma and Hervey Bay.
As such, important features of JF’s account were correct and not in dispute.
Further, JF recalled the abuse becoming more frequent from when they were Rockhampton. Not only was JF no longer living with the family, but JF was fitted with the contraceptive device in Rockhampton. JF said that it was only after she was fitted with that bar, that the accused ejaculated inside her.
Apart from an occasion when she was five and having nightmares, JF was never taken to see a doctor, except when the accused took JF to see a doctor to arrange contraception. The accused knew JF had started to have periods. JF readily acknowledged that at the time she was fitted with this device she had a boyfriend, but she was adamant they were not having sex. I accept JF’s evidence on this topic and reject the accused’s contrary evidence. This evidence lends further weight to JF’s account.
Complaint Evidence
I accept JF’s evidence that the first person she told about the offending was AW and that she told him about it in early March, shortly after she ran away from 34 Owl Drive.
The fact that JF chose to first disclose the offending to AW at this time is readily explicable. I accept JF’s evidence that when she was young, and first abused, the accused threatened to kill her if she told anyone what he had done. She was scared of him, because of that.
By the time of the initial complaint, JF had formed a close and trusted relationship with AW, in circumstances where because of the family’s frequent moves, she had previously had very little opportunity to develop close friendships. She had left 34 Owl Drive and was physically separated from the accused.
She was in a sexual relationship with AW and old enough to fully appreciate the extent of the abuse and its wrongfulness.
JF recalled telling AW that the accused had been sexually abusing her for 11 years and that she also told him that the accused had raped her, as AW did not understand what she meant. She said she had not told him any other details.
AW recalled JF telling him that the accused had raped her from about the age of six or seven until recently and that when she was aged about eight, her had drugged her.
I have already made observations as to AW’s evidence. He was not a particularly impressive witness and he may have inaccurately described some of the features of this conversation.[671]
[671] See discussion at [607]-[616] herein.
However, I am satisfied he was telling the truth about being told by JF that the accused had been abusing her from after her dad had left, until recently, being consistent with her account of the offending.
I am also satisfied that AW was telling the truth when he described JF as being really scared, and as shaking and breaking down throughout the course of this conversation.
I find that this conversation occurred several weeks after the last alleged act of sexual abuse at 34 Owl Drive. In such circumstances, I cannot be satisfied that there was a sufficiently close temporal connection between JF’s distress during this conversation and the alleged sexual offending. As such, I cannot use the evidence of JF’s distress, of itself, as evidence of consistency of conduct relevant to bolster her credit as to the offending. [672]
[672] Fergusson v The King [2024] SASCA 63 at [42]-[45].
However, JF’s demeanour is relevant to my overall assessment of the complaint evidence. The fact that she presented this way may explain why there is some difference in the witnesses’ recollection as to precisely what was said during this conversation and why JF did not go into further detail at that time.
I am satisfied that the circumstances in which JF made the initial complaint to AW and what she told him demonstrate a degree of consistency of conduct on her part.
Summary
I have carefully scrutinised JF’s evidence.
Having done so, I am satisfied that JF was an honest witness, giving a genuine account of her experience of being repeatedly sexually abused by the accused from when she was aged about five, until shortly before she fled his home in February 2023, when she was aged 15.
There were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence and some aspects of her account which may have been inconsistent with other evidence. I consider it likely and find there were aspects of JF’s account where she has confused (or merged) certain memories of one occasion of abuse with another, when recalling specific details of the offending. I am satisfied that this is simply the product of the limitation of memory and indicative of how memory works, rather than indicative of her lying about the offending, or her memory of the abuse itself being unreliable.
Given the frequency of the abuse, and the extended period of time over which it occurred, it is to be expected that JF now has difficulty accurately differentiating an occasion, with another similar occasion of such offending.
Insofar as there were inconsistencies and potential anomalies in JF’s account, those inconsistencies and anomalies are not such as to cause me to entertain a doubt as to the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending.
I am satisfied that JF is not mistaken in her recollection of the fact of the abuse, its frequency or its nature. I am satisfied both that she is telling the truth and that her memory of the abuse is not a product of a dream, or her imagination, nor is she mistaken about the fact the abuse occurred.
JF’s detailed and nuanced account as to how the abuse started, how the accused gained her silence, and how the abuse then progressed over time was very persuasive. Her account was cogent and compelling. I believed her.
I am satisfied there is no reasonable possibility that JF’s account is a carefully constructed, well thought out, detailed and structured fallacy.
Findings
I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that when she was aged about five and living in a house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused came into the bedroom she shared with S and lay in the bed next to her. He pulled down her pants and underwear and touched her, in a circular motion, at the opening of her vagina, on and near her clitoris for a period of about ten minutes. Afterwards, the accused told her that he would kill her if she told anyone what had happened.
I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that about three to four months later, when the family was still living in the house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused again came into JF’s bedroom and did the same thing to her.
I accept JF’s evidence that after they moved to Lucindale, and JF was aged approximately six, the accused touched JF in a similar way when JM had left the house to go to the nearby shops.
I am satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that the accused is telling the truth when he denied this offending.
Although it is possible that the accused penetrated JF’s vagina or labia majora with his finger or fingers on one or more of these three occasions, I cannot be satisfied of this beyond reasonable doubt.
However, I am satisfied that on each of these three occasions, the accused intentionally applied force to JF, in circumstances which were unlawful, and in circumstances which were indecent insofar as they had a sexual connotation. I am satisfied that on each of these three occasions, the accused committed an unlawful sexual act, namely the offence of indecent assault. As JF was aged only five or six at this time, the offence in each instance was aggravated.
JF gave detailed evidence about the various uncharged acts of sexual abuse which occurred interstate. I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt,[673] that the accused continued to abuse JF, sexually, when they lived interstate and that over time the abuse got worse and more invasive. I accept JF’s evidence that when the family lived interstate, the abuse expanded to including penile vaginal intercourse, digital intercourse, fellatio and anal intercourse.
[673] As per DPP v Roder [2024] HCA 15, if this finding is an indispensable link in terms of my reasoning as to the accused’s guilt on either count, I must be satisfied of this evidence beyond reasonable doubt. I do not consider the evidence to be such, but I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did sexually abuse JF multiple times, as claimed by her, during the periods they lived in Queensland and the Northern Territory.
I accept JF’s evidence and find that the abuse was more frequent during school holidays (and after JM left the accused) and was more aggressive and forceful when the accused was drunk. I accept JF’s evidence that there were occasions when the accused abused JF when they were living interstate, after giving her alcohol and an occasion when he abused her after giving her Ritalin (and alcohol).
I accept JF’s evidence that there were occasions when the accused smacked her by hand, or with objects.
The accused’s conduct both in Tailem Bend and Lucindale, and then interstate, establishes that he had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest. When JF did not complain about the abuse, and it remained undetected, the accused was emboldened to continue to act on that sexual interest and to engage in more serious, invasive, brazen and aggressive acts of sexual abuse against JF. He had effectively normalised that behaviour after years of repeatedly abusing her.
I accept JF’s evidence that when the family returned to South Australia, the accused continued to sexually abuse her. JF was aged 15 at this time.

I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that there was an occasion at the Murray Bridge caravan park that the accused vaginally raped JF so badly that she had difficulty walking the next day.
I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, that when the family moved to 27 Owl Drive, notwithstanding there were occasions when AW visited the house or stayed overnight, there was the opportunity for the accused to sexually abuse JF and that he continued to do so.
I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt that when the family lived at 27 Owl Drive, there were at least six occasions when the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with JF, as described by her, during which the accused also, at times, forced JF to engage in fellatio with him and/or digitally penetrated her vagina.
I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt that when the family lived at 34 Owl Drive, notwithstanding the accused had commenced a relationship with GW, he continued to sexually abuse JF. I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt there were at least three occasions when the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with JF, as described by her, at 34 Owl Drive, during which the accused also forced JF to engage in fellatio with him.
I am satisfied and find that the abuse only stopped when JF fled 34 Owl Drive in about late February 2023.
On each occasion that the accused inserted his finger (or fingers) or penis into JF’s vagina, and on each occasion he forced JF to perform fellatio upon him, the accused committed an unlawful sexual act, being unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 17.
As to count 1, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and find that during the first relevant period:
1.The accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF.
2.During the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF.
3.At the time, LGF was a child aged under 14.
4.At the time, the accused was an adult.
As to count 2, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and find that during the second relevant period:
1.The accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF.
2.During the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF.
3.At the time, JF was a child aged under 17.
4.At the time, the accused was an adult.
Conclusion
I find the accused guilty of count 1 and count 2.