R v Doo

[2010] VSC 325

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA  (Not) Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. 1656 of 2009

THE QUEEN

v

COLIN HAROLD DOO

---

JUDGE:	Coghlan J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	22 March, 10 & 11 May 2010
DATE OF SENTENCE:	18 June 2010
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Doo
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2010] VSC 325

---

Catchwords:   CRIMINAL LAW - Procuring a Minor for Child Pornography - Producing Child Pornography - Sexual Penetration of a Child Under 16 Years – Rape - Indecent Act with a Child Under 16 Years - Administering a Drug for the  Purposes of Sexual Penetration - Indecent Assault - Being in Possession of Child Pornography – Circumstances of covert recording – Guilty Plea – Ten identified complainants – Extended period of offending - Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic) – Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) ss.6D.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr R. Gibson	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr J. Desmond	Victoria Legal Aid

HIS HONOUR:

1. Colin Doo, on 22 March 2010 you pleaded guilty before me to seven counts of procuring a minor for the purposes of child pornography, ten counts of producing child pornography, one count of sexual penetration of a child under 16 years, six counts of rape, 12 counts of an indecent act with a child under 16 years, one count of administering a drug for the purpose of sexual penetration, two counts of indecent assault and one count of possessing child pornography.

1. When the matter came on for plea, it had been discovered that the original Count 2 on the presentment pleaded an offence not known to law at the time it was alleged to have been committed.  I gave leave for the deletion of that count and the consequential renumbering of the remaining counts.  The words ‘without consent’ had been omitted on three counts of rape, namely counts 24, 25 and 26.  The date specified in counts 1, 36, 37 and 38 were incorrect.  I permitted the amendment sought on each of those counts, none of which were opposed.  In relation to Counts 4, 9, 15, 20, 32 and 38, the Schedules referred to therein required minor amendments to avoid duplication.  I allowed substitution of those Schedules.  It was not suggested that re-arraignment was necessary on those counts.  In relation to Count 39, there were very substantial amendments to the attached Schedule.  I took the view that the substituted Schedule on that count necessitated re-arraignment.  You were therefore re-arraigned on Counts 1, 25, 26, 27, 36, 37, 38, 39 and pleaded guilty.

1. You also pleaded guilty to two summary matters which had been uplifted from the Magistrates’ Court by consent. They were charges of possess cartridge ammunition without licence under s 124(1)(a) of the Firearms Act 1996 and possess a prohibited weapon under s 5(1)(e) of the Control of Weapons Act 1990.

1. It followed that you fell to be sentenced for the matters outlined above, however there were nine rather than…