R v Woods, Jacob

[2008] NSWDC 177

CITATION:	R v Woods, Jacob [2008] NSWDC 177
HEARING DATE(S):	09/04/08
JUDGMENT DATE:	2 June 2008
JURISDICTION:	Criminal
JUDGMENT OF:	Nicholson SC DCJ
DECISION:	Convicted on all counts. Overall sentence amounts to aprox 6years; overall non parole period amounts to 4 years.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal Law - Sentencing - Sexual intercourse and other offences - prepubescent male victims (x3) - 10 episodes of offending - offending period 2 years - Aboriginal community - assessing mid-range of seriousness - fiarearm ofences - .22 calibre rifle - faulty working condition - unlicenced - strong subjectibve circumstances.
LEGISLATION CITED:	Firearms Act 1996
CASES CITED:	Gladue v The Queen (1999) 1 SCR 688 [80] R v Rushby (1977) NSWLR 597 R v Hayes [1984] 1 NSWLR 740 R v Cuthbert (1967) 2 NSWR 329
PARTIES:	Regina Jacob Woods
FILE NUMBER(S):	07/61/0100
COUNSEL:	J Thompson for Offender
SOLICITORS:	Mr J. May ODDP Dubbo for Crown

JUDGMENT

1. Most adults have an interest in forming and pursuing sexual attraction to another person or persons. In general this interest is of no great moment to the criminal law. There are at least two crucial exceptions to this proposition; where there is an absence of consent the criminal law regards persistent pursuit of such an interest as anti-social conduct of such a degree that it amounts to criminal behaviour.

2. The second exception relates to children under sixteen and others of equivalent status, who are psycho-sexually immature lacking understanding of sexual options and appreciation of the significance and consequences of sexual relations whether casual or long established. As a child matures and comes to some understanding of the inequality of personal sophistication between himself and the adult, the power imbalance that existed between them, the measure of inappropriateness of sexual contact between them and the self-centred sexual greed and avarice of the adult in taking such advantage of the child, whatever pleasure that child may initially have taken from the experience can and should turn to resentment, outrage and a justified feeling of sexual exploitation and defilement. Equally, the criminal law regards the sexual exploitation of children and vulnerable adults as abhorrent anti-social behaviour of a high order.

3. There is little doubt that Jacob Charles Woods long before 16 January realised the abhorrent anti-social nature of his sexual relations with three of Bourke’s young Aboriginal boys; NB born 1995, DG born 1996 and ME born 1998. By January 5 2007 police were aware he had been showing pornographic videos to young Aboriginal boys and suspected him of having indecent dealings with NB. Police searched his premises. Items of interest to them were a .22 calibre rifle, ammunition and pornographic videocassettes. Police found material confirming their interests in these items was well founded.

4. They also found a suicide note. Among its contents was recognition by Woods that he required help, needed counselling services and expression of remorse, “for doing it”. A suicide attempt shortly before the search had failed because of a mechanical fault in the rifle. There is a world of difference between ending one’s life on account of depression caused by one’s anti­social behaviour, and accepting accountability to the community for one’s criminal conduct constituted by that behaviour. The first is conduct of a beaten man. The second is conduct of a man who accepts that there still may be feats to achieve. Sometimes that second course is by far and away the more courageous course.

5. Upon his arrest, Jacob Woods, began to accept accountability for his criminal conduct. He is to be sentenced for twenty-one offences, which I shall identify shortly to which he has pleaded guilty.

6. As a sentencing judge it falls to me to resolve a number of competing tensions as I strive to determine the appropriate sentences for these offences before this Court committed by this offender harming these young victims in the Bourke community, Gladue v The Queen [1999] 1SCR 688 [80].

7. My initial task requires an assessment of the objective criminality of the offences before the Court. I will also need to have regard to matters personal to this offender, subjective matters. The starting point for such assessments requires a sentencing judge to make findings of fact from the evidence before the Court relating to the offences and to the offender.

8. My fact finding task has been somewhat circumscribed in that the parties have tendered an agreed set of facts, to which I shall shortly return. It is sufficient at this point that I remind the Court the judge is not a party to the agreed set of facts. The tender of the agreed facts does not relieve him or her from his fact finding responsibility. It simply limits the material from which the facts may be found. To the extent, if it be the case, that the facts as agreed do not reflect the actual events that occurred it must be remembered the Court can only find the facts from the evidence placed before it.

9. The offender’s rehabilitation prospects will have to be assessed even if looking through a glass darkly. Before any sentence can be made there are likely to be technical questions relating to deterrence, discounts, whether special circumstances are to be found, totality of sentence, Form 1 matters, back up charges brought from the Local Court to be finalised in this Court, whether any of these offences attract a standard non-parole period, the length of the parole periods and finally of course the ultimate overall length of term of imprisonment to be imposed. None of these can be commenced until the primary facts are determined. What weight needs to be given to all of these matters against the imperative that all sentencing should have as its primary focus, the protection of the community will also need to be determined see R v Cuthbert [1967] 2 NSWR 329, R v Rushby [1977] NSWLR 597, R v Hayes [1984] 1 NSWLR 740.

Charges

10. Sexual intercourse (fellatio) with child under ten years (x4) contrary to s 66A Crimes Act . Sexual intercourse (fellatio) with child between ten and under fourteen that is aged ten and under fourteen (x7). Attempt sexual intercourse (anal penetration) with child between the age of ten and fourteen (x2). Possess unauthorised firing arm (x1) (contrary to s 7A(1) of the Firearms Act 1966). There are two further matters to be taken into account on a Form 1, namely intimidating a neighbour on 6 January 2007 with intention of causing him to fear physical harm, and resisting police officer in the execution of his duty. There are also seven offences to be dealt with pursuant to s 166 Criminal Procedure Act ; four relate to indecent acts committed in the course of dealing with ME; one relates to a private exhibition of an R18+ film to a minor; one relates to possess unregistered firearm; and one to fail to ensure safe keeping of a firearm. I think that all adds up to twenty-one.

Facts

11. These offences came to light through a detailed electronic interview conducted between police and the offender. Initially Woods had come to the attention of police in circumstances earlier referred to. He nominated his three victims to police. Police sought to interview by audio\visual means each of the boys nominated by Woods. Clearly the boys were too young to fully comprehend that their relationship with the offender was damaging to them. They were unwilling to disclose to police the real dimensions of the relationship, confused or unaware that they were not to blame and indeed were the victims. The youngsters were clearly uncomfortable and probably scared in the presence of police and with the topics being pursued. Their interviews must have been painful for them and difficult for the police. Reading the interviews one could not help but worry whether the interview process was contributing any damage to the boys.

12. Insensitively and also mistakenly the transcripts of each interview’s cover sheets carried the letters ERISP of the relevant child. The letters “SP" in ERISP stand for “Suspected Person”.

13. It is inappropriate and unfortunate that those interviews should have been so described. One imagines and feels that the children may well have felt like suspected persons. Again I stress they were the victims.

14. The offences are scattered through a two-year period that appears to begin sometime after 6 February 2005 and ends sometime before 16 January 2007. Woods leased a two bedroom unit opposite the Bourke Police Station on 7 February 2005. T0hat lease terminated on 28 October 2005. During this period he committed three offences against NB to which I shall return. After 28 October 2005 Woods moved to Moree to be close to his then girlfriend, RK. He was twenty-three years old. He would return to Bourke to visit every couple of weekends or so. On 12 April 2006 Woods successfully sought the position of Aboriginal Community Liaison Officer (ACLO) with the Department of Education & Training in Bourke. On 5 June 2006 he was appointed. The position was administrative in nature; his office was not located on any school campus. Employment in the position saw him residing permanently in Bourke from late May 2006 until his arrest on 22 January 2007.

15. During the second period of residence he committed further indictable offences involving three victims, and an indictable firearm offence. As best I can calculate there were ten discreet occasions on which he offended, sometimes offending against two victims and sometimes more than two criminal charges arising from an occasion.

16. The offences, as best I can determine, appear to occur in this order; sequence number 23 an offence of oral sexual intercourse with child under ten years, namely NB. The agreed details are that between 6 February 2005 and 29 April 2005 the accused stated he was at his home in Richards Street, Bourke. He stated that the victim had come to visit him. He was watching a pornographic video when the victim started talking to the accused about the video and in particular, “sizes” on the movie. The accused stated that the victim said something about his being bigger. And the accused said, “No, it’s not”. The victim said, “Why don’t I stick it in your mouth?” The accused said, “I bet you don’t.” The victim then placed his penis into the accused’s mouth. The accused then performed oral sex upon the young boy. At that stage the boy was under ten.

17. The offence next occurring is offence sequence number 7, again an offence of oral sexual intercourse against NB. Between 28 April 2005 and 29 October 2005 the accused stated he was at his home in 2/24 Richards Street, Bourke. The accused stated the victim had come to visit him, “some long time later”, after the offence just mentioned. The accused stated that he had oral sex with the victim by placing his penis into the victim’s mouth. The accused cannot recall if he ejaculated or not.

18. The next offence, as best I can tell, is sequence 8 attempted sexual intercourse (anal) with child, NB, between ten years and fourteen years. Between 28 April and 29 October 2005 the accused admitted to attempting anal intercourse with the victim. The accused stated he was at home in Richards Street, Bourke with the victim. They commenced to fondle each other’s penises. The accused then stated that the victim was on the lounge room floor on his knees and elbows. The accused stated that he placed himself on his knees behind the victim, put spit on his hand and rubbed the spit onto his penis. The accused then attempted to place his penis into the anus of the victim. The complainant said that it hurt him, the accused ceased trying to place his penis into the anus of the victim.

19. Next in sequence are sequences 1 and 22; between 20 May 2006 and 16 January 2007 the offender stated that he was at his home in Church Street, Bourke. The victim, NB, came to visit him. He placed a pornographic video for them to watch in order to gain sexual arousal. The offender had oral sex with NB by placing his mouth over the victim’s penis. The victim then went on to give the offender oral sex by placing his young mouth over the offender’s adult penis. The offender cannot recall if he ejaculated or not.

20. The next offence would appear to be sequence 2 between 20 May 2006 and 16 January 2007. The offender admitted to attempting anal intercourse with NB. The offender stated that he was at his home in Church Street, Bourke when the complainant called by. The two commenced to fondle each other’s penises. The offender claimed that the young child was on the lounge floor on his knees and elbows. The offender then placed himself on his knees behind the young complainant, put spit on his hands, which he rubbed onto his penis. The offender stated that he sought to place his penis into the anus of the child. The child said it hurt, the offender ceased trying to place his penis into the victim’s anus.

21. The next offences are sequence 17 and 24 these are the first offences that involve the young person ME who was then under ten years of age. Between 20 May 2006 and 1 September 2006 the offender was at Church Street, Bourke lying on the lounge under a blanket. Young ME came and lay with the accused under the blanket. The offender started touching the child around his belly area before moving his hand downwards. He told the young child to let him know if he wanted him to stop. The offender then touched the victim's penis. That progressed to oral sex whereby the offender placed his mouth over the young child’s penis. The young ME spent the night at the offender’s premises sleeping on the floor, while the offender slept on the lounge.

22. The offence next in time would appear to be sequence 18 again with the young person ME. Between June 1, 2006 and 1 September 2006 the offender was at Church Street, Bourke. He indicated that other children were also at his home but they were outside leaving he and ME alone. The offender stated that the victim, “Wanted to do it then”. The offender stated that ME said, “Give us a suck”. To which the offender replied, “No, not now later”. All the other boys later went to sleep and the offender and young ME were alone in the lounge room. The offender stated that ME pulled his penis out and said, “Now”. And the offender responded by performing oral sex, by placing his mouth over the young child’s penis.

23. The offences next are sequence 3 and 4 these are offences of oral intercourse again with ME and oral intercourse DG. Between 1 September 2006 and 13 November 2006 the offender stated that he had oral sex with both victims, both were at his home and it was nighttime. Other boys were also at the home. They were, however, asleep. The offender said that both young boys began mucking around with each other in that they were fondling each other penises. He then commenced to masturbate his own. The offender then stated that he placed his mouth over the penis of ME for a couple of minutes. He then stated that the put his mouth over the penis of DG for a couple of minutes. He then witnessed both boys give each other oral sex. He stated he then masturbated his own penis and feel asleep. On that particular night he had been drinking alcohol.

24. The offences that next appear to have occurred are sequence 9 and 10 and these are offences involving young NB. Between 30 November 2006 and 5 January 2007 the offender stated he was at his home in Church Street, Bourke. NB had come to visit. The offender then placed a pornographic video on to watch in order to gain sexual arousal. He had oral sex with NB by placing his mouth over the young boy’s penis. The offender went on to state that NB also gave him oral sex by fellating him. The offender cannot recall if he ejaculated or not. Young DG was present during these acts and that boy was masturbating. The offender is unsure whether he suggested to DG that he should masturbate.

25. To complete the review of the sexual offending of the two-month period between 1 September 2006 and 30 November 2006 the sequences of offences are 11, 13 and 26. They are acts of indecency with a child under sixteen, aggravated indecent assault of a child under sixteen and aggravated indecent assault on a child under ten. The victims were DG for two of those offences and ME for one of them. Between 1 September 2006 and 30 November 2006 both DG and ME were at the offender’s home in Church Street, Bourke. It was nighttime. Other boys were also present but they were asleep. Both the young complainants began mucking around with each other in that they were fondling each other’s penis. The offender then commenced to masturbate his own penis. He allowed DG to masturbate his adult penis. He then masturbated the penises of both young victims. It was after that had occurred that the sequence offences 3 and 4 were committed.

26. While it is difficult to untangle the occasions from the charges it would appear that there were nine or ten occasions when there were sexual offending taking place over a two year period.

27. There are other offences that I am dealing with. Sequence 19 was the private exhibition of a RX18+ film or a R18+ film in the presence of minors. The offender stated that he would view pornographic videos for his own sexual gratification and often young males would be present or would arrive at the offender’s home while he was watching the pornographic videos.

28. Some of the facts that I have recounted indicated that the videos did not come on, on occasions until after the young persons had arrived. The offender admitted to watching pornographic videos at the time or shortly before the above sexual assaults occurred. He watched pornographic videos for his own sexual arousal. Police have obtained information by interviewing a number of young males as young eight in relation to watching pornographic videos with the offender in his premises. A number of pornographic videos were seized during the execution of a search warrant.

29. Then the next offences that need to be recounted as part of the offending conduct are sequence 20, 21 and 25. At 11.30am on Tuesday 16 January 2007 police interviewed NB then aged eleven. NB knew the offender had a gun, that he kept it in a cupboard or underneath the bed, that it was a point 22 calibre rifle and that he had both seen it and used it. NB claimed that he had “a shot out of it” when he went roo shooting with the offender and a number of other minors some three weeks prior to the interview.

30. Before commencing the execution of the search warrant on Church Street, Bourke, the offender was formally cautioned and questioned briefly about the firearm the police were looking for. The offender answered police questions, which were recorded on a video. He said there had been a .22 calibre rifle at the house but it was not there now; it belonged to him; it was not registered and he didn’t have a firearms licence. He also told police that it didn’t shoot properly and that he had “just dumped it” with some other rubbish on or about the preceding Sunday at the local tip.

31. During the execution of the search warrant police were searching the offender’s car. The offender told police the rifle was actually in the boot of the vehicle. Police opened the boot and found only a rifle case and some live and spent ammunition. The offender claimed the firearm had been in the boot that morning and he had no idea where it was. He later said a number of minors knew where the weapon had been

32. At 9.55pm on 16 January police observed the offender walking towards the police station at Bourke carrying a rifle. Police, not surprisingly, became alarmed and confronted the offender at the front door of the police station. He surrendered the firearm without incident. I am satisfied it was always his intention so to do. The firearm is a .22 calibre rifle, manufactured in Germany, with a serial number on it and “Tasco” brand sites fitted to the weapon.

33. In the record of interview conducted on 19 January at Orange Police Station, the offender gave another version of the firearm, (Q & A 562-584). He said that he knew that “one of the boys took it” out of the car and that “they told him” that “they” had it at the time police entered the front of the house. He said the rifle was not in the boot of the car; “it was actually sitting on the back seats” and that one of the minors just reached in and grabbed it through an open window. The accused goes on to say that the boy who took the rifle “possibly” also took twenty rounds of ammunition, but these had been subsequently returned to the house, but he could almost guarantee that they were probably not there any more.

An Overview of Offending Conduct

34. An overview of the offending discloses that NB was a victim dating from early 2005 through to the end of 2006. There were four occasions when the offender sucked the young boy’s penis, two occasions when the young boy fellated the twenty-four year old and two occasions when the offender tried to penetrate the boy’s anus. All offending against NB constituted indictable charges.

35. There were three indictable offences committed against ME, all constituted oral sex upon him. ME was also subjected to acts of indecency towards him and aggravated indecent assaults on a total of four occasions. This latter group of offences before me are not indictable matters but matters usually dealt with in the Local Court, being in my Court pursuant to powers given to the Crown pursuant to s 166 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

36. There were two indictable offences committed against DG, both oral sex upon him. There were also two aggravated indecent assaults against DG, that are Local Court charges being dealt with in this Court.

37. The two matters on the Form One concern a neighbour of the offender. Very late on Saturday night, 6 January 2007 the neighbour was watering his lawn. Numerous bottles and iron bars were thrown from the offender’s residence on to the neighbour’s roof. The neighbour saw a number of young boys running into the offender’s premises. Not surprisingly he called upon the young boys to stop throwing the items. Instead of supporting the neighbour, as would have seemed logical, the offender became aggressive towards his neighbour. He commenced to threaten the neighbour with violence. The abuse continued well past midnight. Police were called two times. By the second time the offender appears to have lost the plot entirely. Police arrested him and as they walked him to the paddy wagon the offender’s aggression shifted towards the police. He resisted arrest, was handcuffed and appears thereafter to have gone quietly with the police.

38. It is difficult to reconcile his behaviour in front of the young persons who were then at his home with the position in the Bourke Community as the ALCO with the Department of Education and Training. What lesson were these young boys to take from that bullying, violent and irrational behaviour.

Need for Parental Vigilance

39. The facts disclose these young boys of very tender years were apparently permitted by their parents to stay overnight at the offender’s residence. The level of contact that the offender had with the boys’ parents is not before me. The level of knowledge of the offender by the parents is not before me. But this case again illustrates the importance of parents being highly vigilant about the sexual safety of their children. That vigilance can take many forms including warning the child, and investigating with appropriate inquiries the background and behaviour of the adult male disclosing an interest in children that includes long periods, including periods overnight, alone with the child.

40. It was the arrest for conduct towards his neighbour in irrational support of the young children that I suspect caused the police to have concerns about the offender.

41. At the completion of the search warrant the accused was released from custody, pending further inquiries. Among the items found by police was a handwritten suicide note. It was in the following terms:

“Dear All,
I am sorry. Tell my family I love them and I will look over them”.

There was then a short passage about his ward, then:

“To all my friends I am sorry. To the police please set up a counselling service for people like me to get help before they do something. I hated doing it afterwards and wanted help but nowhere to go for help...”

No doubt police were interested in the significance of and the reasons for the suicide note.

42. Upon his release from custody on 16 January Detectives Edmonson and Stuart spoke to Woods. Off the record he admitted he had a problem. He left the police to go to the Bourke Hospital. From there he made his way to the Bloomfield Hospital at Orange. It was while there that he was arrested for further questioning. There is no doubt the Prosecution case would depend almost entirely upon the accused’s willingness to cooperate fully with the police. All of the sexual assault charges were possible only because of his full and frank account to the police.

Objective Criminality

43. From the facts as he finds them to be the sentencing Judge is required to assess the objective criminality of the offences. This is an essential step in assessing the seriousness of the criminal behaviour of the offender. That is done by comparing objectively the criminality exhibited in the various offences I am dealing with, with criminality of offences of similar kind. It is in this way that the objective seriousness of the criminality of these offences can be evaluated. The objective criminality has an important impact upon the overall sentencing outcome.

44. The sections of the Crimes Act 1900 which create the offences that I am dealing with are all about the protection of young children from a range of experiences while their physical, emotional and psycho-sexual development is patently immature and the power imbalance between the child and the adult grossly favours the adult. The fact that consent of the victim is no defence to an offence under this section highlights its purpose in protecting the young.

45. Lee J in describing the jurisprudential philosophy behind this section said the following:

“One begins with the proposition that our community views with great concern the sexual molestation of children by adults and that has been acknowledged by the Legislature in providing for greater penalties when the victim is under sixteen. That acknowledgement has been in our Legislation over a long period of time. Little children are entitled to grow up free from defilement by sexual predators and free from risk of psychological upset, confusion and difficulties in later life caused by such conduct.”.

The psychosexual development of young children is just as important as the development of their minds, emotions and bodies. Crucial to the development of all aspects of the young person are age appropriate dealings, attitudes and conduct. Boys of a young age, the age that I am dealing with here, would normally becoming aware of the sexual differences between themselves and females. They may be experiencing the early stages of sexual awakening. Instead, thrown into the development of these three young boys are pornographic movies espousing sexual values that are as shallow as they are gross and being used as a means of arousing interest and a willingness to participate in the sexual acts that scream power imbalance between participant, and sexual gratification based upon a myth.

46. I am satisfied that each of the victims willingly cooperated with the accused. While this is a matter that can be taken into account, one has to bear in mind that children of this age are in no position to understand what is healthy or unhealthy for their psychosexual development. The purpose of the criminal law is to protect the tenderly young from this kind of activity and their willingness to participate in it through their innocence.

47. As against NB the offending constitutes eight offences over a two year period. On four occasions Woods sucked the young boy’s penis, on two occasions the youngster fellated the adult Woods and on two occasions there were attempts at anal penetration of the ten and later eleven year old. The attempt would not appear to have amounted to much more than a pressing, with some force, of the adult penis against the anus of the young boy who complained it was hurting. The offender thereafter ceased his attempt immediately.

48. Three indictable offences and one summary offences were committed by Woods against ME, the indictable offences were three counts of sucking ME’s penis and the remaining offences aggravated acts of indecency. Two indictable offences and two summary offences were committed against DG. The two indictable offences were oral sex upon DG, the remaining offence was two of aggravated indecent assault.

49. While the offender may not have been actively predatory in seeking out young persons for sexual gratification, he certainly welcomed them into his home, took steps to ensure his fridge was full. He was willing to share with them his R18+ DVDs, knowing they would arouse the curiosity and guarantee the return of the children to his abode. Further he was prepared to use the films to sexually excite the young persons, thereby making their willingness to participate in his illegal activities easier to achieve. Their sexual encounters became, for him, an extension of the pornography on the film and an expected outcome of the viewing. The abundance of food and pornography were grooming tools used to encourage their return. Such grooming constitutes an aggravating feature of this criminality.

50. The offender was himself sexually assaulted as a young person. A feature of child sexual assault offences is that numerous offenders have themselves been sexually offended against. Such a phenomenon does not necessarily establish in the individual case any nexus between the earlier victim becoming the later offender. This offender claims some nexus between his earlier experience as a victim and his later offending creating a new generation of victims. I do not rule it out, however, the nearest the psychiatric evidence comes is an opinion of the possibility of an over-identification with children. However the reasons for that over-identification have not been explored.

51. I should also note when assessed by the Regional Forensic Psychologist for the Sex Offenders’ Program, under the auspices of the Probation and Parole, Woods reported he had been sexually abused by a friend’s grandfather between the ages of nine and thirteen years. He told the psychologist that he then liked the abusive contact. It is significant that he sought to inculcate the same attitude to those he was abusing. However, there is a difference in seeking to inculcate an attitude in those being abused and the decision made to abuse them in the first place. I do not regard the attitude I have just described as a causative link.

52. There is evidence, which I accept, that the offender was on some occasions well affected by alcohol. Certainly during this two year time, he was consuming alcohol to a point of intoxication up to three times weekly. While intoxication may explain one aberrant episode it can hardly be an explanation for this series of offending.

53. Dr Allnutt, having read the accused’s record of interview observed, “He appears to attribute a degree of his responsibility to his offending, to the young boys”. The observation is one well justified, for example in respect of at least two offences he claims the children were the aggressive parties seeking the sexual encounter with him. Such a proposition ignores the grooming, the welcoming, the pornographic videos and his own part in reinforcing their behaviour on earlier occasions. Offences with ME and DG were committed in the company of each other and himself. The commission of the offences in the presence of another person is regarded as an aggravating feature.

54. The Crown sought to argue this offender was in a position of trust because his position in the community gave him credibility and because he opened his home. There is no evidence the children were aware of his position. In any event it must be a contemplated ingredient of these offences that there is always an adult-child relationship in these particular offences.

55. In the case of NB however there is an argument that there was a breach of trust. The offender’s initial contact with, and knowledge of, NB was in the role of his football coach. While there is no evidence that he used his role as a football coach to entice NB to his home, nonetheless NB was visiting the home of his football coach when he was sexually assaulted. When one accepts a position of responsibility in respect of children such as a football coach, that responsibility is not turned off and on as the football team runs out on to the field or comes from it. It is a position of community responsibility. Football coaches are looked to as mentors in a wide range of social situations apart from simply instilling football skills, tactics and giving half time speeches. NB was sexually assaulted by his football coach that is a feature of aggravation

Standard Non-Parole Periods

56. Four of the offences, the first oral intercourse with NB, and the three oral intercourses with ME carry a standard non-parole period of fifteen years in certain circumstances. Firstly the offences must fall within a mid-range of seriousness. For reasons I shall explain none of these offences qualifies as falling within a mid-range of seriousness. Secondly as a general proposition the standard non-parole period only applies to offences in the mid-range of seriousness after a trial has been completed. In this case the accused has pleaded guilty to cases against him built primarily on his own admissions.

57. None of the offences has any suggestion of force, threats, or drugs, before during or after the sexual encounter. There is no suggestion in respect of these four offences of any pain or discomfort being experienced by the victims. There is no suggestion that any of the victims was unwilling, although as I said the use of pornographic videos was, in part, a factor in their apparent willingness. Each case was an episode of fellatio upon the victim.

58. The standard non-parole period applies to all offences created by s 66A, that is sexual intercourse with children under ten years. The law recognises many forms of intercourse between victim and offender. The definition of sexual intercourse in the Crimes Act is wider than used in common parlance. Fellatio, all other things being equal, is not regarded by the law as heinous as penile penetration of a female victim or anal penetration of both.

59. NB was nine years old. ME was younger, perhaps as young as seven, certainly eight, when the first offence was committed against him. The younger the child the more serious the offence, other things being equal. But it would not constitute a circumstance of aggravation as envisaged by s 21A(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 . For these reasons I do not find any of these four offences require the imposition of the standard non-parole period.

The firearm Offence

60. The firearms offence is the least serous of the indictable offences. The objectives of the Firearms Act (1966) is to confirm possession of firearms as a privilege conditional upon the over-riding need to ensure public safety. A second aim is to improve public safety by imposing strict controls upon possession of firearms. The offender’s possession of the firearm I am concerned with was cavalier. The weapon was not maintained in working order. It was not kept in a closed weapon safe. It was left from time to time in the boot of his motor vehicle and at the time of his arrest he says on the rear seat of his motor vehicle from whence it disappeared. Children were given access to it and it would appear on at least one occasion unsupervised access to it in circumstances where they also had access to ammunition. While the criminality of the offence is the offender’s unauthorised possession of the weapon, given the objects of the Firearms Act , the very nature of the unauthorised possession can be, and in this case is, an aggravating feature of his offending conduct.

61. In country towns it may be that fathers, lawfully in possession of firearms, teach their children responsible and skilful use of firearms. But that is not this case. The defence rely on the weapon being of light calibre as mitigating the offence. While, I accept that the criminality is not as great as the unauthorised possession of a rifle of higher calibre, the potential for death and injury is as real, whether the weapon is a point 22 calibre, or a 303. The defence also sought solace that the weapon was inoperable at the time it was surrendered. For at least some of the time it was in the offender’s possession it would sometimes work and sometimes not. Such a weapon is more dangerous than one in proper working order.

62. Finally, the defence sought to rely upon the fact that the possession of the firearm as charged related to a defined and limited period on 16 January 2007. In assessing criminality of the possession charge, it is appropriate to take into account the background circumstances. The offender’s possession of the weapon on 16 January was more about securing the weapon and delivering it to the police.

Victim Impact Statement

63. There is before the Court a Victim Impact Statement on behalf of DG. The material contained in the Victim Impact Statement is not sworn evidence and has not been subject to cross-examination. The Victim Impact Statement coming as it does after interview with the primary victim may, if I accept it as reliable, provide unsworn evidence as to the impact of the offences upon him. The function of statements, such as this one, is to give to the victims an opportunity of being heard in the sentencing proceedings, by publicly identifying the impact of the trauma visited upon them by the actions of an offender. Secondly, it enables the sentencing proceedings to assist the victim as they move towards some closure of grief, resentment and brooding arising from the criminal conduct of an offender. Thirdly, the victim impact statement contributes to an offender at least hearing first hand and perhaps gaining an insight into the impact his offending conduct had upon the victim. Finally, the Victim Impact Statement ensures that the Court has a continuing con sciousness of the impact violent crime has upon those ordinary men and women who are its victims. As such a Victim Impact Statement plays a very important part in the administration of criminal justice.

64. This Victim Impact Statement is a statement containing particulars of personal harm suffered by DG, usually as a direct result of the offences. The report from Dr Stephen Koder, specialist child psychologist was received in respect of DG. DG did not directly contribute to the history at the interview. There were other factors operating in the child’s life. An older brother aged 19 had spent a lengthy time in juvenile justice detention, another aged 15 was then in juvenile detention. He is the youngest child in a blended family. There is a six month history that the parents gave to, I imagine the parents gave to the psychologist, of the child running away from home for periods of several days at a time with consequent loss of school attendance, shoplifting, mainly snack food items, graffiti and impulsive destruction on other property such as windows; once riding in a stolen vehicle with older boys, frequently getting into fights with other boys at school, openly disrespectful behaviour towards adult authority figures, smoking cigarettes, possibly experimentation with petrol sniffing but no known use of alcohol or illicit drugs.

65. There is a twelve months history of anhedonia with some preserved reactivity at times; a generally flattened and irritable mood, impulsive aggressiveness, tearfulness over slight issues, social withdrawal from friends and family, low self-worth, and ominous utterances such as “I shouldn’t be here”, but no overt suicidal threats, gestures, or deliberate self harm. DG also tends to sleep too long and has lost much of has appetite with resulting weight loss/failure of weight gain. His concentration has become very poor and his academic performance has declined significantly. There is a twelve-month history of agitation, recurring nightmares involving a feared person coming to kill him; misinterpreting innocent sounds, signifying that this feared person is coming to his house and visual flashbacks of his presence; hyper vigilance, intense distress at any reminders of traumatic events; he may run and hide under his mother’s bed; avoidance of school and of any discussion that may be associated with issues around mistreatment, detachment and estrangement of others; a restricted range of affect; episodes of going black and the aforementioned difficulties with concentration. His bladder control has regressed, with episodes of both daytime and nocturnal anuresis, urinating. Dr Koder’s diagnosis was that DG was suffering, 1) post-traumatic stress disorder, 2) major depression, and 3) major behaviour disorder, that he meets the criteria of conduct disorder except for the duration of symptoms which need to be of at least twelve months duration.

66. Given the earlier history I earlier referred to, one cannot say this offender’s conduct is responsible for the complete set of symptoms suffered by DG, I am satisfied the offender’s conduct and his arrest, disclosure and police enquiries all flowing from his conduct have contributed to DG’s symptomatology.

Subjective Circumstances

67. I turn now to the subjective factors, I am both entitled and required to do that. Not only am I sentencing for the criminal offences, but I am also sentencing this offender for them. Each offender coming before the Court varies from other offenders who stand or have stood for sentence. Circumstances personal to an offender may offer to the Court some explanation and insight into the commission of these offences by this man or some reason why a more or a less sentencing outcome is appropriate.

Background, Family Dynamics, Relationships

68. Jacob Woods, age twenty-six is the father of two young children aged six and four. He was raised in country New South Wales by supportive parents. His father attended Court and gave evidence in the defence case. Jacob is the oldest of three siblings. His mother told the author of the Presentence Report there was a closeness in the family relationships. His relationship with his ex-partner lasted three years. She and the children live in a country New South Wales town, but not in Burke. His contact with his children was mostly during the school holidays since the separation. The offender’s mother has suffered from depression, although at what level is unclear. At the time of his arrest he was guardian to a 12/13 year old boy whom he regards as a member of his family. There is no suggestion of any untoward conduct towards this child.

Education, Skills and Employment

69. He completed Year 12 aged seventeen. His early employment included positions such as employment consultant for an agency and contact manager within the Aboriginal Employment Strategy. In June 2005 he was appointed as the ACLO with the Department of Education and Training stations in Burke. That involved him working with communities to give them a better understanding of how the Department of Education functioned. He was paid nearly $50,000 annually. His position was administrative.

70. He also had skills as a football coach. He has had several seasons of coaching young boys in Rugby League. Given these charges, it is important that those who appoint coaches should consider him only for adult teams hereafter.

71. Woods estimates he held six employment positions, the longest lasting a year. He claims to be a good worker. On one occasion he was made redundant. In his last position there was a complaint, although the precise terms of the complaint have not been ventilated in Court, but as a consequence of the complaint he was confined to his desk. Nonetheless, he does appear to have a strong work ethic.

General Heath

72. So far as one can tell from appearance, Jacob Woods presents as a twenty-six year old man in good physical health, he reports no physical ailments. His interest in sports suggest he would maintain a reasonable level of physical fitness.

Mental Health

73. Immediately prior to his arrest, the offender had sought to commit suicide using a firearm ultimately surrendered to the police. The firing pin failed to engage when he pulled the trigger. A couple of days after his arrest he was scheduled to Bloomfield, a psychiatric hospital in Orange, because of the risk of self-harm.

74. My sense of his conduct on the night when he was dealing with his neighbour is that it reached the bizarre, although whether that was alcohol or mental stress is difficult to tell.

75. Dr Allnutt, a well-known forensic psychiatrist reviewed the offender for the Aboriginal Legal Service (ALS). I put to one side matters that may impact upon risk assessment done by Dr Allnutt in relation to sex offending. I will deal with those issues shortly. Dr Allnutt’s view was that Woods was not suffering any significant symptoms of major psychiatric illness, although there were fluctuations in mood characterised by increased energy, euphoria, sleeplessness, racing thoughts and periods of depression. Dr Allnutt was prepared to offer a differential diagnosis that included mild bipolar affective disorder or cyclothymia. He is currently taking antidepressants.

Alcohol and Drug Abuse

76. The offender abused alcohol, drinking to a point of intoxication three times weekly, during the offending period. He sees some correlation between his drinking and offending conduct. He has been diagnosed by a medical practitioner as an alcoholic, but did little while in the community to address his problem. His drinking was of a binge-drinking pattern. He was not a good drunk, becoming aggressive as demonstrated by the offending conduct towards the neighbour. He commenced alcohol consumption at the age of thirteen he used cannabis between fifteen to twenty-one. At the time of his offending, though, cannabis does not appear to have been an issue.

Psychosexual Issues

77. Between nine and thirteen years, Woods was sexually abused by a friend’s grandfather, ceasing when he moved from the area. As already mentioned at the time, Woods liked the abusive sexual contact. However, his view of the significance of that earlier illicit sexual contact has now changed. Woods blames his own criminal behaviour as having a nexus from that earlier life experience, (transcript 09/04/08 page 2/54). As he pursued his sexual interest in prepubescent boys, he lost his sexual interest in women. He claims to have had sexual experiences with adult males. But his present attitude to adult homosexuality was not disclosed and I sense was not pursued. His offending behaviour spanned a number of months. His sexual activity broadened in focus from one to three boys. Dr Allnutt opined there was “some suggestion of over-emotional identification with children”. His behaviour towards his neighbour, on seeking to shield the children causing trouble, from any form of castigation by the neighbour, would seem consistent with this observation.

78. The offender’s alcohol played a part in many but not all episodes of the offending.

79. The offender’s psychosexual profile indicates he has insight into his past criminal behaviour towards the children and a strong desire to rehabilitate. Indeed, his attitude and insight nearly led to him taking his life. His interest in the boys did not extend to compulsion, or threats, or violence. He has a capacity to pursue realistic plans and is highly motivated to engage in treatment. On an actuarial assessment, he was placed in a group of individuals, 33% of whom re-offended within five years and 40% within fifteen years.

80. I note the predicting re-offending propensity for an individual offender is notoriously unreliable. The presentence report found the offender is suitable for and amenable to the CUBIT treatment program. I intend to recommend him for it. Dr Allnutt regarded his risk as directed to prepubescent victims with whom he had developed a relationship. Dr Allnutt thought any future offending likely to involve indecent touching and mutual masturbation. Re-offending prospects appear to be based on personal characteristics of the offender only. They do not appear to take into account the efficacy of and willingness to abide by segregation orders now mandatory in these types of cases. For my own part, I have difficulty putting his offending prospects as high as 33 or 40%, I think a more conservative figure would have been appropriate.

Character and Criminal Antecedents

81. The offender is a twenty-six year old father of two young children. He has a strong work ethic, has achieved a well-paid position of some significance in the Aboriginal community. He has given several years in service to coaching Aboriginal boys in Rugby League. He has been a good son for his parents, and but for this offending conduct, otherwise a role-model in employment and community services for others to follow.

82. There was a problem with drinking alcohol emerging. He had acquired what appeared to be a number of alcohol related convictions including malicious damage to property (x3), behaviour in an offensive manner (x4), drive with a midrange PCA, resist officer in the execution of the duty (x3), plus the one I am dealing with. There is also larceny. All of his offending previously has been dealt with in the Local Court by way of fines, an overview which suggests a serious nuisance type of offending in his past. I do not regard his offending as disentitling him to some leniency. He does not appear to have been previously incarcerated.

Attitude to Offence

83. I have already referred to the psychosexual issues. I do not seek to repeat findings made there under this heading. This offender clearly has issues of guilt relating to his criminal conduct when he sought to commit suicide. He has fully and frankly assisted police upon his arrest. He has pleaded guilty from the outset. He has written to the parents of each victim owning and acknowledging his criminal conduct and seeking professional assistance for his victims. And his suicide note, it is to be remembered said, “To all of my friends, I am sorry” and, “there was nowhere to go for help”. His post­arrest attitude is also consistent with deep remorse, constructive advice to and genuine concern for his victims. His letter to the parents was in these terms,

“I know I am the last person you would want to hear from, but please hear me out.

I am so sorry I have hurt you all, the way that I have hurt especially [victim] I know no words can describe the terrible things I have done, I only hope that you will get help for[victim] It is very important that he talks about what has happened, to a counsellor. I can’t stress enough the importance of this help. If I had done it fourteen years ago, none of this would have happened. The last thing I want for [victim] to have to go through what I am having to go through, my past and present. Remember to get him help. Even if he doesn’t want it, never let up, I know from experience.

I know you may never forgive me, however, I am getting the help that I need so I never hurt another boy, ever.”

84. The early plea coupled with the detailed admissions make an otherwise weak Crown case relatively strong. In any event, the Crown case was never put to the test, because the plea alleviated the need for the children to be called as witnesses. The utilitarian value of the plea, his earlier full cooperation with the police in his interview, his saving these three young victims from the distress of giving their account and his profound remorse makes this one of those exceptional cases where it is appropriate to give a full discount of twenty-five per cent plus some, on the sexual assault offences.

85. I have read the interviews of each of the victims. Their interviews added nothing to the strength of the Crown case. Clearly each child was distressed. My sense is all felt betrayed by the accused for revealing his criminal activities upon them. I have no doubt, as a consequence, they felt guilty about their behaviour and possibly fearful of being labelled as homosexual. They have no cause to feel either, they did no wrong. The wrong was done to them. Nor are they necessarily homosexual. Each one’s sexual development is in its very early stages. Hopefully their choice of sexual preference will come after healing and an opportunity for healthy psychosexual development. The plea has saved each of these children the need to revisit these incidents and the raw and angry feelings about them.

86. I intend to give a discount of twenty-seven and-a-half per cent to each sentence I would have otherwise have set for sexual offending. It should be remembered the prosecution success rate against those defending paedophile charges is something less than fifty per cent. Strongly defended, in all of these sexual matters, success for the defence was “on the cards”.

Rehabilitation Prospects

87. To some extent these have been canvassed earlier in the judgment. There are further positive rehabilitating factors; insight into the offending; profound remorse; strong family support; willingness to undertake a CUBIT sex offenders program; an offender who is still young in years; positive use of time whilst in custody; he has completed drug and alcohol courses and a good work ethic prior to arrest. There is a real difficulty predicting rehabilitation prospects for a sex offender, but in this case there are a number of positive indicators. He will certainly need close monitoring upon release in the community but solid resources to assist him redirect his sexuality towards adult males or females as the case may require will assist him.

Impact of the Subjective Matters on the Standard Non-Parole

88. The general impact of the subjective features is a positive one on the ultimate sentencing outcome. There is nothing in the subjective features that would require me to reconsider my earlier view that the standard non-parole period should not apply. Of course, that is not to say that the standard non­parole period has no role to play in the sentence. It’s creation by Parliament requires me to pay proper regard to the intention of Parliament, that generally sentences for the relevant offences will be drawn upwards from past sentences imposed.

Custodial History

89. The offender has been in custody since his arrest on 22 January 2007, the overall sentence will commence from that date.

Setting the Sentence

90. The maximum penalty for sexual intercourse with child under ten, is twenty-five years. The standard non-parole period which I said doesn’t apply, is fifteen years. Sexual intercourse with children between ten and fourteen years, the maximum penalty is sixteen years. Attempted sexual intercourse with a child of or above ten years of age and under fourteen years carries the maximum penalty of sixteen years; possession of unlawful firearms, two years imprisonment.

Taking Form 1 Matters into Account

91. There are two offences to be taken into account on the Form 1. Had they stood alone, they would have been before a magistrate. It is unlikely the offender would have been sentenced to full-time custody for them. Should I be wrong in that, it is unlikely that he would have received more than three months full-time custody. Nonetheless, the criminality for these offences must be taken into account when sentencing for the offence of sexual intercourse with child under ten, contrary to s66A of the Crimes Act, which will be the first offence in respect of NB. It will therefore be a factor that will tend to drive upwards, in a restrained way, the selection of the overall sentence for that offence.

Deterrence

92. In modern Australian society, there’s a very extensive raft of criminal laws passed by Federal and State Parliaments. The chief purpose of the criminal law put in place by parliaments is to deter those who would be tempted to breach their provisions. Parliament does that by prescribing maximum penalties for those who engage in conduct prohibited by the criminal law.

93. I have just reviewed the maximum penalties for the offences I am dealing with. Consequently, when a person is sentenced for a breach of the criminal law, he or she is exposed to that possible maximum penalty provided by the statute breached. Sentencing for breaches of the criminal law requires a sentencing judge to keep in mind those general deterrence aims of the criminal law for the community at large, by keeping in mind those maximum penalties available and their deterrent purpose. There is also a specific deterrence aimed at individuals likeminded to this offender, who but for such deterrence would be willing to commit offences similar to those for which this offender is being sentenced.

94. Finally, there is a component of deterrence to be considered which is personal to the offender with a view to deterring him and her from re-offending.

Cumulative or Concurrent Sentences

95. There are fourteen sentences on the committal document. There are three victims. The offending has been over two years. While there must, of necessity, be some accumulation of the offences, it will also be necessary to deal with the offences in groups. In addition to requirements that the criminality of each individual offence be identified in the sentences ( Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610) there is also the need for the overall sentence to reflect the total criminality. Necessarily, the requirement of Pearce must yield to some extent to that principle. This is also a case in which, for reasons I shall shortly develop, I would find special circumstances. Again the requirements of Pearce must yield for some extent for that to happen. For the purposes of sentencing, I have divided the sentences into four principal groups, namely, the firearm offence, the offences against DG, the offences against ME, generally the offences against NB. In that final category, there are four subcategories. Firstly, fellatio upon NB, fellatio upon the offender, attempted anal intercourse upon NB and fellatio upon NB when he was under ten.

Special Circumstances

96. The defence seeks and the Crown does not oppose the finding of special circumstances. What this means is that the balance in the sentence between parole and non-parole may fall more favourably than the statutory requirement of the 25% sentence. Reasons favouring that, particularly in respect of the final sentence to be imposed are:- accumulation of the sentences, relative youth of the offender, offender’s rehabilitation prospects better served in the community and the need for close monitoring upon release in the community (Section 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 ); and him being unlikely to obtain entry into CUBIT until the balance of term is reached in the last sentence because of the high demand for the limited places available in that program.

Setting the Sentences

97. But for the plea of guilty for the firearm offence, I would set a fixed term of three months. Applying a twenty-five per cent discount, that becomes a sentence of two months and seven days. In respect of the sexual intercourse offences committed against the victim DG, but for the plea of guilty I would have set an overall sentence of three years. Discounting that by twenty-seven and a half per cent it becomes a sentence of two years and two months.

98. For the sexual intercourse offences committed against ME when he was under ten years of age, but for the plea of guilty I would have set a sentence of four and half years, applying the twenty-seven and a half per cent discount I set an overall sentence for three years and three months.

99. In respect of the offences of NB.

(A) For the sentence of sexual intercourse committed upon NB when he was under ten years of age, but for the plea of guilty I would have set a sentence of five years. Applying the twenty-seven and a half per cent discount, that becomes a sentence of three years seven months and fifteen days. Although this was the offender’s first offence, I have set a higher sentence than in the case of ME. That is because, while there is a partial accumulation, which in the offending against this victim the totality of criminality against this victim is higher than against any of the other victims, and the only way, given the way the sentence is structured for that to be reflected, is to go for the five year sentence.

(B) For the offences of sexual intercourse against NB constituting fellating when he was over ten but under fourteen, I would have set an overall sentence of three years. Applying the twenty-seven and a half per cent discount that becomes an overall sentence of two years and two months.

(C) For the offences of sexual intercourse against NB constituting the fellating of the accused by NB when NB was over ten but under fourteen, I would have set an overall sentence of three years and nine months. Applying the twenty-seven per cent discount that becomes an overall sentence of two years and nine months.

(D) For the offence of attempted sexual intercourse of NB constituting attempted anal intercourse of NB, but for the plea of guilty I would have set an overall sentence of three years six months. Applying the twenty-seven and half per cent discount this became an overall sentence of two years six months and fifteen days.

Imposing Sentences

100. The easiest way to do it Mr Woods is to convict you of all offences globally and then sentence you one by one. There may need to be some adjustment of the description of the offence, but if you would stand up.

101. In respect of the sentences upon which you have been committed for sentence, there are I think eleven of them. You are convicted of all of them.

101. In respect of the possession of the firearm offence, I sentence you to a fixed term of two months and seven days, commencing on 22 January 2007 and expiring on 29 March 2007, that sentence has already been served.

103. For the offences against DG, that is sequence number 4 and sequence number 15, you are sentenced to sixteen months, commencing on 22 February 2007 and expiring on 18 June, that is, the minimum term commencing on 22 February 2007 and expiring 18 June 2008. The additional term on my calculation will expire on 18 April 2009.

104. For the offences against ME, which were sexual intercourse offences represented by sequence numbers 17, 18 and 3, you are sentenced to a minimum term of two years to commence on 22 February 2008 and to expire on 21 February 2010. The balance of term will expire on 21 May 2011. Incidentally, that last date that I gave you, the sentence will expire on 21 June 2008 and the additional term will expire on 21 April 2008.

105. For the offences where you committed oral sex on NB which I think are sequences 7, 1 and 9, I set a minimum term of fourteen months commencing on 22 August 2008 and expiring on 21 October 2009, that has a balance of term expiring on 21 October 2010.

106. For the offence where NB committed fellatio on you, which I think is covered by sequences 10 and 22, you are sentenced to a minimum term of eighteen months, to commence on 22 November 2008 and expires on 21 May 2010, that has a balance of term of fifteen months expiring on 22 August 2011.

107. The offence of attempt anal intercourse against NB, which is covered by sequences 8 and 2, you are sentenced to a minimum term of eighteen months commencing on 22 February 2009 and expiring on 21 August 2010, that has a balance of term of twelve months fifteen days, expiring on 5 September 2011.

108. For the offence of sexual intercourse of NB when he was under ten, sequence 23, I set a minimum term of twenty-one months commencing on 22 May 2009 and expiring on 21 February 2011. There is a balance of term for that of twenty-two months fifteen days, expiring on 15 January 2013. I should indicate that it is in respect of that offence, the last one that I have taken into account the two Form 1 matters.

109. There are a number of s 166 matters. The sequence 11, the act of indecency towards DG, you are sentenced to six months, fixed terms in each of these cases, to date from 22 February 2007 and to expire on 21 August 2007. Sequence number 13 likewise, a six month sentence fixed term to run concurrently with the last one. Sequence 19, exhibit R+ films, six months to date from 22 January 2007 and to expire on 21 July 2007. Sequence 20, possessing an unregistered firearm to date from 22 January 2007, one month and to expire on 21 February 2007. The indecent assault of ME, sequence 24, eight months to date from 22 February 2008. Sequence 25, not keep firearm safely, four months to date from 22 January 2007 expire 21 May 2007. The sequence 26, the indecent assault of ME, the second one, eight months to date from 22 February 2008 and expire 21 October 2008.

110. The overall sentence imposed for the total criminality before the Court is one that could see the offender incarcerated from 22 January 2007 until 5 January 2013, that is, sixteen days shy of six years. The earliest release date is 21 February 2011, that is, the minimum period of four years incarceration. On the view most favourable to him, he could have a parole period of twenty-two and a half months. I recommend to the custodial offenders that the offender be offered at the earliest opportunity, a place in the CUBIT Program at Long Bay. I further recommend that until such a program is available to him, the offender be offered psychological counselling, particularly in respect of his earlier experiences of sexual abuse and anger management. I also recommend that he be placed in some other suitable program such as the USO, that is, Understanding Sexual Offending or the CORE Program.