sentence — 2 counts of using carriage service to transmit child pornography contrary to Commonwealth Criminal Code — additional state offences — victims of offence — s 16(A)(2)(d) — trade and exchange of child abuse material supports industry founded on exploitation of children by depraved minority of adults — exploits vulnerability and innocence of children — offender has exploited children by participating in use and circulation of materials — offender did so as part of own fantasy and desire for sexual gratification — general deterrence — s 16A(2)(ja) — sentence imposed must deter others from becoming involved in possession, viewing and transmission of child abuse material — sentence must denounce offending on behalf of community and protect other children from becoming victims — nature and circumstances — s 16A(2)(a) — offending spans period of just over 4 years — conversations occurred repeatedly and regularly over period of 6 months — creation of text dialogue around pictures and videos of young children was at times particularly degrading, graphic and concerning — dialogue around incest themes has potential to inspire or support such behaviour and is inherently dangerous — serious offences as they directly reflect trade in materials and creation of demand for it — significant overlap between charges — all 3 Commonwealth offences occurred within single conversations — production of child abuse material relates to text conversations and not in any way being involved in creation of images or videos — material transmitted by offender of lesser volume than received and generally of a less serious nature — specific deterrence — s 16A(2)(j) while committing offences offender held position of General Manager within Victorian Correctional system — community expects persons in such roles to be of highest integrity — hardship to offender — while not meeting high standard of exceptional hardship loss of income and ongoing limitations are relevant to considerations — sentencing judge took into account extra curial punishment of publicity and loss of employment as well as involvement of DHHS — time in custody will be difficult — offender likely to serve sentence in protective custody — risk of negative treatment by other prisoners some of whom may have been under offender’s supervision — risk of negative treatment from custodial officers who feel offender has betrayed former role — upon arrest online group emerged focussed on offender with distinct level of vitriol in exchanges — guilty plea — s 16A(2)(g) — offender pleaded guilty from outset — in context of COVID-19 pandemic plea carries particular weight — it was open to offender to take course which would have seen them remain on bail for considerable period of time — offender entitled to discount in sentencing for prompt resolution of matter in those circumstances — COVID-19 — offender entered custody during pandemic which meant immediate period of isolation — it is unclear for how long restrictions will last however prisons will likely be some of last places where restrictions will ease — rehabilitation — s 16A(2)(n) — after being bailed offender sought treatment with psychologist — despite seeing psychologist for over 12 months offender has not started sex offender treatment — offender is still at start of rehabilitation journey — sentencing judge cautious in accepting assessment of being at low risk of reoffending given that offender has not engaged with psychologist in discussion around offending — further psychological risk assessment is also cautiously accepted — offender claimed to psychologist to have no sexual interest in child pornography — claims are difficult to reconcile with online conversations and admissions — psychologist seems to have accepted claim that any interest in this type of material is gone — offender has minimised offending — claims are more likely part of positive impression management due to difficulties in acknowledging negative aspects — positive prospects for rehabilitation — contrition — s 16A(2)(f) — sentencing judge did not accept explanation that this was intellectual pursuit — claim does not explain why offender saved hundreds of images — offender may have unwittingly created narrative which does not confront true motivations admitted in interview — offender claims to not have considered that they were causing harm to young and vulnerable people — offender has now expressed abhorrence and self-loathing at offending — offender sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment for Commonwealth offences to be released on recognisance after serving 14 months — total effective State term of 3 years’ and 5 months — 12 months cumulation of Commonwealth offences on State offences — offender will simultaneously be subject to State parole and Commonwealth recognisance — s 6AAA — but for pleas of guilty global sentence imposed would have been one of 5 years’ and 8 months imprisonment with 4 year and 5 month non-parole period
