STATE OF TASMANIA v RONALD PETER GORRINGE 18 APRIL 2024
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE WOOD J
Ronald Peter Gorringe has pleaded guilty to one count of possession of child exploitation material contrary to s 130C of the Criminal Code.
On 25 January 2021, police received information that a male was acting suspiciously at the New Norfolk pool. The person was the defendant.
The following day, on January 26, a person attended the Bridgewater Police Station and told police that their neighbour, the defendant, Ronald Gorringe, had entered their backyard and placed a HP laptop computer under some bushes. The computer was seized by police and forensically examined.
The username was the defendant’s name and it was last shut down on 25 January 2021 at 10:37 pm, and it contained child exploitation material.
The material was examined and classified according to the Interpol Baseline Classification System.
There were 1,051 category one images. Category one images are those that depict pre-pubescent children (under the age of 13 years, approximately) and the child is involved in a sexual act or is witnessing a sexual act, or the material is focussed/concentrated on the child’s anal or genital region.
There were also 109 images that fall in category two, namely, depicting files that are illegal according to local legislation either by way of age or content.
And there were 107 category three images, being related but not illegal files, depicting pre-pubescent children with the child posing in sexually provocative poses wearing limited underwear and focussed on the child’s anal or genital region. These 107 images do not fall withing the charge of possession of child exploitation material.
Additionally, there were video files that are not illegal according to this classification system depicting young girls at the New Norfolk pool, young girls at Woolworths in Bridgewater and pre-pubescent girls in bathers at the defendant’s residence. These videos were largely focussed on the bottoms of the young girls.
A review of the web history on the laptop revealed pornographic searches aimed towards young girls.
Seven months later, on 17 August 2021, a search warrant was executed for the defendant’s residence in Bridgewater, and a number of devices were seized belonging to the defendant, namely, a Samsung mobile phone, a USB, a HP laptop computer, and an Acer tower computer. These were sent for forensic examination which returned the following results:
Samsung mobile phone
Material located on the device was categorised as follows:
- 280 images in category 1, as previously defined.
- Two images in category 2.
- 23 images in category 3 of related but non-illegal files.
There were text messages found from the defendant to his neighbour seeking to have his laptop returned.
USB
- 4 images in category 1, as previously defined.
+
HP Laptop Computer
- 4 images in category 2 of unidentified females, depicting sexual acts with animals, not child exploitation material.
- 1360 in category 3 being related but non-illegal images. The images were of unknown young girls in dancing outfits and bathing costumes posing for a camera. Again, these images are not covered by the charge.
Acer Tower Computer
The computer was last logged into on 5 October 2004. There were no illegal files but there were 896 images in category 3, being sexually provocative poses with the child wearing limited underwear and focussing on the child’s anal or genital region.
The defendant was interviewed by police on 25 July 2022 and did not admit having any of the illegal material on his devices.
He admitted hiding the HP Laptop found by the witness because he knew the police were looking for him after he had been at the swimming pool the day before. He said he was not aware there was child exploitation material on the computer, which was untrue. When asked about the videos from the New Norfolk Pool and Woolworths Bridgewater, he provided no sensible explanation and said it must have been in the wrong place at the wrong time.
He admitted the Samsung mobile phone was his and that no one else had access it. He said there should not have been any child exploitation material on the phone as it was deleted. He admitted the USB was his and said there should not have been any child exploitation material on it. He admitted purchasing the second laptop after police seized his first laptop.
It can be seen from the facts I have outlined that the defendant had possession of 1,446 illegal images depicting exploitation material contained on three devices, across two different dates.
The defendant is aged 57 and has no prior convictions for similar offending. He has prior convictions for offences committed throughout his adult life, including assault, driving related offences, drug related offending, and drive under the influence of alcohol. In 1987, he was sentenced for burglary and stealing to a term of six months’ imprisonment, three of which were suspended. That is the only sentence involving actual imprisonment.
At the time of these offences, he was addicted to methamphetamine and had been for the past 20 or so years, and he was also a long-standing user of cannabis. Since being charged, he has managed to cease his use of methamphetamine and cannabis. He was motivated to do this because of the discovery that he had a daughter and grand-daughter whom he did not know about.
He suffers from schizophrenia and has been hospitalised twice. He has engaged with the Mental Health Service on a voluntary basis for over a decade and is compliant with treatment. His condition is currently stable and managed well by anti-psychotic medication.
Mr Gorringe has lived a solitary life for a number of years. He is socially isolated and has limited interests. Unfortunately, he has become even more isolated since these proceedings have been before the court due to threats he has received via social media.
He is not employed and is in receipt of a disability support pension. Family members with whom he was close, particularly his father and sister, are no longer alive.
The discovery that he has his own family, a child and grand-daughter has been very significant to Mr Gorringe and he is very motivated to strengthen that family connection. His daughter is supportive of him, and aware of the charge, and has expressed that she wants to see him get the help he needs to get better.
Mr Gorringe pleaded guilty at an early stage. A report from Community Corrections indicates he has expressed regret and remorse for his offending.
The defendant attributes his offending to his use of methamphetamine.
I have a thorough and helpful report from consultant psychiatrist, Dr Lorraine Davison, dated 20 October 2023.
It is her opinion that Mr Gorringe has paedophilic disorder, with a chronic sexual interest in young girls. Symptoms of his condition of schizophrenia have not directly contributed to his offending.
Further, it is Dr Davison’s opinion that it is clear his use of methamphetamine is not responsible for his offending, although it is a factor. She explains the likelihood of him reoffending in a similar manner in the future is much higher if he relapses to methamphetamine use. It is vital and important that Mr Gorringe does not return to any methamphetamine use.
Dr Davison also notes that the defendant has certain characteristics which pose difficulties or obstacles for treatment and rehabilitation, such as poor self-awareness, denial, limited coping skills, reluctance to engage in treatment, antisocial personality traits, and limited social supports. She does not suggest that these cannot be overcome but just that they present challenges in terms of providing treatment and rehabilitation for him.
Dr Davison recommends two forms of treatment. First, it should involve formal counselling/therapy for drug use, including a realistic relapse prevention plan. She suggests consideration be given to mandatory random drug testing to ensure abstinence from methamphetamine. Second, his treatment should involve specific psychological therapy for sex-offending. She notes this is not available in the community.
Since Dr Davison provided her report, there have been a number of listings before the court to see what might be done to arrange the treatment that she recommends.
In terms of treatment for drug use, the defendant was referred to Alcohol and Drug Services to provide formal counselling for illicit substances use, as well as relapse prevention planning. This referral was arranged with the support of the Care Co-ordinator of Tasmania Mental Health Service, Ms Claire Tabor, who has worked with Mr Gorringe since early 2021. Anglicare’s Drug and Alcohol Treatment Service is engaged for drug and alcohol relapse prevention planning. Mr Gorringe has commenced engagement with that Service. It seems that there is a wholistic and supportive approach that is being offered by Anglicare, and relapse prevention planning includes social connection and the offering of constructive activities.
Further, Mr Gorringe is progressing an application for NDIS funding and is engaging with his general practitioner for this purpose.
At the suggestion of Community Corrections, Mr Gorringe has been pursuing a referral from his general practitioner to a clinical psychologist for sex offender treatment and rehabilitation to be provided privately. The Community Forensic Mental Health Service do not currently offer that service in-house. His general practitioner made various enquires but was unable to locate a specialist psychologist who was available to provide this treatment.
More recently, and most fortunately, Anglicare has been endeavouring to assist Mr Gorringe in accessing specialist treatment. Mr Frances of Anglicare’s Mental Health has been following up a number of clinical psychologists who have been recommended. He has had success in arranging appointments with a suitably qualified clinical psychologist at the Crawley Clinic and appointments have now been arranged for Mr Gorringe.
I note that the court process has been drawn out and there have been now a number of adjournments to arrange the treatment and support recommended in October last year. It can be seen that Mr Gorringe has been compliant and co-operative with the endeavours to arrange the necessary treatment both in terms of his engagement with Community Corrections and Anglicare, as well as health professionals such as his general practitioner and care co-ordinator, Ms Tabor. His daughter has been supportive of him throughout the process and indeed, even undertook her own research and enquiries to seek the recommended specialist counselling for her father.
It can be seen that the defendant now has considerable support available to him that was not available at the time of his offending and the treatment that has been recommended is now in place. As I have said, it is most fortunate that Mr Frances has been able to achieve success in this regard and it is now able to be offered. Dr Davison was of the understanding that this treatment would not be available in the community, it is not available through the Forensic Mental Health Service and even the general practitioner did not have success in arranging it for Mr Gorringe.
In terms of some concluding comments, the crime before the court involving possession of child exploitation material is a very serious matter. The act of possessing that material is a form of encouragement to criminals to abuse children. When that content is viewed and downloaded, it perpetuates the harm that is caused to the abused child. General deterrence is a dominant consideration and, generally, gaol sentences are imposed. Rehabilitation is also a sentencing goal; it is not only in Mr Gorringe’s interests but in the community’s interests as well. Mr Gorringe’s willingness to engage in comprehensive treatment is a positive indication that he has prospects of reform. In my view, a suspended term of imprisonment subject to strict conditions gives appropriate weight to these sentencing goals. If it turns out that Mr Gorringe is not compliant with treatment, then he will be brought back before me and the suspended term of imprisonment may be activated. But, Mr Gorringe, there are signs that you will be compliant, that you will be cooperative with the treatment and the orders I am about to make and because of that I can have confidence that you are deserving of this opportunity.
I record a conviction and I impose a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment wholly suspended for the maximum period of three years on the following conditions:
- You must not commit an offence that could attract a term of imprisonment for three years from today.
- You are subject to a period of supervised probation for a period of two years from today.
- You must report to a probation officer or supervisor at 75 Liverpool Street, Hobart, before 4:00 pm today.
- You must submit to the supervision of a probation officer for a period of two years from today.
- You must report to a probation officer as required by a probation officer and comply with the reasonable and lawful directions of a probation officer or supervisor for that same period.
- You must comply with any directions given by your probation officer in order to progress your application for assessment by the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
- You must comply with directions that you undergo assessment and treatment for drug dependency and relapse prevention as directed by a probation officer.
- You must submit to testing for drug use as directed by a probation officer.
- You must submit to medical, psychological, or psychiatric assessment or treatment as directed by a probation officer, including psychological therapy for sex offending as recommended by Dr Davison in her report of 20 October 2023.
I make an order pursuant to s 130F of the Criminal Code that the three devices seized from the defendant that contain the child exploitation material be forfeited.
I make an order pursuant to s 6 of the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2005 that you be placed on the register and be subject to the obligations under that Act for a period of three years from today.