STATE OF TASMANIA v BARRY JAMES HUBBLE 30 JULY 2025
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE BRETT J
Mr Hubble, you have pleaded guilty to one count of possession of child exploitation material. The material was stored by you on three separate devices all of which were found by police in your bedroom. You shared the house with your mother, sister and nephew but there is no suggestion, as I understand it, that anyone else had access to the relevant devices. In total, the devices contained 18,126 child exploitation material files of which 12,936 were unique images and videos. The material was categorised in accordance with the Interpol based catergorisation system. There was 762 category 1 files and 17,364 category 2 files. It is apparent that some of the material was animated but in accordance with the fact that the examples put to me were intended to be an indication of the overall material, it is clear also that the majority of the material involved depictions of real people and real children.
The material contained child exploitation material images which exhibited in my view a high level of depravity and cruelty. The examples which have been described to me depict the serious sexual abuse of many children. The children are mostly female and their ages range between 8 and 15 years. There are many examples in the material that relate to real people and penetrative sexual acts perpetrated by adult males on children. In some, there are aspects of the treatment of the child which emphasises the degrading nature of the conduct. For example, there are depictions of adult males ejaculating on a child’s body and in her mouth and children being tied up or otherwise restrained when they are being penetrated by adult males.
In one video, an eight year old child is tied to a clothes horse and subjected to sexual contact from an animal and then an adult male. There are also examples of children interacting sexually with each other obviously at the instigation of and under control of adults.
You were 47 years of age at the time of these crimes. There is nothing relevant in your criminal history and I have been given significant information about your horrific childhood and the perpetration on you of sexual abuse. I note also that as a result of an accident, you suffer from a condition which causes ongoing and extreme pain and you are required to be heavily medicated to cope with that pain. I think one of the effects of this is that in the event of a custodial sentence you will find that sentence more difficult to deal with than others who do not have that same condition.
Having said that, while your general background and your childhood in particular is relevant to my overall assessment of you, it does not explain your involvement in this crime and your moral culpability in respect of it remains high. I also regard this crime as having a high degree of objective seriousness and requiring a sentence that emphasises general deterrence. As has been said by this Court including myself on many occasions, the possession of child exploitation material creates a market for such material which in turn encourages its production. This inevitably results in horrific abuse of children of the nature exemplified by the material which was in your possession. The large number of images possessed by you aggravates the seriousness of the crime and again is directly linked to the number of children harmed in the production of this material.
General deterrence is particularly important because possession of such material results from a deliberate decision and is easily achieved because of the internet. Those who make such a decision must understand that they will incur such punishment.
There is very little that mitigates your offending. I do accept that you should be given credit for your early plea of guilty. You pleaded guilty at an early time in the Magistrates Court. This has significant utilitarian value in particular it has avoided the need for the prosecution to prove the case against you at trial. I accept also that the plea does at the very least indicate that you have some insight into the seriousness of this matter and you have as you sit here today made a commitment that you will not repeat such conduct in the future. Hence it is relevant to the question of specific deterrence.
It follows from all of this that the only appropriate sentence is one of actual imprisonment and that is because of the need to give effect to general deterrence and denunciation of the Court and the community in respect of such conduct.
Barry Hubble, you are convicted of the crime to which you pleaded guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 16 months to commence immediately. If it were not for your early plea of guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of at least 20 months imprisonment. You are not eligible for parole until you have served one half of the sentence, which is a period of eight months.
I am required to make an order under the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2005 unless I am satisfied that you do not impose a risk of committing a reportable offence in the future. Having regard to the circumstances in this case, I am not satisfied of that matter and accordingly must make an order. I order that your name be placed on the Register pursuant to that Act and that you comply with the reporting obligations under that Act for a period of five years.
Pursuant to s 130F(2) of the Criminal Code, I order that the three storage devices, in particular the hard disk drive, the computer tower and the mobile phone seized by police be forfeited to the Crown.