STATE OF TASMANIA v CECIL MAURICE MABB 2 DECEMBER 2021
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Cecil Mabb pleads guilty to abduction of a child and assault. I agreed to deal with his plea of guilty to one count of assaulting a pubic officer. On Sunday 24 January 2021 a married couple took their three children camping with family friends at Montagu Park, in the far north west coast of Tasmania. Soon after the family arrived at about 4.30 pm, their daughter, aged five, and the four year old son of another family, rode their bikes off in the direction of the nearby boat ramp. Mr Mabb had parked his ute, backed into the bush, in an isolated section about 400 metres along the route the children took. As the children passed Mr Mabb took the girl from her bike. Without speaking, he picked her up by the legs, put his hands around her neck, choking her, and carried her to his ute. She was screaming. The boy pleaded with him to let her go but he did not. Mr Mabb threw her into the passenger side of his car and drove away at speed towards the beach.
The boy returned to the camp site terrified and distressed and managed to convey enough of what had happened. Frantic attempts were made by her parents and others to find the child, initially without success. The police were called at 5.15 pm. At about 5.30 pm she was found alone on a beach about a kilometre from the campsite. She was dazed and in shock and seemingly oblivious to the calls of those looking for her. She told the man who found her that “someone brought me here and I don’t know how to get back.” She had suffered injuries, the full extent of which only became apparent later.
At about 5.37 pm, only a few minutes after the girl was found, Mr Mabb phoned the police. He said there was an extreme emergency because he had just tried to kidnap a child. He provided his personal details and his approximate location. He told the police that he needed professional help and intended to return to Rosebery. What then followed was an intensive police search. Information about the location of his phone disclosed that by just after 8 pm he was in the Arthur River area. He phoned the police two more times that evening, both times around 9 pm. He sounded intoxicated but would not disclose his location. The search was suspended in the early hours of the morning of Monday 25 January but recommenced at first light. A police helicopter and drones were deployed and Parks and Wildlife officers joined in. At about 1.30 pm two of those officers, one of whom was Jamie Hanson, found Mr Mabb’s vehicle in the bush off a remote fire break area near the Arthur River. Mr Mabb was there. He told the two parks officers to leave and that he wanted the police. He assaulted Mr Hanson by threatening him with a hammer. At about 4.15 pm Mr Mabb walked from the bush and surrendered himself to police officers. He was intoxicated. He has been in custody since 25 January 2021.
Mr Mabb is now 42. He comes from a background of considerable deprivation. His mother, regrettably, is a member of the stolen generation, and she succumbed to heavy abuse of alcohol and was unable to care for him. He moved with his father to Tasmania aged five. He claims to have been sexually abused, and then abandoned when he was 13. He returned to live with a family in Queensland but was exposed to abuse of alcohol and drugs, and strongly inappropriate widespread community sexual behaviour. Between 1995 and 2003, when he was aged between about 16 and 24, he committed a series of sexual offences against children. He was not dealt with for those crimes until 2008 when he was sentenced to imprisonment for four years. He was required to serve 16 months. Otherwise his record before 2008 was for some drug offending, an escape and an assault, none of which resulted in actual imprisonment. He was not then sentenced for any offence since until 16 September 2021. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 months from 26 January 2021 for an assault committed on 5 June 2020. On his release from the 2008 sentence his life stabilised. He and his wife commenced life together. He became an industrious member of the community. All of that changed in 2019 when the relationship with his wife broke down. His life went into a downward spiral. He began to heavily abuse alcohol and prescription drugs and became itinerant. And was estranged from his two children. He moved to Tasmania in mid-2020 and lived in Rosebery. Unable to find stable work, the situation did not improve. On the day of this crime he went fishing and was intoxicated. He says that he released the girl after about five minutes, immediately realised the gravity of what he had done, wished to present to the police but instead resorted to more alcohol and cannabis. As to the events of the next day, he says that he had no intention to harm the ranger, Mr Hanson, although Mr Hanson was not to know that.
Mr Mabb pleaded guilty on 29 January 2021, only four days after his arrest. The pleas of guilty and his admissions to the police are in his favour. They facilitate justice and relieve the victims from the additional trauma of having to contemplate a trial and give evidence. I am also satisfied in this case that the pleas are a strong indication of an acceptance of responsibility and remorse. He has suffered for his actions independently of the sentence I impose because the caravan and shed in which he lived at Rosebery, and his personal possessions have been destroyed by vigilantes. He is subject to harsh treatment from other prisoners.
Nevertheless this is a particularly serious crime. It must have been a terrifying experience for the child he abducted and her family, and also for the others searching for her. Although Mr Mabb released her after a relatively short period, he abandoned her on her own and she was not found until an hour after she was taken. Although the fact of the abduction is serious without more, the nature and extent of the injuries she suffered demonstrate that significant force was used against her. The boy said he saw Mr Mabb put his hands around the girl’s throat and choke her. When she was found the girl said she had been choked. Those complaints are strongly supported by the medical findings. She had areas of petechiae, small red spots which appear as a result of bleeding from small blood vessels, on her forehead and around her eyes and mouth. There was also bleeding into the whites of both of her eyes. In this case those petechiae resulted from intracerebral pressure caused by external pressure which obstructed the larger blood vessels in her neck, strangulation. Strangulation also explains the redness and bruising which was observed in various locations on the front, side and back of her neck. There was redness and bruising on her ears which are explained either by strangulation or, perhaps more correctly, choking or by blunt force trauma. Choking carries a high risk of death or brain injury from asphyxiation. There was also bruising and redness around her ears and on her scalp and left jaw which were explained by blunt force trauma, in other words, being struck to the left side of her head. There were other bruises and scratches and abrasions all over her body including her arms and legs, and her front and back. Those injuries suggest that she was either dragged, or ran, through the vegetation. The child was examined for signs of sexual assault. No evidence of it was found. That does not exclude the possibility of sexual assault, but Mr Mabb is not charged with any sexual offence and the sentence imposed on him cannot be increased to take account of the possibility that an offence has been committed that he has not been charged with.
The psychological effects on his victim are likely to be significant and long lasting, and the full impact is not likely to be known for a long time. The effects may well be lifelong. A victim impact statement prepared by her father given to me some time ago describes the type of immediate effects which are to be expected, such as a loss of confidence, fear and anxiety. A further victim impact statement to take account of the passage of time and given to me today indicates that the effects of this crime are ongoing. She continues to suffer from nightmares and other serious psychological impacts. There has been a continuing impact on the broader family.
The reason or motive for Mr Mabb’s conduct is relevant to the need to protect the public from any future risk he may pose. This sentencing hearing commenced on 13 April 2021. I was given a report from an experienced forensic psychologist, Dr Georgina O’Donnell dated 5 April 2021. Following his apprehension on 25 January, Mr Mabb told the police at the Burnie police station that he was a paedophile. He was formally interviewed on 26 January 2021. He admitted what he had done. He cannot explain his conduct other than to assert that he wanted to cuddle the girl because she reminded him of his granddaughter. He told the police that he was “pretty sure” there was no intention of sexual assault. While in custody he told prison staff that he was not a paedophile, but that he “abducted the girl so he could eat her”, and that he had had a desire to eat people since he was a teenager. Mr Mabb agrees that he said those things, but says he did not mean them. The suggestion of some cannibalistic tendency unsurprisingly generated some publicity as a result of which Dr O’Donnell wrote a further report dated 14 April 2021. She points to the lack of any clinical evidence to support such a motive.
As a result of further contact arising from the publicity the State sought time to investigate and obtain reports about matters relevant to sentence. What followed is a report from a forensic psychiatrist, Dr Michael Jordan. It is dated 25 October 2021. There is substantial consensus between the opinions of both experts. Like Dr O’Donnell, Dr Jordan reports that there is no evidence to suggest any statement of cannibalistic intent, if that is what it was, and I find that it was nothing other than a bizarre attempt to access treatment in the prison he thought he needed. As I’ve already indicated Mr Mabb offered no other explanation for his crime. He cannot explain his conduct after that, and in particular the force he applied and why he took her away in his car. Although he has stated on multiple occasions in various contexts that he is a paedophile, he denies any sexual interest in children and says that sexual interest in the victim was not the reason he took her. Both psychiatrists do not exclude sexual motivation playing a part in this crime. Dr O’Donnell, states that Mr Mabb’s trauma and life experiences, particularly the sexual abuse to which he was subjected as a child, have led to emotional and behavioural problems, and that it is likely that Mr Mabb does have an underlying sexual interest in female children. Dr Jordan reports that although Mr Mabb has a range of unusual sexual proclivities, it is not conclusive that he suffers from paedophilic disorder. According to Dr Jordan, although some of the risk factors for future sexual offending are present, two of the most important factors, sexual deviance and strong anti-social traits, are not. He tends to the view that the crime was more likely a drunken, misguided and disturbing attempt at self-soothing, rather than sexually motivated, although the question is “open to conjecture.”
As I have already indicated, the matters which have led to a protracted further investigation are relevant only to the issue of future risk. The fact that a crime of this nature was committed at all is indicative of a need for punishment, general and specific deterrence and protection of the public. I would also take account of the chance, expressed in varying ways by both experts, that sexual motivation cannot be excluded as a possible contributing factor in a very complicated scenario, adding to the need for public protection. Both experts speak of the need for programs to address the various future risk factors. Abduction of a child is a Class 3 offence under the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2005. I must make an order under that legislation unless I am satisfied that there is no risk of future sexual offending and, in the circumstances of this case, I cannot be so satisfied. I take into account that he has since this crime been sentenced to a period of 10 months imprisonment. That is relevant to totality but I give it little weight because this crime involves substantial separate criminality. I will allow for parole but only after a period which, in my view, adequately reflects the need for punishment and public protection.
Cecil Mabb, you are convicted on complaint 50277/21 counts 1 and 2, abduction of a child and assault. You are also convicted on complaint 50283/21, assaulting Mr Hanson. I make an order under the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2005 directing that the Registrar cause your name to be placed on the Register and that you comply with the reporting obligations under that Act for a period of six years from your release. I impose one sentence. You are sentenced to imprisonment for six years from 25 November 2021. I order that you are not eligible for parole until you have served four years of that sentence.