STATE OF TASMANIA v RJF 3 JULY 2026
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
RJF, you plead guilty to one count of committing an indecent act with a child. The victim of the crime was your daughter, Emily, who was 8 years old at the time. To protect her identity I have referred to her in the published version of these comments by a different name. The crime was committed either in late 2023 or in the first part of 2024. At the time your partner was James King. In these published comments I have also used a false name for him. You and he were at home with Emily and Mr King’s eight year old son. The children were playing in Emily’s room until you called her into your bedroom. You and Mr King were there. You asked her to remove the underwear she was wearing under her nightie. You and Mr King removed your own clothes. As Emily lay on her back on the bed you knelt at the foot of the bed licking her genitals while Mr King had sexual intercourse with you by penetrating your vagina with his penis from behind. How long this went on for cannot be determined, but Emily saw all of what was happening. Afterwards, Emily put on her underwear and returned to her room.
Later, you told her that she could not tell anyone what had happened or you “would go to jail” and she and Mr King’s son would be “taken away”.
On 17 June 2024 Emily began living with her father after he became concerned about her safety. Emily said nothing about what had happened until December of that year when she disclosed to her father what you had done. When he asked you if you had sexually assaulted Emily your response was “Yes, once”. The police were notified. On 13 December 2024 Emily was interviewed by a police officer and the interview was recorded. You were interviewed on 30 January 2025. You described Mr King as violent and abusive but said nothing in relation to the allegation of this crime.
You were not arrested until 14 January 2026. You are now aged 47. You have no relevant prior convictions. Your biological father was a violent alcoholic. You were victim of and witness to his violence. After he was no longer with your mother you had a loving and supportive step father. Since leaving high school you have led a relatively industrious life. You have three children. The older two are adults. As a result of this crime you are currently estranged from them. You now live with your mother and are her principal carer. She is elderly and requires constant care. The burden of that will now fall on others. However, the impact of your imprisonment on family members is part of the price to be paid for serious crime.
You pleaded guilty on your first appearance in the Court of Petty Sessions on 25 March 2026. Your early plea will result in a discount on your sentence. You have accepted responsibility and facilitated justice. Perhaps most importantly, your daughter is saved from the considerable additional trauma of having to prepare for a trial and give evidence. You have also indicated a willingness to give evidence at the trial of Mr King about the commission of this crime and your respective roles. He has not yet entered a plea. The State is unable to say whether your evidence might be of value. Your counsel referred to an issue concerning the extent of your recall of this particular incident but that will be a question for future proceedings if necessary. Nevertheless, it is the policy of the criminal law to allow a reduction in sentence in return for giving evidence in relation to co-offenders. That is so for many reasons, including that it is inherently right to assist in the prosecution of offenders generally of such serious crimes as this and it indicates some contrition and insight on your part. If you fail to co-operate as you have promised, the sentence may be reviewed and increased on appeal. In this case, I will take it into account in a general way because the promise is of uncertain value and I find it too difficult to specify what the discount should be.
You are to be sentenced for one crime, which did not involve an allegation of repeated conduct. However, even one crime of this nature can have a dramatic impact. A victim impact statement prepared by your daughter’s father was read to the court. One purpose of it was therapeutic. The contents are to be treated with circumspection. There may be other factors at play. However what her father described is just the type of impact which was to be expected. Your daughter is now 10. She blames herself for what happened. She was in your care and subject to your supervision and authority. There can hardly be any greater breach of trust than breach of the trust of a child in a mother. She was very young and vulnerable. She was subjected to acts which were degrading and humiliating in what should have been the safety of her own home. Mr King’s presence added to the degradation and humiliation. His son was also in the house. The State accepts that this crime was instigated by Mr King and that you committed this crime at his direction and control. A report from a forensic psychologist, Dr Georgina O’Donnell, indicates that you do not suffer from any paraphilic disorder. That is, you were not motivated by your own sexual attraction or gratification. Mr King had subjected you to physical abuse and sexual violence. You acquiesced as a result of his coercive conduct and to avoid the possibility of further violence against you. However, it is not asserted that you were deprived of the power to refuse. You elected to subject your daughter to sexual abuse to facilitate his depraved sexual gratification instead of fulfilling your duty to protect your daughter.
In sentencing for matters of this nature the protection of children is the paramount factor. Courts have a duty to protect children from sexual depredation and deter those who may be inclined to engage in such conduct. General deterrence is a dominant consideration, particularly in cases where the perpetrator is in a position of trust in relation to the victim. Children are particularly vulnerable in the situation of abuse carried out by a family member. The prohibition of sexual acts with children is founded on the presumption of harm. The harm which results from sexual abuse of a child can be profound and lifelong. Your daughter has been deprived of a happy childhood, free of abuse, and a relationship with her mother, at least until she is an adult.
I think the risk of future offending is small, but the nature of this crime is such that I cannot be satisfied that there is no material risk.
You are convicted on complaint 30727/2026. 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 three years from your release. You are sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 21 months from 26 June 2026 the date you were taken into custody. I order that you not be eligible for parole until you have served half that term.