STATE OF TASMANIA v CHRISTOPHER ALEX STANDEN 1 DECEMBER 2023
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE MARTIN AJ
Mr Standen, following information received from overseas, on 17 October 2019 members of the Australian Federal Police executed a search warrant at the home of your parents, where you lived. A number of electronic devices were seized which, in essence, contained child abuse material. Although your offending was detected in October 2019, because of the need to forensically examine the electronic devices, you were not charged until 19 October 2022.
You first appeared in the Magistrates Court on 17 December 2022 and, on your second appearance in the Magistrates Court, being 17 January 2023, you entered your plea of guilty. On 23 February 2023, a plea was presented in this Court in mitigation, but for various reasons, including the obtaining of reports, the proceeding in this Court were adjourned from time to time and it was not until 15 August 2023 that you were sentenced.
You have pleaded guilty to three crimes that can generally be described as child abuse crimes. First, possessing child abuse material accessed using a carriage service contrary to s 474.22A of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)(the Code). The maximum penalty for that crime is 15 years. Second, accessing child abuse material contrary to s 474.22 of the Code for which the maximum penalty is also 15 years’ imprisonment. Third, possessing child exploitation material contrary to s 130C of the Criminal Code (Tas), for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for 21 years.
As I have said, your pleas were entered at the earliest opportunity. Justice Geason imposed separate sentences for each crime, but the result of the orders was the imposition of a total effective sentence of imprisonment for 2 years and 8 months from the date of sentence. His Honour ordered that you be released after serving 12 months.
You appealed against the sentence on the sole ground that the sentence was manifestly excessive. However, through no fault of Justice Geason, it became apparent that one of the sentences was imposed on the basis that you had accessed 22,492 items of child abuse material, when the number of items accessed was, in fact, 5,325. That mistake having been made, on appeal the sentences were set aside and the matter was recommitted to this Court for determination by a different judge.
The lengthy delay in this matter has not been caused by your conduct. Of course, during the period of the delay, you were on bail with stringent conditions. You have, therefore, had this matter hanging over your head for a very long time and it has caused you and your family significant distress and stress. It is well recognised that these types of consequences caused by excessive delay are to be taken into account in the exercise of the sentencing discretion.
Finally, I note that you have been in custody since 15 August 2023. So, the sentence I impose will be backdated to that time.
The first crime concerns possession of 22,492 files containing child abuse material found on two hard drives which were seized on 17 October 2019. Hence the date of the crime was the date of seizure. Child abuse material is categorised by the Australian National Victim Image Library and your material included images in categories one through to five, including the more serious categories involving sexual penetration of children. The hard drives also contained computer generated animation and cartoons involving child abuse. The two hard drives were only partially examined. An additional nine hard drives were also analysed and found to contain some category six child abuse material in an unknown amount.
The second crime of accessing and downloading child abuse material occurred between May 2016 and October 2019. During that period in excess of three years you accessed child abuse material online and downloaded it to your mobile telephone and hard drives to save and store it. You categorised and sorted the material in these two offences by theme.
The crime in count two involved images, which were part of the 22,492 files that related to count one. This crime involved 5,325 child abuse images and videos and they were within categories three through to and including category five.
The third crime contrary to the Tasmanian Criminal Code involved your possession of 175 (anime paper) books, 35 of which contained category six child abuse material.
On 17 October 2019, you cooperated fully with the investigating officers. You admitted that the electronic devices were yours and provided a password to police which enabled them to access your encrypted drive where the images were located. You had password protection on the encrypted drive because it contained child pornography.
During the interview with police on 17 October 2019, you admitted the images found on your computer included children in nappies, young children involved in oral sex, a small child with a penis between his legs and a penis in each hand, baby photos and photos of naked young children. When you were asked how the images came to be on your computer, you said you had downloaded them and had been downloading over a period of years. You had used a TOR browser in order to access them and, having downloaded the images, you sorted the images and videos by theme in a folder named Tetsu. You admitted looking at most of the sorted images and videos, but not all, and any that were not sorted were located in a an unsorted folder. TOR is software for enabling anonymous communication and is required to access the Dark Web. It allows users to send messages by concealing the user’s location.
Police put to you that there were images of nude young boys performing sexual acts and asked if you would class this as child exploitation material. You agreed that you would. You admitted understanding that this material was against the law.
During the interview you gave answers which appeared to acknowledge that you were sexually attracted to children. It has been made clear to me during submissions that your attraction is to viewing images of young children and that you have no inclination to engage in personal contact, and that is physical contact, with children.
I agree with Justice Geason that there was a degree of sophistication attached to your crimes. Your offending was far from isolated accessing of child abuse material. Mr Standen, put bluntly, your crimes are abhorrent. The material includes numerous individual victims being subjected to highly depraved acts amounting to rape and sexual assault of very young children by adult persons. As the criminal courts are well aware, this type of offending encourages worldwide abuse and exploitation of children and the prevalence of these types of crimes is, quite frankly, frightening. Protection of children is of paramount importance. To that end, general deterrence, together with denunciation and punishment, are of particular importance in the exercise of the sentencing discretion.
As to matters personal to you, I have had the assistance of reports from a clinical psychologist, a forensic psychiatrist and a probation officer. The authors have provided a very helpful insight into your background and mental state. Prior to this offending, which commenced in 2016, you were a person without criminal offending and of good character.
You were born in 1986 and you are now aged 37. You were born and raised in Tasmania in a good family, although your parents experience difficulties arising out of post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by one of your parents. You were, in your words, an “outstanding” student at school, but you found the workload at University overwhelming and, again in your words, you “crashed and burned under the pressure”. Notwithstanding those problems, you went on to obtain further qualifications and, until these pending legal matters arose, you had a continuous employment in the IT area. You hope to re-enter the workforce in due course and you have commenced a self-study course in cyber securities.
During later high school years, you publicly acknowledged that you were a homosexual and commenced a relationship with one of your friends. It was about the end of high school when you felt that you were developing a growing sense of body dysmorphia. You found escape from these feelings through reading and engaging in video games where you could fantasise about being someone else. The escapism continued with pornography. At this time, you also had an interest in anime, a form of a Japanese cartoon which is a legitimate mainstream genre of animation in Japan. You started learning Japanese at school and this dovetailed into your interest in anime. It was put to Justice Geason, and to me, that the child exploitation material falling within this category is, or was, an underground offshoot of that material.
Over the years you have had a number of relationships, but you began experiencing depressive symptoms in your early twenties. Those psychological issues have continued unabated until the present time and you have had ongoing treatment over the years, including appropriate medication.
As to your offending, the psychiatrist reported that there is no indication to suggest an underlying mental illness would have affected your ability to understand the wrongfulness of your actions. In the opinion of the psychiatrist, you would have been aware that your conduct was likely to be considered illegal, but the psychiatrist added that “distorted cognitions such as he was not a ‘bad’ person or such interest are a ‘weird’ part of him and that he was not harming anyone, would have facilitated the offending”. The psychiatrist concluded, on balance, from the information available that it was possible to conclude that you would meet the criteria for a paedophilic disorder (which involves persistent and intense patterns of sexual arousal from deviant fantasies, urges regarding prepubescent children.
The clinical psychologist first saw you on 8 November 2019 and has seen you extensively since that time. She has reported that over the years you have presented with consistent concerns for your family’s mental health and relationships, empathy for your family and work colleagues, remorse for your behaviour, and a desire to understand your behaviour. Your attitude is one of ownership and responsibility and, as she says, with no efforts to deflect or minimise your behaviour, your presentation has been consistent and interpreted by her as sincere over the course of these years.
In the opinion of the psychiatrist, you pose a low risk of sexual recidivism. You are already engaged in psychological treatment, that is until you were taken into custody, and receiving anti-depressant medication. It is the opinion of the psychiatrist, you would benefit more from individual psychotherapy rather than a sexual offender treatment program. You are fortunate to have the ongoing support of your family and a long term partner.
I accept the opinion of the psychiatrist that you are a low risk of repeating your offending. I am satisfied you are thoroughly ashamed of your conduct, and remorseful as to the impact it has had on your family, particularly your parents. You now have insight into the nature of your offending and the harm it causes on a wider front. It must be said, however, that notwithstanding your prospects of rehabilitation, which are positive, personal deterrence remains a relevant factor. In addition, matters personal to you and your prospects, while relevant, in terms of priority must give way to the need for general deterrence, denunciation and punishment.
Mr Standen, for over three years you accessed a vast range of child abuse material in an organised and methodical manner. The material you accessed included images of grossly depraved conduct involving very young children. Your criminal conduct involved many victims, that is, many children. As a community we must never lose sight of the fact that this type of offending involves child victims who, because of you and many others who act your depraved desires, are preyed upon and made to suffer in degrading and depraved ways.
When you appealed against your sentence following the imposition of the sentence by Justice Geason, had your appeal followed the normal processes, if the Court of Criminal Appeal had been of the view that your sentence was, in fact, too light, it would have given a warning to you of its power to increase your sentence and you would have had the opportunity to withdraw your appeal. If the appeal had been allowed and the Court had re-sentenced, a lesser sentence would have been imposed. As events have transpired you are back before this Court for re-sentencing and my discretion is not constrained, but there may be an element of unfairness if my sentences are longer than those imposed by Justice Geason. In these circumstances, I have reached my own view as to appropriate sentences with respect to each individual offending and the total, but I have made adjustments to reflect these particular circumstances.
Count one concerns your possession on 17 October 2019 of 22,492 files containing child abuse material. Ordinarily, I would have imposed a sentence longer than the sentence imposed by Justice Geason, but not significantly longer. In those circumstances, given the history of this matter, I impose the same sentence as imposed by Justice Geason, namely imprisonment for 1 year and 8 months. That sentence will commence on 15 August 2023.
Count two relates to your accessing and downloading 5,325 images and videos over a period in excess of three years. This was an organised and persistent crime. In my view, the sentence imposed by Justice Geason was manifestly inadequate and I have reached the view that it would be inappropriate for me to impose the same sentence. I will impose the sentence I consider to be appropriate, but I will make adjustment in other ways to reflect the particular circumstances which I have described. Had it not been for your plea, I would have imposed a sentence of imprisonment for 3 years. After allowing for your plea, I impose a sentence of 2 years and 3 months.
Count three concerns possession on 17 October 2019 of the anime paper books containing category six child abuse material. Unconstrained by the background circumstances, I would have imposed a sentence somewhat longer than Justice Geason, but not significantly. In those circumstances, I impose the same sentence of 8 month’s imprisonment. That sentence on count three will be served concurrently with the sentence on count one.
Having regard to the principle of totality, and making full allowance for the extensive delay in this matter, I was of the view that the sentence of 1 year and 2 months of the sentence on count two should be served cumulatively, which would bring a total of 3 years, that is cumulatively on count 1, but in the circumstances, I am going to make an adjustment and direct that you serve a total of 2 years and 8 months. This means that the sentence on count two of that sentence, 1 year is to be cumulative on the sentence imposed with respect to count one. So, ultimately it comes back to the same period of 2 years and 8 months as was imposed by Justice Geason, although I note from his sentencing remarks there was an arithmetical error at the end.
I am going to impose a recognisance release order. It is in this area that your rehabilitation and your future prospects are particularly important, as is making full allowance for the extensive delay in this matter. It is also important to note that you have been in custody since 15 August 2023. I make it very clear to you that the recognisance release order I am imposing is significantly shorter than the period I would normally impose had it not been for these other factors which we have discussed. I make a recognisance release order that you be released after serving six months, that will be on your entering into a recognisance of $5,000 to comply with conditions that you be of good behaviour for a period of three years. Your release will be subject to the conditions stipulated in s 20(1)B of the Crimes Act. You are required to report to Community Corrections within two days of your release from custody.
So it is quite clear, during that period of three years you are to be under the supervision of a probation officer; obey all reasonable directions of the probation officer; not travel interstate or overseas without the permission of the probation officer; and undertake to take such treatment or rehabilitation programmes the probation officer reasonably directs. I have said that you are to obey all reasonable directions of the probation officer, that includes directions as to your place of residence and your employment, and understand that treatment or rehabilitation programmes includes assessment of treatment for any form of sexual offending.
I direct that your name be placed on the Register in accordance with the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act, and you must comply with the reporting conditions for a period of five years after your release.
You are convicted of each of the offences.
Your recognisance release order takes effect six months after you were taken into custody.