IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA	Revised
Not Restricted
Suitable for Publication	
AT WODONGA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS		
		
v		
		
STEFFEN ELBERT (A Pseudonym)		

---

JUDGE:	HER HONOUR JUDGE RIDDELL	
WHERE HELD:	Wodonga	
DATE OF HEARING:	16 October 2024	
DATE OF SENTENCE:	18 October 2024	
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Elbert (A Pseudonym)	
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VCC 1628	

REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:			CRIMINAL LAW -- SENTENCE
Catchwords:		Accessing Child Abuse Material --- Possession of Child Abuse Material --- Commonwealth offences --- Offending over 22 month period --- Hidden-service Chat rooms --- Dark Web --- 13,548 links accessed --- 345 Files downloaded and saved --- Category 1 and 2 images and videos possessed --- Exceptional Circumstances --- Offender aged 52 --- No prior criminal history --- Significant sexual abuse by parents and by uncle when offender was a child --- Positive work history --- Married --- Family support --- Previous attempts at rehabilitation --- Early Plea of Guilty
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) --- the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic)
Cases Cited: 	DPP v Smith [2010] VSCA 215 --- DPP (Cth) v Garside (2016) 50 VR 800 --- DPP v Tewksbury [2018] VSCA 38 --- Dennis v The Queen [2017] VSCA 251 --- Maine v The Queen [2018] VSCA 56 --- McNiece v The Queen [2019] VSCA 78 --- Crowder (a pseudonym) v The King [2024] VSCA 211 --- Bugmy v The Queen (2013) CLR 571 --- DPP v Drake [2019] VSCA 293 --- Jawarhiri v The Queen [2021] VSCA 287 --- DPP v Hermann [2021] VSCA 160 --- Eser v The Queen [2021] VSCA 287
Sentence:		TES 24 Months Imprisonment --- 2 Year Recognisance Release Order after serving 10 months imprisonment
---

APPEARANCES:
	Counsel	Solicitors	
For the Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth)	Mr S. Dhanapala	Office of Public Prosecutions (Cth)	
			
For the Accused	Ms J. Lardner	Victorian Legal Aid	

HER HONOUR:
1	Steffen Elbert, on 16 October 2024 you pleaded guilty to two Commonwealth charges relating to offences of accessing and possessing child abuse material.
2	Your offending occurred over a period of approximately 22 months between 1 January 2022 and 21 November 2023, at a time when you were between 
49 and 51 years of age.
3	You are 52 years old.  You are a man without prior criminal history.
4	You came to the attention of the Victoria Police Joint Anti Child Exploitation Team who executed a search warrant at your premises on 21 November 2023.   A desktop computer and a USB were seized.
5	On analysis it was confirmed that you had accessed two hidden-service chat rooms which are dedicated to discussing and sharing child abuse material.
6	The first of those, 'NaughtyKidsChat', has been in operation for three years.  It promotes itself as being a space for users to discuss and share material relating to male and female children ranging from toddlers to 15 years of age in both candid and innocuous posers as well as sexual environments and depicting sexual acts involving children.
7	The second, 'BoysLand', is a similar platform which depicts male children between aged four and 14 years in sexualised environments and acts.
8	Screen recording of your desktop computer along with the statement of a police covert operative who is authorised to access such hidden-service chat rooms, confirm that you have been active on both sites since at least August 2022.  You use the moniker 'CaringMan' and you have been identified as having a sexual preference for male children through posts on the sites and by way of your reaction to images tagged as boys and posted by other users.
9	On your arrest, you were interviewed by police and made fulsome admissions.  You volunteered to police that at the time the search warrant was executed at 12.40 pm, you were in the middle of viewing some material and chatting with fellow users in America.  You agreed that you had been accessing the chat rooms for two to three years, increasingly over the last 12 months.
10	You agreed that you started saving some of the images that you liked or thought 'were good', admitting that some were sexual i.e. pornographic.  'There is some that are nude, some that are non-nude, some that are X-rated pornographic.'  You confirmed that they depicted children anywhere from four years old up to teenagers, commenting that you saved those you thought 'were cute or nice'.
11	You admitted sharing in the chat room by posting links. You admitted sometimes watching videos, however denied that you would save them as you did not want your wife to see them.
12	You told police that you got sexual gratification from the images.
13	You admitted that you had set up a particular application used to access these sites to automatically delete all conversation and record of any pictures seen or traded when you closed it.
14	You were confirmed to be using what’s called a TOR browser. A TOR or The Onion Router and Onion Browser for iOS are free, open-source software applications that enable anonymous communications and access to the darknet.
15	On examination, the TOR browser was open.  The 'recent files' system folder of 'NaughtyKidChat' which automatically displays the most recent and frequently accessed files and folders, contained child abuse material, in particular that of pre-pubescent boys performing sexual acts on adult men.  Also visible among the images was a self-shot photograph of you. 
16	Examination of the 'BoysLand' chat room revealed that on clicking material listed as 'Gallery', 13,548 links to images, showing predominantly pre-pubescent boys involved in sexual poses or sexual acts with adult males had been accessed by you.
17	It is not further possible to quantify the number of images or videos you accessed during the entirety of the charged period.
18	You admitted to police that you accessed such material once to twice a week.
19	Charge 1 of using a carriage service to access child abuse material reflects the period 1 January 2022 to 21 November 2023.
20	Charge 2 of possessing child abuse material on the date of the search relates to a total of 345 files which were located across both devices.  Of those, 332 were still images and 13 were videos.
21	Two hundred and twenty-three images and two videos were categorised as Category 1 on the Interpol Baseline Categorisation System.  That is the most serious category in that system.  It involves images or videos depicting a real pre-pubescent child under the age of 13 years involved in a sex act, witnessing a sex act or with a focus on the anal or genital region of the child.  Some examples of the images and videos you had stored are outlined in the prosecution opening.
22	The remainder of the images and videos are Category 2 child abuse material.  Such material depicts children as victims of sexual abuse, in the presence of another who is engaged in sexual activity or posing sexually, or a child exposing their own genital or anal region or breasts.  Again, some examples of what was found on your devices are contained in the summary prosecution opening.
23	The possession charge relates to the single date of the search, however you accept that that material was accumulated over a period of time.
24	You indicated your intention to plead guilty at the earliest opportunity, indicating your plea on 11 July 2024.  I accept that you are entitled to a discount in sentence on account of your plea of guilty.  Even though there is a strong prosecution case against you, your plea saves the court and the community the cost and time involved in a criminal trial.  In your case I accept it is also a reflection of some remorse for your offending.   You were very candid in your dealings with investigating police.
25	You also offered investigators the name and details of another offender by way of an email you sent after you were bailed.  Although that did not lead to an arrest, I accept that was some effort by you towards making amends for your own wrongdoing.  Similarly your plea of guilty is a reflection of the fact you have taken responsibility for your actions.  You receive the benefit of that plea.
Sentencing Principles
26	Offending against children is serious.  Sexual offending involving children is inherently so.  It is abhorrent to decent minded members of the community.
27	As the internet has developed, the proliferation of child abuse material has exploded.  Access is easy.  Detection and prosecution is difficult.  Offending is prevalent and widespread across countries, cultures and social standing.  The increasing demand places real children at risk of exploitation.
28	The trade and exchange of child abuse material supports an industry founded on the exploitation of children by a depraved minority of adults.  It exploits the vulnerability and innocence of children.  It exploits the power imbalance which naturally exists between adults and young people.  It does so for the sexual gratification of those adults, with little care or concern for its victims.
29	Victims of online child pornography are victims in that moment when their images are captured, but are victims long after as their faces and bodies are exchanged across the internet where the images and videos are likely to remain accessible indefinitely.  There is a presumption of harm to those children, both immediate and long lasting.
30	People who access that child abuse material are a critical part of that trade.  They create the market for others to create and disseminate such material.
31	For those reasons, general deterrence must be the paramount consideration in sentencing.  That is, the sentence I impose on you must deter others from becoming involved in accessing or possessing child abuse material.  It must also denounce your offending on behalf of the community and seek in some way to protect other children from becoming victims.
32	The repetitive nature of your involvement in accessing that material, over a lengthy period, highlights a need for specific deterrence.
Objective Gravity
33	In making an assessment of the objective gravity of your offending, I take into account the comments made by the Court of Appeal in the matter of DPP v Smith, and DPP (Cth) v Garside and to the cases which have followed those decisions and have reflected the expanding nature and scourge of child pornography offences. I take into account the matters outlined by the sentencing judge and implicitly approved in the recent decision of Crowder (a pseudonym) v the King and the cases referred to therein.
34	In particular in your case I take into account the following matters.
35	You accessed the material over a period of just under two years.  You accessed it regularly during that time.  You shared links with others and engaged in which discussions of the subject matter.
36	You accessed at least 13,548 images or videos, representing many, many children.
37	There is a level of sophistication to your offending.   You took steps to conceal your online presence by use of the dark web, through the TOR browser, and encrypted chat services, knowing you were in an encrypted online environment which gave some protection from detection.  You report conversations by others about law enforcement agencies, and you clearly understood the wrongfulness of your behaviour and the risks you were taking.  You set one application to automatically delete your conversations and the record of what you had looked at, clearly to avoid being found out.
38	Although I accept there are cases where many more images and videos are involved, it is the gravity of the majority of images and videos you possessed which is aggravating.  Of 345, 235 were Category 1.  That is, real children, many pre-pubescent, have been photographed and videoed in absolutely despicable acts committed against them by adults, or being made to engage in sexual acts themselves or with other children.
39	The prevalence and widespread nature of this type of online offending is demonstrated by fact that at the time of arrest you were talking in a chat room with other users who were overseas.
40	The possession charge is a single date but reflects a collection made over a longer period.  Your act of possession provide a good example of the fact that children who are exploited in this way have no control over where their images end up, over who saves them, over the fact they may be shared or passed on, and over the fact that they remain in existence hereafter.
41	You accessed and saved the images at least in part for your own sexual gratification.
42	The gravity of accessing and possessing child abuse material remains high notwithstanding I accept you did not intend to further distribute the material.
43	Those matters all elevate the seriousness of your offending.  In my view, it is a serious example of these types of offences.
44	Taking account of the matters in s16A of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), and giving effect to s17A, I am satisfied that no sentence other than a term of imprisonment is warranted.  In my view, that is the sentence of appropriate severity in all the circumstances of the offending.
Submissions of Parties as to Sentence
45	The prosecution submit that imprisonment, albeit with recognisance release order is open to me.  What that means is, the prosecution accept that the upper limit of any term of imprisonment on both charges should not exceed three years.  However, the prosecution while submitting a sentence with a recognisance release order is available, submit that such sentence should involve actual time to serve.
46	Ms Lardner, on your behalf in thorough and detailed written and oral submissions, sensibly accepts that the only sentencing option available is one of imprisonment.  However, she urges that on account of a combination of matters, I should find exceptional circs and release you immediately to a recognisance release order to allow you to continue a path to rehabilitation.
47	The statutory presumption recently enshrined in the Crimes Act (Cth) is that a person guilty of child sexual offending of this kind will serve some actual period of imprisonment.  However, a finding that exceptional circumstances exist in all the circumstances of the case opens the door to a term of imprisonment which would see you immediately released without having to serve an actual term.
48	Before turning to the question of whether there are exceptional circumstances in your case, I will outline your personal history.
Personal Circumstances 
49	I have been assisted by the submissions from Ms Lardner and by a comprehensive report authored by consultant Psychologist, Mr Simon Candlish, and dated 6 October 2024.
50	Mr Candlish is a recognised and well-respected expert in the field of assessment and treatment of sexual offenders.  He provides an executive summary at the start of his report which outlines the following features of your personal history.  He says you were the victim of sexual abuse by your uncle over a sustained period of time during your childhood and were also exposed to highly inappropriate sexual behaviour within your family home by your parents.  You have a history of depressive symptoms.  Despite your offending, he assesses you as being a low risk for further sexual offending based on testing via the recognised assessment tools.
51	Turning to that history in some more detail.
52	You are married and have been in the relationship with your wife since you were 22 years old.  She is supportive of you, though struggling with the impact of this offending.
53	You are the eldest child of two, with a younger brother.  I note that your brother was present in court through these proceedings.
54	You have a complex relationship with your father who you describe as a 'big strong Dutch man' and being like 'Jekyll and Hyde'.  He was easily angered, resulting in intense displays of rage and aggression.  He perpetrated acts of violence towards your mother and at times towards you and your brother.  Your parents never celebrated your birthdays.  You report being chronically fearful in your home.  Your family moved between a number of States in your formative years and you report being isolated at school.
55	Your schooling was thus disrupted.  You attended six primary schools and five secondary schools between year 7 and year 10.  You had difficulty forming friendships and were bullied.  At times you were involved in reactive fights.
56	You told Mr Candlish that you had a good relationship with your mother.
57	However, you described to him a history of what is child sexual abuse by way of your parents performing sexual acts in your presence from the time you were around the age of seven or eight.  That included penetrative acts.  Your father apparently told your mother this would be beneficial for your sexual education.  You also described more generally that your father displayed sexually disinhibited behaviours in the home.
58	You also report that your father liked to see your mother engaged sexually with other men which you recall would sometimes be occurring when you got home from school. As a result rumours and gossip spread among your peers, resulting further in your isolation.
59	You were sexually abused by an uncle between ages four and 11 and that included penetrative acts.  Your uncle was approximately 10 years older than you.  You describe to police during your record of interview as well as Mr Candlish your complex feelings stemming from that abuse.
60	There is no dispute about this past history of child sexual abuse.  It was not suggested that such history and its impact amounts to a mental impairment or in some way was causative such as to enliven principles 1 to 4 of Verdins.  However, there can be little doubt that your complex relationship with your parents, your father in particular, and the sexual acts committed in your presence by them and committed against you by your uncle have had an impact on you and must have some relevance to your offending.
61	Mr Candlish summarises the impact of your background as follows:
'Mr Elbert was exposed to highly inappropriate sexual behaviour as a child within the family home.  He was exposed to parental conflict and aggression and experienced neglect.  He witnessed his father’s aggressive outbursts which contributed to anxiety as a child.  He experienced insecurity and he was bullied.  Mr Elbert was sexually abused over a considerable period of time during his childhood.  He appeared to experience confusion and developed a desire to please and satisfy his abuser.  He likely experienced some level of affection from the abuser, adding to the complex impact of such abuse.  He was therefore prematurely sexualised and abused, creating a vulnerability towards sexual preoccupation, use of sex to cope with negative mood states and deviant sexual exploration, leading to the development of deviant sexual interests.'
62	He also reports that you persisted in your offending over an extended period as a result of a lack of empathy stemming from your sexualised and sexually aroused state, your distorted views that minimised the impact and seriousness of child sexual abuse, and your own experience of abuse as well as the compartmentalised and avoidant way of approaching your life.
63	Ms Lardner relies on those aspects of your history and of the expert opinion to submit that the principles enunciated by the High Court in the Queen v Bugmy are enlivened. Those principles arise where an offender has suffered significant deprivation or abuse in their childhood and formative years.  The effects of such abuse or disadvantage do not generally diminish with the passage of time, and are likely to have profound and lasting consequences.
64	The consequence of a finding that Bugmy is applicable is that your subjective culpability cannot be equated with a person who committed the same offences but had the advantage of a normal, stable and regular home environment.  That is a reflection of the principle of equal justice; though like must be treated as like, where there are differences they should be recognised.
65	The Victorian Court of Appeal in DPP v Drake stated – 
'It is the mark of a humane society that the moral judgment expressed through sentencing should take account of the lifelong damage that may result from exposure to violence or abuse or parental neglect in an offender's formative years.  … childhood trauma can permanently damage — and seriously distort — a person’s view of the world around them and their understanding of social norms.'
66	That finding is a matter which does not diminish with time and which must be given full weight in sentencing.
67	I accept that your early life experiences, in particular your premature exposure to sexual behaviours has had such an impact on you and in that way works to reduce your moral culpability for your offending.  I have read the record of interview.  I accept your account that at least in part your engagement online with other people interested in children brought you into contact with people who had experienced similar abuse themselves. Paradoxically that communication even in those settings helped you understand your own experiences.
68	That is not to excuse your behaviour nor to suggest that you did not know the wrongfulness of your actions.  You clearly did and you acknowledged as much in your record of interview.
69	It is also clear to me, despite your denials to Mr Candlish, that you did gain sexual gratification from accessing the child abuse material, as you first told police.  You told police that when they arrived you were looking at an online video but that it was one of those days where 'I wasn’t actually masturbating', inferring that other days you would do so.
70	Despite the seriousness of your offending, Mr Candlish assesses you as being at low risk of future offending.  He says your risk is perpetuated by ongoing distortions about sexual abuse of children and child abuse material that minimises such acts, and any associations with similar individuals, as well as unresolved issues associated with your own history.
71	I am perhaps more guarded about your level of risk, given some aspects of minimisation and lack of insight.  However, I appreciate those features would have been equally apparent to Mr Candlish and given his expertise I accept his opinion.
72	I take that assessment into account when assessing your prospects of rehabilitation and the need for specific deterrence.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
73	I also take into account a number of other matters outlined by Ms Lardner when assessing those principles.  I acknowledge that some of these are common features of those who commit online sexual offences as children – such as a lack of prior criminal history and otherwise solid work, family and community engagement.  As such, they receive less weight in the sentencing synthesis.  Nonetheless they are relevant to my overall consideration.
74	You have not offended before this time, and significantly you have made attempts to obtain therapeutic help for your own traumatic history.  In 2008 to 2009, you attended counselling via the Centre Against Sexual Assault or CASA.  You attended regular sessions over three to four months, however you report it was 'too much', saying that the need to recount and outline the abuse you suffered led to you stopping those sessions.  You tried again to address those issue via treatment over an eight- to nine-month period in 2014, and again in 2016 to 2017.   Those further attempts though somewhat helpful were clearly difficult for you.
75	After being charged with this offending, you completed a number of online modules of a program via StopItNow.org as recommended by investigating police.
76	In February-March 2024, you engaged with a psychologist but the cost was prohibitive.  You have ultimately found a psychologist in Tasmania who operates online.   You have participated in six sessions, working on managing intrusive thoughts about your abuse history.  You are positive about this treatment.
77	I have received a letter from that psychologist, Ms Helen Middleton, who confirms your attendance.  She says you have struggled emotionally with the sexually inappropriate behaviours inflicted on you.  You have discussed with her the way that abuse may have fuelled your curiosity regarding how others have dealt with childhood abuse, and the relationship between that curiosity and your involvement with online chat communities.
78	You told Mr Candlish you recognise the need and have an intention to continue with counselling.  To that end, you have also registered for a 12-week online treatment program for child sex offenders and run by SafeCare.org.au.
79	You have longstanding depression dating to your teenage years and including over the last five to 10 years as you have confronted the child sexual abuse you experienced.  Those chronic feelings have been exacerbated by your experience of being charged and of the criminal justice system.
80	You are highly deterred by that experience.  You have remained on bail on strict conditions since your arrest and have not reoffended in any way.  I take those matters into account.
81	I also take into account a level of public opprobrium you have suffered.  You have been engaged in the Jehovah’s Witness congregation since you were 21 years of age.  You have a raft of close relationships and social relationships through that community and it is clearly an important part of your life.  On learning of your offending, that community engaged in an inquisitorial process involving interviews and a judgment process.   A panel of elders assembled for that purpose.  There was a threat of excommunication, however, ultimately a range of restrictions were put in place including limits on your involvement and restrictions on any time with children.  That has been a difficult process.  A member of your Jehovah’s Witness community has been present in court for these proceedings.
82	I take those matters into account in the following way.  Not all persons who commit offences are subject to those types of processes or suffer the public shaming and potential for rejection from their community.
83	You have a good work history.  On leaving school after year 10, you worked with your father in the forestry industry.  You have worked in fruit picking and pruned trees for some years before beginning work for a pool building company when you first met some of your Jehovah’s Witness colleagues.  You were employed by the pool building company for five years.
84	You learned plastering in 1998 and went on to establish a successful plastering business which you continued until 2015.  You were proud of this business and had employed three apprentices.
85	In 2015, you suffered a workplace injury when an apprentice dropped a load of heavy plasterboard sheet you were both carrying.  You relied on income protection for two years before taking a position as a console operator where you worked until informing your manager of this offending upon which you were terminated.
86	I take into account your positive employment history, what Mr Candlish describes as your strong capacity for future employment or study and the fact that you have been a contributor to the community in that way.
87	I also take into account that your workplace injury from 2015 has left you suffering chronic pain in your neck.  You have nerve damage resulting in reduced feelings in your fingers and you regularly experience numbness and pins and needles in your arms.  You are medicated for this.
88	In addition you are a migraine sufferer. You experience frequent and debilitating migraines, which at times, including in March this year, have resulted in a hospitalisation.  Migraines have a direct link to stress and it is not surprising that your migraines have increased since being charged with these offences.
89	You also have Type 2 diabetes and have been told you are at risk of stroke.
90	I have received a raft of medical material confirming you are on a range of medications.  I take into account your physical health issues in combination with your age.
91	I also accept that when you were hospitalised in March 2024 with a severe migraine, you report that you were feeling suicidal.  I note your comments in the record of interview that at times you have previously felt suicidal on account of your past history.
92	Mr Candlish diagnosis you with a Major Depressive Disorder, mild in form.  Ms Lardner submitted that Principles 5 and 6 of Verdins are enlivened on account of that diagnosis, in combination with your physical health and the relationship between stress and migraine; that is the burden of imprisonment will be greater and for a prisoner without those conditions.
93	I accept that you have chronic depression which has been exacerbated by the experience of being prosecuted.  I take it into account and I understand and accept the submission that increased stress of incarceration may trigger migraines.  I accept in that way that any period of incarceration at your age and for the first time will be very stressful and that your mental wellbeing is likely to suffer to an extent.  I accept that makes imprisonment more burdensome for you than for another first-time prisoner.  The potential for deterioration is somewhat speculative, however, I have made some allowance for it.
94	Ms Lardner submits that the combination of the above matters, along with the objective gravity of the offending, your offer of details of another offender to police, your lack of prior offending and limited relevance of specific deterrence, the low level of risk you pose, your strong prospects of rehabilitation and your demonstrated willingness to obtain treatment should lead me to conclude that exceptional circumstances have been made out in your case.
95	A number of the matters relied on here are common features of online child sexual offenders.  Even in combination they are not exceptional.
96	Equally, many offenders who access online child sexual abuse material have themselves been victims of some form of abuse as children.  That appears paradoxical to many members of the community however there is a wealth of psychological research detailing the way such early abuse stunts sexual development, shapes sexual identity and normalises deviant views.
97	Although, as I have said, that is not an uncommon personal feature of offenders, in my view, your early childhood experiences are quite unique.  In my view, they do amount to an exceptional circumstance for the following reasons.
98	The level of exposure to abuse by your parents is quite extraordinary.  The years of serious contact sexual abuse by your uncle is also significant.  We often say in this court that the impact of such abuse on children is long lasting.  You were such a child and the impact on you during your early development and through your formative years, including through puberty, must be significant.  It has clearly shaped a distorted view of sexual acts towards children.  In that way, as I have outlined your moral culpability is reduced.
99	However, even allowing for that finding, the gravity of your offending and the aggravating features of it, still lead me to the conclusion that despite that exceptional circumstance, a term of imprisonment some of which you must serve, is still warranted.  The gravity is encapsulated in a comment made by the Court of Appeal in Crowder to the effect that,
'The possession of images of real abused children was a matter of significant gravity.  The capacity of the applicant to access and possess such material, knowing that real children had been abused in order to produce it, reflect significantly on the moral gravity of the applicant’s offending.'
100	The Court there also referred to the same type of covert steps taken to access material from the dark web, bespeaking a level of premeditation and planning and reflecting a clear understanding of the nature of the material and of the fact that accessing and saving it was criminal behaviour.
101	I further take that view having given consideration to current sentencing practices across Australia for similar offending.  I was assisted by both Counsel in provision of a number of cases which I have read.  As always, there are similarities and differences between offender and offending and as such there are limitations.  In particular I do note in Crowder the more graphic nature of some of the material possessed.  Ultimately, I am required to impose a just sentence in all the circumstances and that is what I have endeavoured to do.
102	I have taken into account the sentencing principles relating to child abuse material.
103	I have taken into account the maximum penalty for each offence is 15 years' imprisonment, and I have taken into account the maters outlined in s16A(2).
104	I accept there should be some concurrency as between the two charges.  Charge 2 involves downloading and storing some of the images and videos accessed under Charge 1 but it does involve different criminality.  By possessing those images they remain available to you.
105	Totality is nonetheless still relevant, and I take it into account.
106	I also note the prosecution make application for registration pursuant to the Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 (Vic).  Such registration is mandatory and will be imposed for a period of 15 years.
Sentence
107	The sentence I impose is as follows.
108	On Charge 1, you are convicted and sentenced to 22 months' imprisonment to commence immediately.
109	On Charge 2, you are convicted and sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.  That sentence will commence on 18 August 2025.  The effect of which is to cumulate three months on the base sentence on Charge 1.
110	The total effective sentence, therefore is 25 months' imprisonment.
111	I declare that you are to be released to a recognisance release order of two years after you have served 10 months' imprisonment.  I declare that you have already served three days' imprisonment and that such period should be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
112	The conditions of the recognisance release order will be as follows.
113	It is a surety imposed, I think, Mr Dhanapala, or is it the - I am looking at the draft order.
114	MR DHANAPALA:  Yes, Your Honour.
115	HER HONOUR:  I order the release of Mr Elbert after he serves 10 months upon giving security with a surety or by a recognisance of $2,000.
116	MR DHANAPALA:  So the surety is an option, Your Honour, where you can just do reconnaissance on its own and get rid of that bit.
117	HER HONOUR:  All right, that is what I meant.  All right.
118	Mr Elbert, to explain that to you, you do not pay the $2,000.  It is in effect part of your recognisance release order that you will be of good behaviour and comply with the conditions that I am about to outline to you.
119	So the conditions of the recognisance release order will be that you be of good behaviour for a period of two years and that you comply with the mandatory conditions.  Those are as follows:
•	that you would be subject to the supervision of a probation officer for a period of two years;
•	that you obey all reasonable directions of that probation officer or their nominee;
•	that you not travel interstate or overseas without the written permission of the probation officer or their nominee; and
•	that you undertake such treatment or rehabilitation programs that the Deputy Commissioner of Community Correctional Services and Sex Offender Management, or their nominee, reasonably direct.
120	And, further, in order to give effect to those conditions:
•	that you report to the Wodonga Community Corrections Centre by 4 pm or within two clear working days of your release from custody;
•	that you report to and receive visits from a community corrections officer; and
•	that you notify an officer at these specified Community Correction Centre of any change of address or employment within 2 clear working days after that change; and further
•	that you attend for assessment and if assessed as suitable for treatment for sex offender programs or programs to reduce offending as directed by the Deputy Commissioner of Community Correctional Services and Sex Offender Management or their nominee.
121	Do you understand those conditions, Mr Elbert?
122	OFFENDER:  (No audible response.)
123	HER HONOUR:  I can see you nodding but if you could just say.
124	MS LARDNER:  He might be on mute, Your Honour.
125	HER HONOUR:  I see.  We will just take you off mute.  Thank you.
126	All right.  Do you understand those conditions, Mr Elbert?  Sorry.
127	OFFENDER:  Yes, I do.
128	HER HONOUR:  Thank you very much.  Do you understand that a breach of those conditions could result in you coming back to me and that there' is a potential for resentencing?
129	OFFENDER:  Yes, I do.  I very much understand that.
130	HER HONOUR:  All right, thank you.
131	In addition, you will be subject to sex offender registration.  That is mandatory registration for 15 years.  There is a bundle of paperwork that you will receive in custody.  It will be a matter for you.  There is a provision on that paperwork for you to sign, acknowledging that you have received that paperwork, but that will be provided to you in due course.  Do you understand that?
132	OFFENDER:  Yes, I do.
133	HER HONOUR:  All right.  Your obligations under that registration are all outlined in that paperwork.  So I encourage you to read that carefully.
134	OFFENDER:  I will.
135	HER HONOUR:  Thank you very much.
136	Finally, in addition to those matters, pursuant to s6AAA, but for your plea of guilty, so if you had not pleaded guilty, the sentence I would have imposed in this matter would have been a total effective sentence of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and eight months.
137	Are there any matters to raise, Counsel?
138	MR DHANAPALA:  No, Your Honour.
139	MS LARDNER:  There was a forfeiture order, which was by consent.
140	HER HONOUR:  That is correct, I think.  The prosecution opening indicates ancillary orders to be advised.
141	MR DHANAPALA:  Your Honour, we don't require any because that was signed by consent, so we won't need to seek a formal forfeiture order.
142	HER HONOUR:  All right, thank you very much.  And, Mr Dhanapala, and, Ms Lardner, you are both content with the way I have framed that sentence, the effect of which is Charge 1 is the base sentence upon which three months is cumulated.
143	MS LARDNER:  Yes.
144	MR DHANAPALA:  Yes, Your Honour.
145	HER HONOUR:  All right, thank you very much.  Thank you, Counsel, for your assistance.  We will now adjourn until Monday, 2 pm, please.
146	All right, thank you very much.  We'll leave Mr Elbert on the link, so that you can talk to him.  Thank you.
147	MS LARDNER:  Thank you, Your Honour.
- - -