General deterrence is the paramount consideration in sentencing for possession of child pornography. The absence of sale or distribution of child pornography material is not a mitigating factor where production or dissemination is a separate, more serious offence. A sentencing judge who places undue focus on rehabilitation at the expense of general deterrence and denunciation will fall into error, and a non-custodial sentence for possession of child pornography of this magnitude will be manifestly inadequate.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 66 later cases that cite this judgment.
16 of the 66 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.