When a sentencing judge orders probation for possession of child exploitation material, the supervision and monitoring provided by the probation order may negate the need for the overlapping monitoring under the Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Offender Prohibition Order) Act 2004 (Qld), and the nature of the offence alone may not justify recording a conviction where there are substantial mitigating factors. The nature of the offence under s 12(2)(a) is not to be treated as determinative where countervailing factors under s 12(2)(b) and (c) are substantial. Jackson J signalled that in many such cases, expert evidence about risk to children may be required to support non-recording of a conviction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 21 later cases that cite this judgment.
10 of the 21 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.