STATE OF TASMANIA v GREGORY ALLAN BROWN 2 DECEMBER 2022
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE ESTCOURT J
The defendant, Gregory Allan Brown, now aged 60 years, has pleaded guilty to one count of attempting to involve a person under 18 years in the production of child exploitation material contrary to s 130 and s 299 of the Criminal Code. The defendant pleaded guilty to complaint number 792/2022 in the Magistrates Court on his second appearance on 12 May 2022.
The complainant is now 18 years old.
The defendant and the complainant were not known to each other.
On 7 May 2020, the defendant contacted the complainant via Facebook Messenger, using his real name, but posing as 50 years old. At the time, he was 58 years old and the complainant was 16 years old. However, the complainant told the defendant she was 13 years old in an attempt to deter him from messaging her. The defendant asked the complainant if she had a boyfriend and asked for a picture of her. She sent him an image of her face. He asked her and she told him that she had not had sex before. He then told her that the evening before he had been chatting to an 18 year old girl who had sent him three pictures of her vagina. The defendant asked the complainant to send him three pictures of her vagina. He asked her to trust him and he tried to persuade her, saying it was up to her. The complainant said that she did not feel good about the conversation and I take it, the request in particular. The defendant then ended the chat saying, “Oh ok, I’ll go then, by love, see you”.
The conversation occurred between approximately 7:00pm and 9:00pm. The defendant blocked the complainant on Facebook when the chat ended. The complainant felt stressed and unhappy about being asked to send nude photos of herself, and she reported the matter to police in June 2021.
I have had the advantage of a pre-sentence report on the defendant as well as helpful submissions from counsel.
I am told the defendant cannot explain his conduct, which looking at his background, is clearly aberrant. Something which is reflected by his admissions to police, and his early plea of guilty, for which he must be given credit.
I am informed by the author of the pre-sentence report that the defendant reported a troubled childhood and adolescence. He advised he was adopted by his parents who subsequently conceived a son and daughter, giving him a younger brother and sister. He reported that he was witness to many family violence incidents between his parents, advising his father would hit his mother regularly. He reported that he and his father did not get on, noting that his father frequently consumed alcohol. He reported that he hated his father for the abuse he subjected his mother to. The defendant was placed in Glandore Boy’s Home in Adelaide at age 11 until age 14 when he was transferred to a Salvation Army Institution under the Guardianship Board until he was 18. He reported that his mother disowned him and ceased all communication with him when he was imprisoned in 1993 for starting a fire in 1989 that killed six people.
The defendant reported he married and had two children, before his wife died in a car accident in 1989. He said that he speaks to his youngest daughter on occasion however, his oldest daughter blames him for her mother’s death and refuses to communicate with him. He advised he was with his wife when she was driving the car at the time of the accident that killed her, noting he is unsure of his daughter’s reasoning for blaming him for her death.
The defendant was last employed in the mid-1980s, when he worked for approximately three years as a spray painter. Prior to this, he had worked as a furniture removalist for the Salvation Army for two years. He reported he was injured in a car accident in 1989 and due to the injuries he sustained, he has not been employed since that time. He is the recipient of a Disability Support Pension.
The defendant has a criminal history, including convictions for stealing, property damage, driving whilst disqualified, common assault and arson, and manslaughter, however he has no relevant prior convictions.
I have also had the advantage of a psychiatric report from the Forensic Mental Health Service prepared by psychiatrist Dr Rajan Darjee.
It is reported that the defendant started drinking alcohol when he was 13 years old, but more heavily in his twenties. He used cannabis in his teens and twenties. There are reports of benzodiazepine, opiate and stimulant abuse before he was imprisoned. He has described some alcohol and cannabis use since moving to Tasmania, but reported that he has not had an alcoholic drink since last year and has not taken drugs for many years.
In terms of mental health diagnoses, Dr Darjee opines that he has a personality disorder with antisocial, borderline, and paranoid traits, reflecting his long-standing temperamental difficulties, although his emotional and behavioural problems related to this are much less now than when he was a young adult. The more overt behavioural manifestations of antisocial and borderline personality disorders often improve when people get older.
He has been described as having a mild intellectual disability, based on diagnoses made as a child and a young adult, but Dr Rajee is not aware of any formal assessment of that.
He has had symptoms of psychosis in the past, but in Dr Rajee’s view, these have been due to his vulnerable personality with decompensation under stress, and there is no recent evidence of such symptoms over the last eight years or so. He has a historic diagnosis of schizophrenia due to having such symptoms in the past.
Dr Rajee is of the view that there is no evidence of a strong sexual preferential, or exclusive sexual interest in children, so the defendant does not have paedophilic disorder.
Dr Rajee states that given the defendant’s account of the offence, it is difficult to understand or explain any link between his mental health difficulties and the offending. Aspects of his personality disorder that may be relevant include his longstanding self-focus, emotional regulation problems, impulsivity, and relational difficulties, perhaps with him lacking intimacy, feeling isolated and wanting a quick sexual experience at the time of the offence.
Dr Rajee states that the defendant “is unlikely to recidivate sexually, very unlikely to commit a contact sexual offence, and does not need any specific interventions or management strategies to address sexual risk”. He did say, “staying off social media seems like a sensible move”.
Dr Rajee states that the defendant would be vulnerable in prison due to his cognitive difficulties and his mental health difficulties.
Even an attempt to commit the crime with which the defendant is charged and has now pleaded guilty, is extremely serious as it is now well known that this pernicious conduct has the capacity to feed the far too widespread online appetite for the disgraceful exploitation and abuse of children.
In all of the circumstances however, this case must be regarded as at the lower end of the scale of this type of offending. It is fortunate that the complainant had the resilience to say that she was not comfortable with the disgusting request made of her and equally fortunate that the defendant desisted in pursuing the matter any further.
Offending of this nature frequently attracts a sentence of imprisonment, however, in this case I do not think that an immediate custodial sentence is required. I note that the defendant has been deemed unsuitable for home detention and community service.
The defendant is convicted and sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, which sentence I wholly suspend on condition that he commit no offence punishable by imprisonment for a period of two years.
In view of the contents of Dr Rajee’s report I do not propose to make a Community Correction Order.
This is a crime to which s 6 of the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2005 applies. I take Dr Rajee’s assessment of the likelihood of re-offending into account, however, I am not satisfied that the defendant does not pose a risk of committing a reportable offence in the future and I order that his name be enrolled on the Register kept under the Act and that he comply with the required reporting conditions for a period of five years from today.