Christchurch Court News (New Zealand)
February 27, 2009
By David Clarkson — See also the report below
A judge was left wondering whether a man’s long hours on his computers collecting child pornography was why he neglected the care of his 11-year-old daughter.
The girl was found with her hair lice-infested, clothes unkempt, and living in bad conditions at his home when the police raided the property and seized the man’s computers.
Judge Colin Doherty said: “The saddest part of your conduct to you has been the loss of your child. The saddest part to her is maybe the loss of her childhood, and her need to be rehabilitated.”
The man pleaded guilty to 12 charges of possessing objectionable images, and was found guilty at a Christchurch District Court jury trial on a charge of cruelty by neglecting his daughter.
He was jailed today for a total of one year nine months after Judge Doherty said, “I don’t think this is an appropriate case for consideration of home detention at all.”
He suppressed the 55-year-old man’s name, but only so that there would be no different or detrimental treatment of the daughter by people who knew her. “It’s not for your benefit but for hers.”
Judge Doherty also took the unusual step – with the consent of the crown and the police – of releasing one of the victim impact statements to the media at court.
In this case, one of the child victims depicted in the pornographic images had been traced by investigators and the police were able to provide a report on her. It was made available to the Court News website reporter after all references to her name and the name of her Cambodian village had been blocked out.
The images of the girl – among 1000 images of child abuse or torture found on the man’s computer – had been made by a Canadian offender who went to the village and conducted the activity there. He had since been caught and dealt with by the overseas authorities.
Judge Doherty described the girl’s victim impact statement as “chilling”.
Parliament had increased the available sentences to prevent and avoid the degradation and exploitation of young people. “It is often said that if people like you who want to view it were not about, perhaps the exploitation would not take place.”
The judge had not seen the images that the man had been viewing, but he cited some of the descriptions:
- A female school student being raped by her teacher.
- A pre-pubescent girl being raped by an adult male.
- A child being forced to perform oral sex on an adult male.
- Children being forced to perform indecent acts on other children.
- An image showing the torture of an adult woman who was tied up.
“The descriptions give me a sense of the degradation that each of the victims have undergone,” he said.
Defence counsel Colin Eason said the man explained that he had become involved with the pornography in an “insidious” way. It had started slowly but built up over time. “He doesn’t dispute that it was appalling behaviour on his part.”
Prosecutor Ruth Thomas said the crown disputed the man’s claim that he had inadvertently initially come upon the material, and more had arrived by accident when he tried to block it. She questioned his degree of acceptance and remorse for the offending.
Judge Doherty had received reports on the man’s daughter from Child, Youth, and Family and from the family now caring for the girl.
“She was in a parlous physical state. She had infestations of head lice, very unhealthy hair and skin, clothes in poor condition, and her living conditions were not the best to put it mildly.
“I expect her emotional development has been truncated by the way in which she was living with you.”
There was no suggestion that the man, whose marriage ended in 1999, had physically ill-treated his daughter. “You knew what was required but you didn’t care. You were reckless as to her welfare needs.
“I wonder whether your activity on the computer was something to do with that. I recall evidence that you seemed to spend large amounts of time on your computers in the evenings. It may be that immersing yourself in some of the stuff that was objectionable has inured you to her needs. I’m not sure.”
February 27, 2009
By David Clarkson — See also the report below
A judge was left wondering whether a man’s long hours on his computers collecting child pornography was why he neglected the care of his 11-year-old daughter.
The girl was found with her hair lice-infested, clothes unkempt, and living in bad conditions at his home when the police raided the property and seized the man’s computers.
Judge Colin Doherty said: “The saddest part of your conduct to you has been the loss of your child. The saddest part to her is maybe the loss of her childhood, and her need to be rehabilitated.”
The man pleaded guilty to 12 charges of possessing objectionable images, and was found guilty at a Christchurch District Court jury trial on a charge of cruelty by neglecting his daughter.
He was jailed today for a total of one year nine months after Judge Doherty said, “I don’t think this is an appropriate case for consideration of home detention at all.”
He suppressed the 55-year-old man’s name, but only so that there would be no different or detrimental treatment of the daughter by people who knew her. “It’s not for your benefit but for hers.”
Judge Doherty also took the unusual step – with the consent of the crown and the police – of releasing one of the victim impact statements to the media at court.
In this case, one of the child victims depicted in the pornographic images had been traced by investigators and the police were able to provide a report on her. It was made available to the Court News website reporter after all references to her name and the name of her Cambodian village had been blocked out.
The images of the girl – among 1000 images of child abuse or torture found on the man’s computer – had been made by a Canadian offender who went to the village and conducted the activity there. He had since been caught and dealt with by the overseas authorities.
Judge Doherty described the girl’s victim impact statement as “chilling”.
Parliament had increased the available sentences to prevent and avoid the degradation and exploitation of young people. “It is often said that if people like you who want to view it were not about, perhaps the exploitation would not take place.”
The judge had not seen the images that the man had been viewing, but he cited some of the descriptions:
- A female school student being raped by her teacher.
- A pre-pubescent girl being raped by an adult male.
- A child being forced to perform oral sex on an adult male.
- Children being forced to perform indecent acts on other children.
- An image showing the torture of an adult woman who was tied up.
“The descriptions give me a sense of the degradation that each of the victims have undergone,” he said.
Defence counsel Colin Eason said the man explained that he had become involved with the pornography in an “insidious” way. It had started slowly but built up over time. “He doesn’t dispute that it was appalling behaviour on his part.”
Prosecutor Ruth Thomas said the crown disputed the man’s claim that he had inadvertently initially come upon the material, and more had arrived by accident when he tried to block it. She questioned his degree of acceptance and remorse for the offending.
Judge Doherty had received reports on the man’s daughter from Child, Youth, and Family and from the family now caring for the girl.
“She was in a parlous physical state. She had infestations of head lice, very unhealthy hair and skin, clothes in poor condition, and her living conditions were not the best to put it mildly.
“I expect her emotional development has been truncated by the way in which she was living with you.”
There was no suggestion that the man, whose marriage ended in 1999, had physically ill-treated his daughter. “You knew what was required but you didn’t care. You were reckless as to her welfare needs.
“I wonder whether your activity on the computer was something to do with that. I recall evidence that you seemed to spend large amounts of time on your computers in the evenings. It may be that immersing yourself in some of the stuff that was objectionable has inured you to her needs. I’m not sure.”
No comments:
Post a Comment