fbpx

Paedophile Police and Hypocrisy in R v Edwards [2019] QCA 15

Type of protection : Granting release

  Notable Unreported Decision

{solid} Appeal Determined (QCA) 

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Edwards [2019] QCA 15

PARTIES:

R
v
EDWARDS, Gregory Paul
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 269 of 2018

DC No 1920 of 2018

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane – Date of Sentence: 19 October 2018 (Smith DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

12 February 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

6 November 2018

JUDGES:

Morrison and Philippides JJA and Boddice J

ORDER:

The application is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE – where the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of using a carriage service to access child pornography material – where he was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment, to be released on a $500 recognizance after serving two months, on the condition that he be subject to probation for a period of two years – where defence counsel contended that the imposition of a period of actual custody is manifestly excessive – where the applicant was a serving federal police officer – where the majority of the child pornography material were graphic representations in the form of computer generated figures engaged in sexual activity or stories – where it was submitted the nature of the offending did not attract a period of actual custody – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 17A

Criminal Code (Cth), s 474.19(1)

Assheton v The Queen (2002) 132 A Crim R 237; [2002] WASCA 209, cited

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v D’Alessandro(2010) 26 VR 477; [2010] VSCA 60, cited

Godfrey v The Queen[2013] WASCA 247, cited

McEwen v Simmons(2008) 73 NSWLR 10; [2008] NSWSC 1292, cited

R v Gordon; Ex parte Commonwealth DPP[2011] 1 Qd R 429 ;[2009] QCA 209, distinguished

R v Pham (2015) 256 CLR 550; [2015] HCA 39, cited

R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294; [2015] NSWCCA 174, cited

R v Reid [2004] QCA 9, applied

COUNSEL:

D A Holliday, with L M Dollar, for the applicant (pro bono)

B Power for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Robertson O’Gorman for the applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth) for the respondent

  1. [1]
    MORRISON JA: On 19 October 2018 the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of using a carriage service to access child pornography material contrary to s 474.19(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth). He was sentenced that day to 15 months’ imprisonment, to be released on a $500 recognizance after serving two months, on the condition that he be subject to probation for a period of two years.

Abuse survivor speaks out: “Cops stood guard as I was raped by politicians as a child”

Editors notes: Baker explained how she and other children around the age of 6 were often brought to various properties and given alcohol and then raped by judges and lords. Jessa Dillow-Crisp recently testified at the Colorado State Capitol, during Human Trafficking Awareness and Advocacy Day, about the horrible experiences that she had in her past. She was unable to report the abuse or go to the police because there were a number of police officers who were involved in her kidnapping and abuse. “There was gang raping, the police officer who handcuffed me and raped me, told me I would be put in jail if I opened my voice,” she said.
Judges name: Various Judges and Lords
Paedophile protected: Judges and Lords and Police
Paedophile protectors court location: Staffordshire, England.
Type of protection : Granting release

Staffordshire, Eng — An abuse survivor has bravely broken her silence to tell her horrific childhood story. In an interview with Sky News, Esther Baker, 32, explained how she and other children were raped by politicians as uniformed police officers stood guard.

“I got the feeling very much that they were protecting somebody, that they were with one of the men,” said Baker.

“One of them (police officers) I knew from church. There were a few occasions where they would be in uniform, and I kind of knew, I learnt that when they were in uniform that it was going to be a rough night,”

Abuser Name or Alias:: UK Politicians guarded by UK Police
Abusers Organisation:: UK Government
Matter Resolved?: No

CA Democrats author bill to protect sex offenders who lure minors

Type of protection : Granting release

No sex offender registry if perpetrator within 10 years of age of the minorSenator Wiener with fellow LGBT Legislative Caucus members Susan Eggman, Todd Gloria, Toni Atkins, Ricardo Lara, Cathleen Galgiani, Evan Low, and Sabrina Cervantes. (Sen. Wiener photo gallery)

By , February 19, 2019 3:03 pm

State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblywoman Susan Eggman (D-Stockton) introduced recent legislation “to end blatant discrimination against LGBT young people regarding California’s sex offender registry.”

However, under their bill, SB 145, the offenders would not have to automatically register as sex offenders if the offenders are within 10 years of age of the minor.

State Senator Scott Wiener. (Kevin Sanders For California Globe)

Wiener claims the current law “disproportionately targets LGBT young people for mandatory sex offender registration, since LGBT people usually cannot engage in vaginal intercourse.”

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, amended by Proposition 35 by voters in 2012 (Ban on Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery), requires a person convicted of a certain sex crime to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California.

Wiener says, “Currently, for consensual yet illegal sexual relations between a teenager age 15 and over and a partner within 10 years of age, ‘sexual intercourse’ (i.e., vaginal intercourse) does not require the offender to go onto the sex offender registry; rather, the judge decides based on the facts of the case whether sex offender registration is warranted or unwarranted. By contrast, for other forms of intercourse — specifically, oral and anal intercourse — sex offender registration is mandated under all situations, with no judicial discretion.”

“This bill would authorize a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors to seek discretionary relief from the duty to register if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor,” SB 145 states.

Proposition 35 was created and passed to protect children from sexual exploitation and sex trafficking. Victims of sex trafficking are often vulnerable children, “afraid for their lives and abused—sexually, physically, and mentally,” the Proposition said.

What Does SB 145 Also Do?

Legislators Wiener and Eggman say they are trying to shield LGBT young people from having to automatically register as sex offenders for specified sex crimes. But their bill does much more.

Assemblywoman Susan Eggman

SB 145 would allow a sex offender who lures a minor with the intent to commit a felony (i.e. a sex act) the ability to escape registering as a sex offender as long as the offender is within 10 years of age of the minor.  No specification is made as to whether the sexual offender is straight or LGBT.

SB 145 would add a section to the state’s penal code (Section 290.55) stipulating that as long as the offender is “not more than 10 years older than the minor,” they are not automatically mandated to register as a sex offender. There is no age limit or range specified, except for existing law which already excludes lewd acts with children under 14.

SB 145 appears to allow adults to victimize minors by luring them with the intent to have sex, and then shields the predator from being automatically registered as a sex offender, as in the case of a 25 year old luring a 15 year old for sex, or a 22 year old luring a 12 year old.

SB 145, as currently written, appears to allow certain sexual predators to live among the population without anyone being aware.

Why is this bill needed?

Here is the text from SB 145:

This bill would authorize a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors to seek discretionary relief from the duty to register if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor.

Digest Key – Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: NO

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 290.55 is added to the Penal Code, immediately following Section 290.5, to read:

290.55. (a) A person convicted of an offense specified in subdivision (b) may, by writ of mandate, seek discretionary relief from the duty, imposed as a result of that conviction, to register pursuant to the act if, at the time of the offense, the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor, as measured from the minor’s date of birth to the person’s date of birth.

Here is the current California Penal Code § 288.3 (2017)

(a) Every person who contacts or communicates with a minor, or attempts to contact or communicate with a minor, who knows or reasonably should know that the person is a minor, with intent to commit an offense specified in Section 207, 209, 261, 264.1, 273a, 286, 287, 288, 288.2, 289, 311.1, 311.2, 311.4 or 311.11, or former Section 288a, involving the minor shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for the term prescribed for an attempt to commit the intended offense.

(b) As used in this section, “contacts or communicates with” shall include direct and indirect contact or communication that may be achieved personally or by use of an agent or agency, any print medium, any postal service, a common carrier or communication common carrier, any electronic communications system, or any telecommunications, wire, computer, or radio communications device or system.

(c) A person convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) who has previously been convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state prison for five years.

Last week, California Globe reported on another sex crime bill introduced by California Democrats: “legislation to shield a person from the consequences of crimes they commit in California, even violent ones, as long as the person reports the crimes to authorities.The language of the proposed statute appears to immunize a person from ANY crime so long as they are reporting a violation of a sex crime law.”  Sen. Scott Wiener is the author of California Senate Bill 233.

Source : https://californiaglobe.com/legislature/ca-democrats-author-bill-to-protect-sex-offenders-who-lure-minors/?unapproved=8113&moderation-hash=79a5d8207fe6f5a173520d021b8a8390#comment-8113

WA Government confirms 50 victims of child sex abuse in Pilbara, fewer than previously reported

Type of protection : Granting release

The State Government has attempted to quietly correct the record about the extent of child sexual abuse in the Pilbara, lowering a widely reported figure.

Stephen Dawson MLC, speaking on behalf of the Police Minister, said in Parliament last week there were 50 victims involved in current child sex abuse cases — a stark comparison to the figure of 184 that had been used previously.

NT man jailed for sexually abusing family friends kids

Type of protection : Granting release

“If he’s abused children he has known since they were babies, what’s stopping him from abusing other children that he does not know.”

The 53-year-old man had been a friend of the family for over 40 years.

But that didn’t stop him from repeatedly abusing the two young girls while they stayed at their grandmother’s house, the NT News reported.

Once in 2015, the Darwin man fondled the then-nine-year-old girl before putting his arm around her.

In 2019, he tried to pull the then-eight-year girl onto his lap, telling her to “be quiet” as he tried to kiss her and put his hand up her skirt.

He appeared in Darwin Supreme Court on Friday after pleading guilty to ten separate counts of indecent dealing with children and violating a child protection order regarding incidents that took place over a four-year period.

Victorian police in pedophile rings: victims

Type of protection : Granting release

A highly-organised paedophile ring involving Victorian police and former politicians had been operating in the state since the 1970s, anti-child abuse groups claimed today.

Dr Reina Michaelson of The Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Program (CSAPP) and Bravehearts founder Hetty Johnston today said they had been told by child sex abuse victims that former Victorian elected politicians and police members were involved in child pornography and prostitution.

Dr Michaelson said she was working with child sex abuse victims who said they had witnessed significant police corruption and protection of paedophilia rings.

"I'm working with victims whose experience included police presence, police actually involved in the sexual offences that were committed against them," Dr Michaelson said.

Greens slam Judge Garry Neilson's comparison of incest and paedophilia to homosexuality

The Greens have called for District Court Judge Garry Neilson to be referred to the powerful Judicial Commission for his comments comparing incest and paedophilia to homosexuality.

But Attorney-General Brad Hazzard has refused to be drawn on the controversy, saying he does not want to prejudice an upcoming trial.

Judge Garry Neilson in 2003. Credit:Law Society Journal

Fairfax Media today reported Judge Garry Neilson has said just as gay sex was socially unacceptable and criminal in the 1950s and 1960s but is now widely accepted, “a jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now ‘available’, not having [a] sexual partner”.

Judge Sally Porkorny and Chief Justice Fairchild protecting abusers.

Judges name: Sally Porkorny and Justice Fairchild
Judges title: Judge and Chief Justice
Judges position: Judge and Chief Justice
Paedophile protectors court location: Douglas County, USA
Type of protection : Granting release

It really is the same old, same old.  But if there's not enough articles about family court judges protecting abusers and punishing protective parents, here's another one for you.

Judge Sally Porkorny and Chief Justice Fairchild in Douglas County are two of the most pathetic excuses for Judges.

However it sounds as if it doesn’t matter what county you find yourself, the Judges are throwing the rules of law out to suit whatever need they wish. These two Judges support a case manager who removes children from a good safe home and places the child with a drunk abusive, porn watching father.

Porkorny refuses to allow a hearing to allow me to present evidence, refuses to find the case manager and father in contempt and Judge Fairchild sat on the bench and said “I know Cheryl Powers, and she would never do anything like what you are saying.”

Has Judge Garry Neilson outed himself for being a paedophile given he implied incest and paedophilia are OK?

Type of protection : Granting release

District Court Judge Garry Neilson has used a court of law to try to justify incest and paedophilia as being OK and acceptable to the public. What Judge Neilson has done is make it clear to everyone that he is a sick and perverted person who should be in jail. Judge Neilson said that “the community may no longer see sexual contact between siblings and between adults and children as “unnatural” or “taboo” and:

“District Court Judge Garry Neilson said just as gay sex was socially unacceptable and criminal in the 1950s and 1960s but is now widely accepted, “a jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now ‘available’, not having [a] sexual partner”.”

“He also said the “only reason” that incest is still a crime is because of the high risk of genetic abnormalities in children born from consanguineous relationships “but even that falls away to an extent [because] there is such ease of contraception and readily access to abortion”.” (Click here to read more)

Australia’s paedophile epidemic being covered-up by judges

Type of protection : Granting release

Australia has an epidemic of paedophiles and as a country we need to face up to it and deal with it. The courts are a key area that the paedophiles are getting support and protection from and I will give multiple recent examples in this article as finding the examples is not hard as there are many of them.

This website is meant to focus on judicial corruption and it is impossible to ignore the links between the judiciary and paedophiles. In recent times we even had Judge Garry Neilson use the sanctity of the court to defend paedophiles which only another paedophile would do. While Judge Garry Neilson was meant to be suspended from hearing sex abuse cases he is still a judge. (Click here to read more)

Paedophile Judge Garry Neilson

Make no mistake the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was only the tip of the Iceberg. Over the next year or so it will be a huge issue as the government deals with the recommendations of the Royal Commission and as more people have become empowered by the Royal Commission to raise issues that have long been hidden or covered up. Social media has also had a huge hand in empowering people to raise complaints.

Wall of Shame Judges and their accomplices

The first name is Judge Roper for Doniphan County Court, and he is taking children that are in great care out of their parents homes and placing them in foster homes through T.F.I. where they are getting abused, neglected and raped.

The second name is County Attorney Charles Baskens and he is also helping the state take children out of good homes and putting them in bad ones.

The fourth is Roxanne Armstrong with T.F.I. Family Services who is not taking care of the abusive homes.

Last but not least is William MaQuillen, who is my sons GAL and he is the one that was my boyfriends sisters GAL when they were younger and he did nothing to try and help my mother in law get her back. He knows just like the other three people I have listed that the homes they are placing children are abusive and neglecting the children BUT THEY DO NOT CARE!!

Source : https://pcjustice.wordpress.com/the-wall-of-shame/

Kansas male chauvinist pig Judge J. Patrick Walters of Wichita, US.

Type of protection : Granting release

These Kansas Judges need to pull their heads out of their ‘god-syndrome’ asses. WTF—

During a hearing yesterday in a Sedgwick County Courtroom, mother Tammy Youngquist sought to have contact with her two very young daughters.  She hasn’t seen them in months.  As most mothers who have been run into the ground financially by the abusive ex, she motioned the court pro se….without a lawyer.  Judge J. Patrick Walters refused to entertain anything in the motion she put forward, and when Tammy was quoting something in Kansas Constitution about rights of women, Assmunch Walters asked “Women have rights?“  Then he left the court room.

Subcategories