ACT Court of Appeal rules senior ex-public servant can be named as child sex offender

An ACT Court of Appeal majority ruled on Tuesday that there was no basis upon which to make an interim non-publication order over the man's name permanent, allowing him to be identified in 28 days' time.

The offender, who reached the upper echelons of a Commonwealth department during a lengthy public service career, resigned after he was arrested in May 2020.

Police raided the 61-year-old man's Canberra home that month, seizing his Apple laptop after learning he had attached two images depicting child abuse material to an email.

He had planned to send these computer-generated images to a UK woman, with whom he exchanged "sexual fantasy" emails, but his Gmail account was suspended shortly after he attached the files.

It is therefore unclear whether they reached their intended recipient.

The man ultimately pleaded guilty to a single charge of possessing child abuse material, over which he was sentenced in the ACT Supreme Court last May to a $100 recognisance release order.

The sentencing judge, then-chief justice Helen Murrell, also revoked a non-publication order magistrate Glenn Theakston had imposed in relation to the offender's name.

When the man immediately signalled an intention to challenge her decision, the former judge put in place an interim order preventing publication of the name until after the appeal was determined.

A full bench of the Court of Appeal, comprising three judges, heard the man's challenge last November.

On Tuesday afternoon, Justice Michael Elkaim announced he and Acting Justice Verity McWilliam were dismissing the appeal.

They explained that Mr Theakston had put the non-publication order in place early in the case "to protect a close relative of the offender", who was thought to be at risk of self-harm if the man was identified.

MORE COURT AND CRIME NEWS:

The duo said former chief justice Murrell later found this order should not continue post-sentencing because there was no evidence publication of the 61-year-old's name was likely to prejudice the administration of justice.

Justice Elkaim and Acting Justice McWilliam concluded there had not been any error in that decision, though they acknowledged there may be "significant and distressing" consequences.

"While the court is not blind to the unhappiness and hardship visited upon family members when a person is convicted, this is a consequence of the conduct of the offender and the outcome of the proceedings, not a prejudice affecting the administration of justice," the pair said.

Justice Chrissa Loukas-Karlsson, who formed a different view, would have upheld the offender's appeal.

The appeal court's 2-1 majority ultimately extended the interim order for 28 days from Tuesday.

This was done to allow the offender to consider any further appeals, and to "enable any management to occur in relation to [his] relative".

Unless the offender appeals to the High Court, his name can be published on June 22.

We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: