[2024] SADC 148

Prosecution: R Counsel: MR B STURM - Solicitor: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (SA) Accused: CHRISTOPHER GERALD BLEYENBERG Counsel: MR G BOWEN - Solicitor: COLTHORPE LAWYERS Hearing Date/s: 24/06/2024, 25/06/2024, 26/06/2024, 27/06/2024, 28/06/2024, 02/07/2024, 03/07/2024 File No/s: DCCRM-23-043220 B DISTRICT COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (Criminal) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court in which it was generated. R v BLEYENBERG Criminal Trial by Judge Alone [2024] SADC 148 Reasons for the Verdict of her Honour Judge Schammer 12 November 2024 CRIMINAL LAW - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - PROPENSITY, TENDENCY AND CO- INCIDENCE - ADMISSIBILITY AND RELEVANCY - PROPENSITY EVIDENCE - EVIDENCE OF UNCHARGED ACTS CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - CONFESSIONS AND ADMISSIONS - STATEMENTS - STATEMENTS MADE IN PRESENCE OF ACCUSED AND RELATED CONDUCT - PARTICULAR CONDUCT CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - COMPLAINTS CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - CREDIBILITY - GENERALLY The accused is charged on Information dated 16 January 2024 with two counts of sexual abuse of a child pursuant to s 50(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 1935 (the Act). The complainant in each count is JF, the accused’s former step-daughter. The first count relates to alleged offending between 26 March 2012 and 31 December 2014, when JF was aged between 5 and 7 and was living with her mother, the accused and the accused’s young daughter, S, in Tailem Bend and Lucindale. The second count relates to alleged offending between 1 December 2021 and 28 February 2023, when JF was aged between 14 and 15 and was living with the accused, S and her half-sister, C, in Murray Bridge. -- 1 of 165 -- JF’s mother, JM, commenced a relationship with the accused when JF was aged approximately four. Shortly thereafter they moved in to live with the accused and S in a rental property in Tailem Bend. The accused and JM used cannabis, alcohol and methylamphetamine throughout the course of their relationship. They led an itinerant lifestyle, characterised by frequent moves. Within a year, JF, JM, the accused and S (the family) had moved from Tailem Bend to Lucindale. JF alleges that twice in Tailem Bend and once in Lucindale, the accused sexually abused her by indecently touching her vagina. On each occasion, he threatened to kill her if she told anyone what he had done. This is the offending in count 1. After a short period living in Lucindale, the family moved interstate. JF alleges that the sexual abuse continued interstate and became more invasive (the uncharged acts). The family travelled for a period, sleeping in a tent during their travels, before settling in Queensland. They lived for short periods in Helensvale, Southport and Merrimac. With each move, JF moved schools. JF described incidents of sexual abuse in Southport and Merrimac, including an occasion in Southport, when JF was aged about seven and for the first time, the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with her. The accused and JM purchased a caravan in Merrimac. They took JF out of school for about a year and travelled up and down the east coast of Australia, before finally settling in Mataranka, Northern Territory, where they lived on a cattle station, in their caravan. The accused and JM obtained work at the station. When the cattle season ended, they moved to Katherine, where they lived in the caravan at a Resort where JM worked. JF described occasions when she was sexually abused by the accused in both Mataranka and Katherine, in particular, abuse that occurred when JF was at work in Katherine. This included anal intercourse. In March 2018, JM gave birth to C, JF’s half-sister. Thereafter, the family, now including C, moved back to Queensland, where they lived in a different caravan, in Helensvale and Upper Coomera. When Covid struck, the caravan parks closed down and the family acquired emergency housing in Roma. While in Roma, JM and the accused continued to use methamphetamine to excess. The accused’s drinking became worse. JF claims the accused gave her alcohol. The accused became physically violent towards JM. JF described occasions when the accused sexually abused her in Helensvale, Upper Coomera and in Roma. JM left the accused when they were living in Hervey Bay, shortly after he threw a Jim Beam bottle at her head, being an incident witnessed by JF. JM attempted to take the children with her, but the accused prevented her from doing so. JF was only 14 at this time. Thereafter, she assumed the role of mother figure within the family, cooking, cleaning and caring for the younger children. The accused, JF, S and C then moved to Rockhampton, where they lived, at first, in a caravan and then for a short period in a villa. JF described the sexual abuse as becoming more frequent after JM left the family. The accused arranged for JF to see a doctor to be fitted with a contraceptive device. Thereafter, when the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with JF, he ejaculated inside her, as he had not done previously. JF claimed that on occasions, she was drunk when the accused abused her. She said that on one occasion, the accused gave her Ritalin, prescribed for S. The accused then decided to return, with the three children, to South Australia. They eventually settled in Murray Bridge. JF was aged 15 and in Year 10 at high school. JF described multiple occasions when the accused sexually abused her in Murray Bridge – in the caravan park where they first resided and then in the two homes where they lived in Owl Drive. The -- 2 of 165 -- alleged offending included multiple occasions of penile vaginal intercourse, fellatio and digital vaginal penetration. On one such occasion, JF claims the accused gave her cannabis. This is the offending in count 2. In November 2022, JF commenced a relationship with AW. In February 2023, JF ran away from the house in Owl Drive, to live with AW’s family. A few weeks thereafter, JF disclosed the offending to AW (the initial complaint). She reported the offending to police in late March 2023. The prosecution relied on the uncharged acts to demonstrate that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act on that interest. The uncharged acts also served to provide context to the alleged offending in count 2, as demonstrating the progression of the sexual abuse, perpetuated by the accused against JF over time and the development of that abuse to include more serious, forceful and invasive acts. JF also described occasions when the accused would smack her, or hit her with objects, leaving bruises or marks. The prosecution sought to rely on alleged implied admissions and conduct said to evidence a consciousness of guilt on the part of the accused. Part of the defence case was that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the alleged offending, namely as she was unhappy with the result of requests she made to the accused to return her personal property after she left Owl Drive and/or because the accused had banned AW from attending at Owl Drive. In addition, it was submitted that JF’s account of certain alleged acts of sexual abuse was either implausible or impossible and/or that the Court could not be satisfied as to the reliability or credibility of her account of the alleged offending beyond reasonable doubt, having regard to various inconsistencies in that account. The accused gave evidence denying the alleged offending and called evidence from his former girlfriend, GW. Verdict: The accused is guilty of counts 1 and 2. Juries Act 1927 (SA) s 7; Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) ss 5, 49(1), 50(4)(b), 50(12), 56, 57(2); Evidence Act 1929 (SA) s 34M, referred to. JJP v R (2021) 139 SASR 91; Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338; DPP v Roder [2024] HCA 15; R v Spencer [2019] SASCFC 70; Murray v R (2002) 211 CLR 193; R v Corrigan (1998) 74 SASR 454; Fergusson v The King [2024] SASCA 63, considered. -- 3 of 165 -- -- 4 of 165 -- R v BLEYENBERG [2024] SADC 148 [Criminal] Introduction 1 The accused, Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg, is charged on Information dated 16 January 2024 with two counts of sexual abuse of a child, JF. The offending in count one is alleged to have occurred at a time when JF was aged between about five and seven. The offending in count 2 is alleged to have occurred at a time when JF was aged 14 and 15. JF is the daughter of the accused’s former partner, JM. 2 The accused elected to be tried by a judge sitting without a jury, pursuant to s 7 of the Juries Act 1927. The Charges 3 First Count Statement of Offence Sexual Abuse of a Child. (Section 50(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 1935). Particulars of Offence Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg between the 26th day of March 2012 and the 31st day of December 2014 at Tailem Bend and Lucindale, maintained an unlawful sexual relationship with JF, a person under the age of 17 years, by engaging in two or more unlawful sexual acts with or towards her, namely: (a) touching her genital area on more than one occasion. Prescribed, Qualifying, Disqualification and/or Presumptive Disqualification Offence This may be a ‘prescribed offence’ within the meaning of sections 5 and 38 of the Child Safety (Prohibited Persons) Act 2016. This may be a ‘disqualification offence’ within the meaning of sections 18A and 18U of the Disability Inclusion Act 2018. 4 Second Count Statement of Offence Sexual Abuse of a Child. (Ibid) Particulars of Offence Christopher Gerald Bleyenberg between the 1st day of December 2021 and the 28th day of February 2023 at Murray Bridge, maintained an unlawful sexual relationship with JF, a person under the age of 17 years, by engaging in two or more unlawful sexual acts with or towards her, namely: -- 5 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 2 (a) causing her to perform an act of fellatio upon him on more than one occasion; (b) inserting his penis into her vagina on more than one occasion; and (c) touching her genital area on more than one occasion. Prescribed, Qualifying, Disqualification and/or Presumptive Disqualification Offence This may be a ‘prescribed offence’ within the meaning of sections 5 and 38 of the Child Safety (Prohibited Persons) Act 2016. This may be a ‘disqualification offence’ within the meaning of sections 18A and 18U of the Disability Inclusion Act 2018. Elements of the Charged Offences 5 As to each count, considered separately, for a verdict of guilty to be returned on that count, the prosecution must prove the elements of that count beyond reasonable doubt. 6 The four elements of the offence of Sexual Abuse of a Child are: 1. That the accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF. 2. In the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF. 3. That at the time the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF, JF was a child. 4. That at the time the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF, the accused was an adult. 7 JF’s date of birth is 27 March 2007.1 The accused’s date of birth is 2 April 1984.2 The alleged offending in count 1 is said to have occurred between 26 March 2012 and 31 December 2014 (the first relevant period). The alleged offending in count 2 is said to have occurred between 1 December 2021 and 28 February 2023 (the second relevant period). 8 I am satisfied that during the first relevant period, JF was a child aged between 5 and 7 and the accused was an adult. 9 I am satisfied that during the second relevant period, JF was a child aged between 14 and 15 and the accused was an adult. 10 JF’s mother, JM, gave evidence, which was not challenged, that she met the accused in about May 2012 and that shortly thereafter, they started dating. JM gave 1 Exhibit P1. 2 MFI P13 at p 1. -- 6 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 3 evidence that about two weeks thereafter, she and JF, moved in with the accused at the home he was renting in Tailem Bend. 11 For various reasons, I will outline hereunder, I find that JM is slightly mistaken in terms of her recollection as to when she first met and moved in with the accused. I find that JM in fact met the accused and moved in with him, before 10 February 2012, at a time when the accused was still on home detention bail. 12 There is no dispute, and I find, that thereafter, JF lived with the accused at various locations until about late February 2023, during which the accused assumed the role of stepfather to JF. 13 There is no dispute, and I am satisfied, that during both the first relevant period and the second relevant period, the accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF. 14 The issue in dispute with respect to both counts is whether any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred. 15 An ‘unlawful sexual act’ is an act that constitutes or would constitute (if particulars of the time and place at which the act took place were sufficiently particularised), a sexual offence.3 16 A ‘sexual offence’ is defined to mean:4 (a) an offence against Division 11 (other than sections 59 and 61) or sections 63B, 66, 69 or 72; or (b) an attempt to commit, or assault with intent to commit, any of those offences, or (c) a substantially similar offence against a previous enactment. 17 Pursuant to s 50(4)(b) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (the Act), it is not necessary for me to be satisfied of the particulars of any unlawful sexual act as if that act had been charged as a separate offence. However, I must be satisfied as to the general nature or character of those acts. 18 As to each count, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the elements of the ‘sexual offences’ relied upon as rendering the alleged acts ‘unlawful sexual acts’.5 As to count 1, those sexual offences are the offences of indecent assault. As to count 2, those sexual offences are the offences of unlawful sexual intercourse and indecent assault. 3 Section 50(12) Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (CLCA). 4 Ibid. 5 JJP v R (2021) 139 SASR 91 per Doyle JA. -- 7 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 4 Indecent Assault 19 As to each count, the prosecution alleges that on each occasion the accused touched JF’s genital area, his conduct constituted the offence of indecent assault contrary to s 56 of the Act. 20 The elements of the offence of indecent assault are: 1. The accused assaulted JF. 2. The assault occurred in circumstances of indecency. It is a matter for me to consider whether the proven conduct of the accused is indecent by reference to reasonable contemporary standards. I must be satisfied that the conduct had a sexual connotation. 21 To prove the first element, the prosecution must prove four sub-elements: • The accused applied force to JF. • The accused intended to apply force to JF. • The assault was unlawful. • The accused knew that JF did not consent or was reckless about the absence of consent. However, as JF was under 17 at the time of each count, the law deems her incapable of consenting to such conduct.6 Unlawful Sexual Intercourse 22 As to count 2, the prosecution allege that the accused engaged in acts with JF which constitute the offence of unlawful sexual intercourse contrary to s 49(1) of the Act, namely by causing her to perform an act of fellatio upon him on more than one occasion and inserting his penis in her vagina on more than one occasion. 23 The elements of the offence of unlawful sexual intercourse are that: 1. The accused had sexual intercourse with JF; and 2. JF was under the age of 17 years at the time. 24 Sexual intercourse is defined to include any activity consisting of or involving penetration of a person’s vagina, labia majora or anus by any part of the body of another person; or fellatio; or cunnilingus.7 Summary of Prosecution Case 25 The prosecution case is that the offending in count 1 commenced within months of JF and JM moving in to live with the accused at Tailem Bend, when JF 6 Section 57(2) of the Act. 7 Section 5 of the Act. -- 8 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 5 was aged 5. JF alleges that when she was in her bed, the accused would come into the room that JF shared with the accused’s daughter, S (who was then a baby), put his hand down JF’s pants and touch and rub her on the vagina. JF alleges that the very first time the accused did this, he told her not to tell anyone, or he would kill her. JF alleges that the accused did the same thing to her at Tailem Bend about three to four months thereafter, and again, about four months after they moved to Lucindale. 26 This is the offending in count 1. 27 The accused, JM, JF and S moved interstate in 2014, when JF was aged about six or seven. The family then lived at multiple different locations together until 2021, when JM left the accused. JF, S and C continued to live with the accused thereafter, initially in Queensland, until they returned to South Australia to live in 2022. 28 JF alleges that during the period she lived interstate with the accused, the sexual abuse continued, its frequency varied, but it became more frequent after she turned eight, occurring maybe four to five times in a two-month period. JF said the abuse never occurred when her mother was home, however the accused would often abuse her in her bedroom when her sisters were sleeping in the room next to her. 8 29 JF alleges that she was seven when the accused first had penile vaginal intercourse with her and that she was nine when he first forced her to perform fellatio upon him. It is also alleged that when JF was in grade six, the accused started giving her alcohol and that he first gave her cannabis when she was 14. In addition, JF claims that the accused gave her drugs that were prescribed for S, namely Ritalin and Catapres.9 30 JF explained that when she was younger, she would tell the accused to stop when he was sexually abusing her but he would not listen. She also tried to wriggle away from him, but he would pull her and lay her on her back. She gave up trying to wriggle away when she was around eight.10 31 JF gave evidence that she got her first period a few months before she turned 14 when they were living in Hervey Bay. She said the offending continued thereafter but did not occur when she was on her period. JF explained that her periods were very irregular and sometimes would last as long as two to three weeks. JM gave similar evidence.11 JF said the accused knew when she was on her period as he had to buy her pads, as her mum was working or at home.12 8 T 50.28-51.27. 9 T 40.33; T 42.23; T 134.23-24; T 137.3-4. 10 T 52.21-33. 11 T 263.32-263.38. 12 T 98.15-99.2. -- 9 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 6 32 In about 2022, when she was living in Rockhampton with the accused, S and C, JF alleges that the accused initiated a discussion with her about the necessity for her to use contraception, so that she would not get pregnant. This was at a time she had started dating and had a boyfriend, albeit JF denied in cross-examination that she was sexually active with anyone, other than the accused, at that time.13 Thereafter an intra uterine device (referred to by JF as a ‘bar’) was placed in her arm. After this, the accused would sometimes ejaculate inside of her, whereas he had not done that previously.14 33 Upon returning to South Australia in 2022, JF, S, C and the accused settled in Murray Bridge. JF alleges that while she was living with the accused in Murray Bridge, he sexually abused her on multiple occasions, including by engaging in penile vaginal intercourse with her, forcing her to perform fellatio upon him and touching her genital area. It is alleged the abuse only stopped at the end of February 2023, when JF ran away from the Murray Bridge house to live with her then boyfriend’s family. This is the offending in count 2. Summary of Defence Case 34 The accused denied that any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred. Further, although not expressly outlined in the accused’s closing address, it was apparent that the accused’s case was also presented on the basis that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the offending. Witnesses and Exhibits 35 The prosecution called evidence from the complainant, JF. In addition, evidence was called from: • The complainant’s mother, JM; • The complainant’s former boyfriend, AW; • Professor Jason White; • Brevet Sergeant B Wilson and • Brevet Sergeant J Forbes. 36 The prosecution tendered numerous exhibits including a Statement of Agreed Facts15 and a Further Statement of Agreed Facts.16 13 T 179.34-180.1. JM gave evidence that she was unaware that JF was using this contraceptive device; T 264.1-5. 14 T 48.28-49.21; T 100.22-28. 15 Exhibit P14 16 Exhibit P15. -- 10 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 7 37 The accused elected to give evidence at trial and called evidence from his former partner, GW. He tendered several exhibits, including text messages exchanged between him and JF on 20 and 21 March 2023.17 Legal Directions General 38 The prosecution bears the onus of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. There is no onus on the accused to prove anything. It is not for the accused to prove that he did not commit the offence(s) as charged. 39 As to each count, the accused is presumed by law, to be innocent of the charge unless and until the evidence that I accept, satisfies me that every element of the offence has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Nothing short of proof beyond reasonable doubt will suffice. 40 There are two counts on the Information. I must assess these counts separately and only take into account the evidence that is relevant and admissible to the count under consideration. 41 As to each count, it is not sufficient for the prosecution to show a suspicion of guilt or to show that the accused is probably guilty. Before the accused is convicted of an offence, I must be satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt each element of that offence. I must reject beyond reasonable doubt the accused’s denial and any explanation(s) proffered by him. 42 In these reasons, if I use the words ‘proved’, ‘established’ or ‘satisfied’, I mean to a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. As to each count, considered separately, if I am satisfied that there is a reasonable explanation consistent with the innocence of the accused, or I am uncertain where the truth lies, then I must find that count has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt. 43 I must assess each witness as to their truthfulness and their reliability. I must determine whether I can rely upon the evidence that a witness gives. I can reject or accept all or a part of a witness’ evidence. 44 JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case as to each count. I must carefully scrutinise her evidence before I can be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of its truthfulness and accuracy. 45 JF gave her evidence at trial via closed circuit television, from the vulnerable witness suite and with the benefit of a court companion. The court was closed during her evidence and her evidence was recorded. JM gave evidence with the benefit of a screen between her and the accused. I must not draw any inference 17 Exhibit D7. -- 11 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 8 adverse to the accused because the evidence was admitted in this form, nor must I allow this to influence the weight given to that evidence. 46 Neither the complainant’s younger sister, C, or the accused’s daughter, S, were called to give evidence. I must not speculate about the nature of any evidence I have not heard. I simply do not know what evidence may have been given by any absent witness. I must decide the case only on the evidence before me. 47 The accused was under no obligation to give evidence. I should give him whatever credit I see fit for subjecting himself to cross-examination at trial. I must assess his evidence in the same way as I assess the evidence of any other witness. I remind myself that if I reject the accused’s evidence in its entirety, that does not bolster, nor strengthen the prosecution case. The prosecution must prove each element of the offences charged beyond reasonable doubt. 48 There was evidence that JF had consumed both alcohol and that the accused had been drinking alcohol in the hours immediately prior to some of the alleged offending in count 2 (and the uncharged acts). 49 Although there was no expert evidence on this specific issue, it is a common experience that intoxication can have an adverse bearing on a witness’ recollection of events and/or a person’s subsequent recall of relevant events. It is also a common experience that intoxication may reduce a person’s inhibitions, it may cause them to be more relaxed or more outgoing, and it may cause them to do things they may not do if they were not intoxicated. 50 As such, the intoxication of a witness by alcohol may affect the proper assessment of his or her reliability as a witness. It is a matter for me to make findings, based on the evidence that I have heard, as to the extent to which a witness may have been affected by alcohol and what effect that has had on their general reliability. This is particularly important in the case of JF’s evidence, as her evidence is critical to the prosecution case. 51 As to the making of inferences, I must not guess or speculate. There must be a logical and rational connection between the facts I find and the inferences I draw. 52 I must bring an open and unprejudiced mind to the case. I must make my decision without sympathy, without prejudice, or fear and must not be influenced by public opinion in relation to this matter. Complaint Evidence 53 JF gave evidence that the first person she told about the alleged offending was her then boyfriend, AW. This evidence was admitted as evidence of JF’s initial complaint pursuant to s 34M of the Evidence Act 1929. 54 Evidence of the initial complaint made by JF is an exception to the rule which prohibits proof of prior, out of court, consistent statements. Complaint evidence is -- 12 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 9 admitted to inform the trier of fact as to how the allegations first came to light and as evidence of the degree of consistency of conduct of the complainant. 55 Importantly, complaint evidence is not admitted as evidence of the truth of what was alleged and cannot be used as some form of independent evidence to prove what happened, as, only the evidence of the complainant as to the allegations of the specific offending against her, is able to prove that. 56 There may be many and varied reasons why an alleged victim of a sexual offence has made a complaint at a particular time or to a particular person. It is for me to determine the significance (if any) of the evidence in the circumstances of this case. Forensic Disadvantage 57 JF’s evidence lacked specific detail insofar as she was unable to recall precisely when some of the alleged unlawful sexual acts occurred. 58 Had a timely complaint been made by the complainant, in each instance, of the alleged offending, the accused may have been able to provide a relatively contemporaneous recollection of the nature of his interactions with her at the time of each alleged unlawful sexual act. For example, he may have been able to prove that he was not present at the time of an alleged occasion (or occasions) of abuse as he was working, or away from the house/caravan for another reason. 59 I accept that in these circumstances, the accused has been deprived of the opportunity to properly identify the occasions of that alleged offending, to defend those allegations other than by way of a bare denial and to fully test the complainant’s reliability and credibility by reference to the surrounding circumstances of those alleged acts. 60 I have taken this forensic disadvantage into account when scrutinising the evidence and in assessing whether the prosecution has proved each element of the offences as charged beyond reasonable doubt. Discreditable Conduct Discreditable Conduct Notice dated 16 January 2024 61 The prosecution filed a Notice of Intention to Adduce Discreditable Conduct at trial (the Notice) whereby it advised of an intention to use certain evidence at trial for purposes which relied upon propensity reasoning. 62 Specifically, the prosecution sought to adduce JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending in count 1, in proof of the alleged offending in count 2, and vice versa.18 It was submitted that, in each instance, the evidence was admissible to demonstrate 18 Items 1 and 2 as listed in the Notice. -- 13 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 10 that the accused had a specific sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act in furtherance of that interest. 63 There was no dispute, and I am satisfied, that the evidence as to counts 1 and 2 is relevant and cross admissible in proof of both counts. 64 If I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts said to comprise the conduct in count 1, I can use that evidence in my consideration of count 2 insofar as it demonstrates that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest. 65 Similarly, if I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed any of the alleged unlawful sexual acts said to comprise the conduct in count 2, I can use that evidence in my consideration of count 1 insofar as it demonstrates that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest. 66 However, I must not use this evidence to reason that the accused is more likely to have committed any of the offences because of the multiplicity of allegations. I must not reason from this evidence that the accused is a person of bad character and is therefore the type of person who would have committed the offences and therefore he is more likely to have committed one or both of the offences. 67 In addition, the prosecution sought to adduce JF’s evidence of uncharged acts of sexual abuse committed against her by the accused interstate, in proof of counts 1 and 2, to demonstrate that the accused had a specific sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act in furtherance of that interest.19 68 I am satisfied that the probative value of this evidence outweighs any prejudicial effect it may have on the accused and that the evidence has strong probative value having regard to the particular issues at trial. 69 If I accept JF’s evidence as to the uncharged acts, I can use the evidence for the permissible purpose, that is, to demonstrate that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest. 70 The prosecution also sought to rely on the evidence of the uncharged acts to ensure the offending was considered in the full context of the accused’s interactions with JF, to show how the offending escalated over time and to demonstrate a pattern of grooming of JF by the complainant. The evidence was also relied upon to assist the Court to understand why JF did not complain about the alleged offending at an earlier time and/or why the accused was emboldened to commit brazen and serious offending against JF without fear of repercussion. 19 Item 3 as listed in the Notice. -- 14 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 11 71 If I accept JF’s evidence as to any or all of the uncharged acts, I can use this evidence for the permissible purposes as outlined. 72 However, I must not use the evidence to reason that the accused is therefore more likely to have committed either alleged offence, because he has engaged in such conduct. I must not reason that because the accused is of bad character in having engaged in such conduct that he is the type of person who would have committed the offending alleged in either count. 73 Further, I remind myself, even if I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that any of these alleged uncharged acts occurred, I can only find the accused guilty of either count, if the prosecution has proved the specific elements of that count beyond reasonable doubt. Other Discreditable Conduct Evidence 74 Evidence was led without objection, and was also the subject of agreed facts, about the accused’s criminal history. That evidence included details of his arrest (or report for) and conviction of various offences and time spent by him on remand in custody and on home detention bail. This evidence included details of the offending for which the accused was placed on home detention bail shortly prior to meeting JM (and JF). 75 The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to assist the Court to assess the credibility and reliability of aspects of the evidence given by the accused, JM and to a lesser extent, JF, in circumstances where the accused gave evidence that he had been compliant with his home detention bail and had been on home detention bail during some of the period the family lived at Tailem Bend. 76 Evidence was given by JM and the accused that the accused regularly used illicit drugs and sold illicit drugs to others from time to time. The evidence was relevant and admissible for permissible non propensity purposes, namely, to put the alleged offending into context insofar as it demonstrated the wider surrounding circumstances in which JF grew up and provided an explanation as to why it was that the family moved so frequently. In addition, the evidence was relevant and admissible to assist the Court to assess the credibility and reliability of the evidence given by both JM and the accused, given they were both often under the influence of drugs during the period that JF lived with the accused. 77 JF gave evidence of an occasion when the accused drove when he was drunk one New Years Eve. The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to give context to an occasion when JF alleged the accused had sexually abused her in Queensland, being an uncharged act. 78 JM and the accused gave evidence that during their relationship they were both in receipt of Centrelink benefits (despite living as a couple). The accused gave evidence that in Roma, they had separate bedrooms to give the impression they -- 15 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 12 were not living as a couple. The evidence was relevant and admissible for a permissible non propensity purpose, namely, to put into context the living arrangements of the family from time to time, being relevant to a consideration of JF’s evidence as to the various acts of uncharged sexual abuse in Queensland. 79 JF gave evidence that the accused was physically violent towards her. 80 This evidence was relevant and admissible for permissible non propensity purposes, namely, to demonstrate the nature of the relationship JF had with the accused and to show the context in which the alleged offending occurred. The evidence was also relevant and admissible to explain why JF complied with his requests to perform various sexual acts (or did not resist those requests) and why she did not make an earlier complaint. It was also relevant and admissible to demonstrate why the accused was empowered to offend against JF, without fear of that offending being reported by JF. 81 Evidence was adduced that the accused was physically violent towards JM, that he threatened to kill JM if she took the kids with her at the time she left him and that a Restraining Order was served upon him at or about that time. 82 This evidence was relevant and admissible to demonstrate why JM left her relationship with the accused and why it was that for some time JF continued to live with the accused, S and C, instead of JM, after the couple’s relationship broke down. It was also relevant and admissible to demonstrate the context in which the alleged offending occurred and why it was that JF was fearful of the accused, such that she complied with his requests to perform various sexual acts (or did not resist those requests) and why she did not make an earlier complaint.20 83 JF gave evidence that the accused gave her alcohol, cannabis and S’s prescription medication. This evidence was led without objection and was relevant and admissible to demonstrate the full context in which the alleged offending occurred, insofar as at times it was at times facilitated by JF being under the influence of alcohol or drugs supplied to her by the accused. 84 The accused gave evidence that prior to his arrest, the Department for Child Protection removed S and C from his care. This evidence was relevant and admissible to explain why the accused behaved in the way he did in the hours leading up to and immediately prior to his arrest. 85 If I accept some or all of the discreditable conduct evidence, I must only use the evidence that I have accepted for the permissible purpose or purposes as specified. I must not use that evidence to reason that the accused is more likely to have committed either count because of this conduct. Further, I must not reason 20 Although JF gave evidence that she was more scared of the accused after witnessing him be violent towards JM, she did not give evidence that this was a reason why she did not complain earlier about the offending. As such, I have not used this evidence for that particular purpose. -- 16 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 13 from this evidence that the accused is a person of bad character and is therefore the type of person who would commit either of the alleged offences. 86 If any evidence of the uncharged acts and/or discreditable conduct is essential to my process of reasoning leading to a finding of guilt, the evidence cannot be used unless on the whole of the evidence, the facts in proof of which the evidence was admitted, are established beyond reasonable doubt. Consciousness of Guilt 87 Officer Wilson and Officer Forbes gave evidence about the attempts police made to locate and then arrest the accused. The accused was eventually found hiding under a bed, up against the wall, behind a deflated blow-up mattress, at GW’s house. 88 I accept the evidence given by Officers Wilson and Forbes on this topic. 89 The prosecution relies on the accused’s conduct – in trying to hide from police upon him becoming aware of JF’s allegations - as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt on his part. 90 Evidence was led from JF, the accused and GW about the circumstances in which the accused acceded to JF’s request for him to return some of her personal belongings, that is, shortly after JF sent the accused a message threatening to report him to the police for raping her.21 The prosecution also relies on this conduct as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt on the accused’s part. 91 Before I can use this evidence, in either instance, as evidence supporting an inference of the accused’s guilt, I must consider whether the evidence, or human experience, otherwise discloses a satisfactory innocent explanation for that conduct. 92 I must assess the relative probability, as a matter of human experience, of that conduct, in each instance, being associated with either innocence or guilt. If I accept any innocent explanation given by the accused for his conduct, in either instance, then that conduct will have no weight. Lies 93 Insofar as it may be suggested that the accused lied either in his evidence or record of interview, I remind myself that whether the accused has told a lie or lies is a matter for me to determine. If I consider the accused has lied, this is relevant and can be used in my assessment of the accused’s credibility. However, I cannot use this as evidence of his guilt. If I find the accused has lied, it does not add to the prosecution case. It remains for me to determine, having regard to all of the 21 Exhibit D7. -- 17 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 14 evidence, whether the evidence is sufficient to satisfy me beyond reasonable doubt as to the accused’s guilt of a count or counts. Motive to Lie 94 The accused contended that JF had a motive (or motives) to lie about the offending. 95 The first potential motive was because she was unhappy with the outcome of her requests to the accused for the return of her property when she left 34 Owl Drive. The second potential motive related to the accused having banned AW from attending at that property. 96 I must consider the possibility of a motive for JF to lie, as this is relevant to JF’s credibility. 97 Even if I reject the existence of any alleged motive to lie, the absence of any such motive does not strengthen the prosecution case, rather the position remains neutral. 98 JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case as to each count. As such, I must be satisfied that her evidence is both true and accurate. It is not for the accused to demonstrate or prove to me that she is wrong or lying. There may be many reasons that a witness may lie and I must not speculate about those. I must not treat JF’s evidence as being more credible or more believable, simply because there is no evidence to provide a reason for why she might be lying. I must carefully consider all of the evidence to determine whether I am satisfied as to her credibility and reliability. Bad Character of Witnesses [JF, JM, AW] 99 GW gave evidence that AW was one of two persons responsible for smashing up a vehicle used by her, shortly after the accused’s arrest and that JF was present when this occurred. AW denied being involved in this incident and JF gave evidence that she was not present at a time when two cars were damaged outside 34 Owl Drive, nor did she know anything about any such incident.22 100 The accused gave evidence that AW stole a bicycle, being an allegation denied by AW. 101 In text messages exchanged with JF in March 2023,23 the accused stated that the police had come to his house about her shoplifting. JF was not questioned on any such allegation. 102 In those same text messages, the accused stated that JM had a warrant out for her arrest in South Australia. He also gave evidence to the effect that she had stolen 22 Noting GW’s evidence was this alleged incident occurred outside her house in Lorikeet Avenue, not outside 34 Owl Drive. 23 Exhibit D7. -- 18 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 15 money from her employer and had been involved with him, selling marijuana while staying in the caravan park at Knott’s Crossing. JM was not questioned on these allegations. 103 If I accept that a witness has a prior history of behaving dishonestly, or engaging in criminal conduct, this is relevant to my assessment of the credibility of the evidence given by such witness. 104 Of course, a person who may be considered to be of bad character may nevertheless give honest and credible evidence. Prior Inconsistent Statements 105 In his closing address, counsel for the accused submitted that the evidence given in court under oath by JF differed in certain aspects from what she had told the police in her various statements and in her proofings with the Director, such that I should have doubts as to both her reliability and credibility. 106 Similarly, it was submitted that the evidence given by JM contained so many differences to that set out in her statement to police made on 21 June 2024, that I should have real doubts as to her reliability and credibility. 107 Out of court prior inconsistent statements are relevant and put before me to assist me to determine the reliability and credibility of the evidence given by the witness in court. However, before I have regard to a prior inconsistent statement there must be some evidence that the prior inconsistent statement has been made. I may use evidence that a witness has said something different on a previous occasion or omitted to say something on a previous occasion as evidence affecting the witness’s credibility and reliability. 108 I have considered those aspects of the evidence given by each witness, said to be inconsistent with earlier evidence (and/or out of court statements), in my analysis and findings with respect to the evidence. Chronology 109 In order to understand the allegations, and the context in which they are made, it is important to make findings of fact on matters which were either agreed, or not seriously in dispute. Those matters include where the complainant was living from time to time, the details of those living arrangements and relevant dates relating to the relationship between JM and the accused. 110 JF had prepared a schedule, listing the various places she had lived from time to time, how old she was and what year she was in at school.24 She said she completed that on her own, although some of the information in it (eg. the address 24 Exhibit P2. -- 19 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 16 of the house in Tailem Bend) had been told to her by her mother. She gave some of her evidence by reference to that schedule. 111 The accused did not dispute the accuracy of that schedule, save that the schedule did not include the fact that the family lived in Helensvale for a brief period of time when they first moved from Lucindale to the Gold Coast. 112 I make the following relevant findings of fact, based on all of the evidence: 1. JF (DOB: 27 March 2007) is JM’s oldest daughter. JF’s biological father is LF.25 2. On 9 March 2011, the accused was arrested for two counts of Aggravated Threatening to Kill. He was initially refused bail and remanded in custody. He was released on home detention bail to reside at 76 Clifftop Street, Murray Bridge on 21 March 2011. His home detention bail address was varied to 11 Webb Street, Tailem Bend on 6 June 2011. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced for this offending on 10 February 2012, at which time he was released on a suspended sentence bond and was not subject to home detention conditions on any other matter.26 3. Between 6 June 2011 and 10 February 2012, the accused committed the following offences:27 • One count of breach of bail on 20 June 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail); • One count of breach of bail on 15 July 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail); • One count of breach of bail on 5 September 2011 (attending Cash Converters without permission); • One count of permitting a person to drive while unlicensed on 5 September 2011; • One count of possessing a prohibited weapon, namely a flick knife, on 6 September 2011; and • One count of breach of bail on 11 October 2011 (positive drug test while on home detention bail). 4. JM gave evidence that she and LF separated in about May 2012, that she met the accused about two weeks thereafter and commenced a relationship with him several weeks later. However, JM, JF and the accused all gave 25 T 233.26-31. 26 Exhibit P15 at [1]-[5]. 27 Exhibit P16 at [6]. -- 20 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 17 evidence that the accused was still on home detention bail when JM and JF started living with the accused, being within weeks of them first meeting. The accused was sentenced for the offence for which he was placed on home detention bail on 10 February 2012 and thereafter was not subject to home detention bail. As such, I am satisfied that JM is mistaken in this respect and that she must have separated from LF in either late 2011 or early 2012 and that she and JF moved in to live with the accused sometime prior to 10 February 2012.28 5. JF first met the accused during a visit to the train park in Tailem Bend. Although JF gave evidence that this was in 2012, when she was aged five and in Reception at school, I am satisfied it was slightly earlier than this, and that JF met the accused before 10 February 2012, and therefore when JF was still aged four.29 6. Sometime shortly prior to 10 February 2012, JF and JM moved in to live with the accused and his daughter, S, in a two-bedroom house he was renting in Webb Street, Tailem Bend.30 S was only a baby, aged approximately one, at this time.31 7. JF, JM, the accused and S (the family) moved from Tailem Bend to live in Lucindale in mid-2013. They lived in a rented three-bedroom house which was immediately adjacent to the school. JF was in Year 1.32 Neither the accused nor JM were working while the family lived at Lucindale.33 8. After Christmas 2013, the family left Lucindale to travel to Queensland to live. They travelled in a Commodore with a trailer on the back. JM and the accused slept in a tent during this period, while JF and S slept in a second tent. After travelling through various country towns, and spending a period of time living in Helensvale, the family settled in Southport, Queensland.34 9. The family lived in Southport, in a one-bedroom unit, for approximately six months. During this period, JF attended Southport Primary School and was in Year 2.35 Neither the accused nor JM were working while the family lived in Southport.36 10. During 2014, the family left Southport and went to live in Merrimac, Queensland in a two-bedroom townhouse. JF shared a bedroom with S, 28 T 233.38-234.7; T 234.20-25; Exhibit P15 at [1]-[5]. 29 T 23.31; T 24.3-10; T 34.1-4; T 234.15-17. 30 T 25.2; T 235.9-17. 31 T 25.17-22. 32 T 54.2-15; T 237.1-9; Exhibit P2. 33 T 57.9-10. 34 T 67.14-68.4; T 181.8-15; T 237.21-25; T 353.25-27; T 353.32-33. 35 T 68.4-13; T 237.34-238.4. 36 T 68.14-16. -- 21 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 18 where there were two single beds. JF attended Merrimac Primary School and was in Year 2.37 11. While the family lived in Merrimac, the accused was working ‘9 to 5’ as a mechanic.38 12. The family lived in Merrimac for about six to eight months.39 Thereafter, the family left Merrimac and during 2015, they travelled around the east coast of Australia in a 12-foot Millard caravan. JF did not attend school during this period.40 13. The family ended their travels in Mataranka, Northern Territory, where both the accused and JM found work on a cattle station.41 The accused worked full time, from about 6:00 or 7:00am to 5:00pm, except during weekends. JM did general farmhand work on the station, feeding the animals.42 14. While in Mataranka, the family lived in the Millard caravan on the Cave Creek Station. JF slept on the top of a bunk bed and S slept on the bottom bunk. JM and the accused shared a double bed at the opposite end of the caravan. 43 15. The family lived in Mataranka for about 12 to 16 months.44 They then moved to Katherine, where they lived for most of 2017 and some of 2018. While in Katherine, the family continued to live in the Millard caravan, and spent a period of time living at the Knotts Landing Resort, where JM had a full-time job working as a house cleaner and in the office. During this time, the accused also worked part-time as a maintenance man/gardener.45 16. C was born in Katherine on 3 March 2018.46A few weeks thereafter, the family moved to another caravan park. JM found work at the Katherine RSL as a maitre d’.47 17. JF attended the Clyde Fenton Primary School during the period the family lived in Katherine. S also attended school at this time.48 18. The family (which now included baby C) moved from Katherine to the Gold Coast in about 2019, They settled first in Helensvale, where they lived in a 37 T 71.35-72.11; T 72.22-28; T 74.1-2; T 238.14-20. 38 T 26.32-38; 238.26-33. 39 T 72.4; T 238.34. 40 T 74.7-10; T 74.17-28; T 238.36-37. 41 T 74.11-16; T 75.7-20. 42 T 75.7-16; T 241.28-36. 43 T 75.27-76.20; Exhibit P5 (caravan labelled ‘Millard 1’); T 243.1-3. 44 T 75.4-6; T 242.3-4. 45 T 79.29-80.8; T 243.6-33. 46 T 243.34-38. 47 T 244.4-8. 48 T 80.9-18. -- 22 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 19 different caravan, an Imperial Roadmaster, at a caravan park.49 Although there was a shower and toilet in that caravan, from time to time the family used both the shower and toilet in the external shower block at the caravan park.50 Neither the accused nor JM worked while the family lived in Helensvale.51 19. The family lived in Helensvale for between three to six months.52 In 2019, they moved to live in Upper Coomera, Queensland (also on the Gold Coast). The family continued to live in the Roadmaster caravan in a caravan park.53 JM did not work while the family lived in Upper Coomera. The accused did not have an official job but earned money buying and selling cars.54 20. In the first half of 2020, the family moved to live in Roma, Queensland. They were unable to live in a caravan park due to Covid restrictions. The family obtained emergency public housing in a three-bedroom rental property.55 JF attended Roma State College but also spent some time being home schooled during Covid. Neither the accused, nor JM were working while the family lived in Roma.56 21. At the start of 2021, the family moved from Roma to Hervey Bay, Queensland.57 While in Hervey Bay, the family lived in the Roadmaster caravan in a caravan park.58 JF attended Urangan High School and was in Year 8.59 JM obtained employment working as a barmaid at the Torquay Hotel. The accused did not work while the family lived at Hervey Bay.60 22. JF first got her period when the family was living in Hervey Bay. She was aged 13, but about two months off, turning 14.61 23. In 2021, while the family were living in Hervey Bay, JM left the accused.62 After JM left, JF, S and C remained living with the accused. At or about the time JM left, they spent a short period of time staying at the Maryborough Showgrounds, and then settled in Rockhampton, Queensland in (about) 49 T 82.10-23; T 244.15-16; Exhibit P5 (diagram marked ’Roadmaster 2’). 50 T 244.27-245.6. 51 T 244.27-30. 52 T 85.22-24; T 244.25-26. 53 T 85.25-34; T 245.25-28. 54 T 245.36-38; T 276.14-19. 55 T 89.10-28; T 246.2-11. 56 T 89.29-38; T 246.14-22. 57 T 90.31-91.3; T 246.33-35. 58 T 246.37. 59 T 92.5-13. 60 T 91.24-36; T 246.38-247.9. 61 T 98.1-6. 62 T 254.21-255.3. -- 23 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 20 mid-2021 where they (that is, JF, S, C and the accused) lived for about a year.63 24. While in Rockhampton, the family (now no longer including JM), lived at the Pankhurst Caravan Park in the Roadmaster caravan for about eight months, before then moving to live in a villa. The accused was looking after the villa for some friends.64 25. While in Rockhampton, at the initiation of the accused, JF was fitted with a contraceptive device. She was aged either 14 or 15 at that time.65 26. In the second half of 2022, the family left Rockhampton and travelled by car, with the caravan, through the centre of Australia, via Alice Springs, to South Australia. 27. The family arrived in South Australia in the second half of 2022. They lived for a few months at the Murray Bridge Marina caravan park, before securing emergency accommodation in a house at 27 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge. JF was 15 and attending Murray Bridge High School in Year 10.66 28. In about November 2022, when JF was living at 27 Owl Drive, she started a relationship with AW.67 29. Several weeks after Christmas 2022, the family moved into another house at 34 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge.68 30. JF lived with the accused, S and C at 34 Owl Drive for between one and a half and two months. In about late February 2023, she ran away from home to live with AW’s family, who lived nearby. She did not return to live with the accused thereafter.69 31. JF first disclosed the alleged offending to AW in or about early March 2023, shortly after she started living at AW’s house.70 32. On Tuesday 21 March 2023 at about 3:30pm, JF attended the Murray Bridge Police Station where she reported the alleged offending.71 63 T 29.28-36; T 101.30-36; T 356.9-13. 64 T 107.10-25. 65 T 179.34-180.1; T 449.9-26. 66 T 114.10-35; T 116.19-33; T 356.34-357.20. 67 T 117.30-33. 68 T 123.3-16; T 357.32-36. 69 T 127.14-33. 70 T 143.36-144.11; T 310.9-311.5. 71 Exhibit P14 at [3]. -- 24 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 21 33. The accused was arrested at the Murray Bridge home of his then partner, GW, shortly after 12:30am on Friday 12 May 2023. He was found by police hiding behind a deflated blow-up mattress under a bed.72 Evidence led by the Prosecution The Complainant, JF Relationship with the Accused – Before the Offending 113 JF gave evidence that she thought the accused was a good person when she first met him. When she and JM moved to live with accused in Tailem Bend, he assumed the role of a father figure towards her. He took her to school and made sure her clothes were washed. He did the cooking and made sure she went to bed every night.73 He would sometimes take her for drives to the shop and took her and S to the train park.74 They had a good relationship as step-daughter and step-father. Relationship with JM 114 JF gave evidence that her relationship with her mother when she was growing up was good but sort of distant, as the accused would not really let her mother do anything with her.75 She said:76 So [the accused] wouldn’t let me go out with my mum to anywhere like the shops or to the park or anything, he would keep me by his side 24/7. The Alleged Offending in Tailem Bend (Count 1) 115 JF gave evidence that the first time the accused sexually abused her occurred in her bedroom at Webb Street, Tailem Bend, about two to three months after she moved to live at that address with JM. She was in Reception and aged about five and a half.77 116 She said that she was lying in her bed, in the room marked ‘Bedroom 1’ in Exhibit P3. This room was originally used as a lounge room, but about two months before the first incident, it had become the girls’ bedroom.78 S was asleep in her bassinet in that same room. She thought JM was asleep in the bedroom she shared with the accused. 117 JF gave evidence that the accused came into the room and lay down on the bed next to her. He stuck his hand down her pants and underwear and started molesting her, moving his hand in a circular motion, playing with her ‘clit’. She froze, was confused and too scared to say anything. She remembered the accused telling her to be quiet. After about ten minutes, he stopped touching her and said 72 T 227.3-229.16. 73 T 25.30-26.2. 74 T 33.23-36. 75 T 29.1-4. 76 T 29.12-14. 77 T 30.18-25; T 33.16-22. 78 T 167.1-13. -- 25 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 22 to her, ‘If you tell anyone, I will kill you’. He pulled up her pants and left the room.79 118 Thereafter, JF was scared of the accused. She did not tell anyone what had happened as he had said he would kill her if she did. The accused acted as if everything was normal.80 119 JF gave evidence that at the time of this first incident, she was wearing a blue ‘Chuggington’ top, purple trackpants and ‘My little pony’ underwear.81 She said she was able to recall these details, and how the accused had touched her, as it was the first time this had happened to her.82 120 In cross-examination, JF initially disagreed with a proposition put to her that when she was initially interviewed by the police, she told them she was wearing a ‘Thomas the Tank Engine’ top and a pair of shorts at the time of this first incident.83 After being shown a video recording of that interview, JF agreed she had said this, however she had later told the police about this mistake.84 JF confirmed in re- examination, that when she spoke to police on 19 June 2024, she told them she was wearing a Chuggington top and purple coloured tracksuit pants at the time of this alleged offending.85 121 JF gave evidence that about four months later, while they were still living at the house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused abused her for the second time.86 122 She said on this occasion, exactly the same thing happened. It was nighttime and she was in bed wearing a T-shirt and shorts. She thought her mum had gone to the IGA to get some smokes. S was asleep in her cot. The accused came into her room and pulled her pants down to her knees. He removed her underwear at the same time. He then started playing with her ‘clit’ in a circular motion. She was really confused and scared and did not know what to do. After about ten minutes, he pulled her pants back up and said, ‘If you tell anyone I’ll kill you’ and then left the room.87 123 In cross-examination, JF said that she did not recall this second occasion as much as the first but she was sure that it had occurred.88 79 T 34.8-32; T 35.2-16. 80 T 35.35-36.6. 81 T 34.34-35.1. 82 T 36.7-11. 83 T 167.20-27. 84 T 189.19-25. 85 T 221.23-36. 86 T 54.33-37. 87 T 54.38-56.15. 88 T 167.29-35. -- 26 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 23 124 The accused did not abuse her again while they were living in Tailem Bend.89 125 In cross-examination, it was suggested to JF that she had previously told the police that when she was five years old, the offending ‘used to happen every second day or daily, or it happened weekly or fortnightly’. JF said when she said that to the police officer, she meant to convey how many times it had happened over the years, not at the house in Tailem Bend.90 126 Later in cross-examination, JF agreed that during an interview with police on 26 March 2023, she said that the offending had started six months after she turned five and that ‘after that it just happened all the time.’ She said:91 A. I said it happened all the time, not meaning that it happened all the time. It would happen at random times. Like I said in that bit before, it happened all the time. It used to just happen at random times. Q. But even on your birthday. A. Yes, that's what I was meaning. It was all the occasions. Especially after I turned the age of eight. Q. Christmas, Easter, all of the holidays, happened all the time, is that what you said, isn't it. A. Yes. The Alleged Offending in Lucindale (Count 1) 127 JF said that they lived at Tailem Bend for about eight months and then moved to live in Lucindale. She remembered living in a rented modern three-bedroom house which backed onto the school. She was sharing a bedroom with S.92 128 JF gave evidence that about three months after they moved into the house at Lucindale, the accused abused her again. She said one afternoon she had been playing in the backyard with S on a toy tractor. She got bored so she decided to go back inside and lie on her bed. S was still playing in the backyard. She thought that JM had gone for a walk to go and get some petrol. The accused came into her room, laid down next to her on her bed, stuck his hand down her pants and her underwear and started playing with her clitoris.93 129 JF recalled that she was wearing a pink T-shirt, black jeans and underwear.94 She was lying on the left side of the bed and the accused lay on the right side. She tried to push him away but he kept going, so she just gave up. He did not say anything to her during the incident, which lasted about five minutes. Afterwards 89 T 56.16-22. 90 T 164.33-165.2. 91 T 212.29-38. 92 T 56.24-34; T 57.3-7; T 57.11-26. 93 T 57.33-58.4; T 58.25-59.9. 94 T 58.12-19. -- 27 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 24 he said to her, ‘I will kill you if you tell anybody, it’s our secret’. She nodded to agree with him.95 130 JF was asked how this incident came to an end. She gave evidence that it ended because her mum was coming home. She gave the following evidence:96 Q. When you say your mum was coming home, how did you know that. A. Because I think he got a message from my mum saying that 'I'm on my way back'. Q. Was it a text message, is that what you're talking about. A. Yes, a text message. Q. How did you become aware of that. A. Because [the accused] looked at his phone and then he said 'Oh shit'. Q. Did he say anything to you about what the text message said. A. No. Q. So how is it that you knew that your mum was coming home. A. Because she appeared through the door not even five minutes later. Q. What did you do after he left the room. A. I just stayed on my bed and did not move. 131 In cross-examination, JF agreed with a proposition put to her that at the time of this incident, her mother had gone to the shop and said that was a little convenience store (not an IGA) located about ten minutes away.97 It was suggested to her that she could not have known the message that the accused had received had come from JM. She gave the following evidence:98 A. Well, I saw the notification on his phone saying 'Mum' but I don't know if he was replying to mum or sending a message off to someone else. Q. And when did you see that. A. Just after the incident happened. Q. And you say your mother came home five minutes later. A. Yes. 95 T 59.10-34. 96 T 60.5-23. 97 T 168.17-19; T 169.21-24. 98 T 169.1-20. -- 28 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 25 Q. So you say you saw a notification that named - well, what did the notification say, did it say - what was the - A. I do not recall. Q. - the heading. A. It was - I do not recall what the heading was. I don't remember what it was named under. Q. And how can you say you know it was from your mum. A. Because I know my mum's writing. Q. It was an SMS message, was it. A. Yes, and everyone types different on SMS. Q. Can you remember what the message said. A. I do not recall. 132 This was the only incident of abuse at Lucindale which JF could remember.99 133 JF denied that she could be mistaken about the alleged offending she had described as occurring in Tailem Bend and Lucindale.100 She disagreed with a proposition put to her that while the family lived at Lucindale, a man called ‘Johnno’ lived with them for some time.101 Uncharged Acts – Interstate 134 JF gave evidence that the first time the accused abused her after they moved interstate occurred about four months after they had moved to live in Southport.102 135 JF gave evidence that they were living in a one-bedroom unit. There was a curtain erected in that bedroom to separate it into two rooms. It was about 9:00am and her mother was at a job interview. She did not know what the job interview was for but said her mother did not end up getting the job.103 S was asleep in the bed next to her. The accused was lying on his bed. She went to tell him she was hungry. He asked her to come into his bed, so she laid down next to him. He then put his hands down her underwear and started rubbing her clitoris. After about two minutes, he stuck his fingers up her vagina and thereafter he stuck his penis into her vagina.104 She said this hurt and afterwards, it stung really badly.105 99 T 60.27-33. 100 T 171.19-26. 101 T 181.38-182.7. 102 T 68.17-25. 103 T 170.13-18. 104 T 68.28-38; T 70.3-8; T 70.24-38. 105 T 71.4-7. -- 29 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 26 136 This was the first time the accused had penile vaginal intercourse with her. He did not ejaculate inside her. 106 137 JF gave evidence that the family moved from Southport to Merrimac, where they lived for about eight months. She said that the accused sexually abused her two times in Merrimac but she could only recall the details of one of those occasions. She said about four months after they moved to Merrimac, she was asleep in the bedroom she shared with S and JM had gone out with some mates. It was about 9:00pm. The accused came into the room and lay down next to her. He stuck his hand down her underwear and pants and started rubbing and playing with her clitoris. He then stuck his fingers in her vagina.107 He used two fingers and it hurt. It stung for about 20 minutes thereafter.108 138 JF gave evidence that after leaving Merrimac, the family travelled up and down eastern Australia. She said there were no incidents of sexual abuse while they were travelling.109 She described travelling through Cooktown, Bendigo and Mount Isa.110 She gave evidence-in-chief that she did not go to school during the that period as ‘the government let me have a year off because I got picked on by my grade 2 teacher.’111 139 The family then lived in Mataranka for about a year, where the accused and her mother worked on a cattle station. JF recalled the accused sexually abusing her ‘probably about three’ times while they were living in Mataranka.112 She could recall the details of two of those occasions. 140 JF gave evidence that the family lived in in a 12-foot Millard caravan during this period. She drew a diagram of that caravan.113 She said she and S shared a bunk bed in that caravan and that she slept on the top bunk. Both incidents that she could recall, occurred in the caravan. 141 JF said that the first incident occurred when her mother went to feed the cows at about 6:00am and also had to run into town. The accused was not working that day. She needed to go to the toilet and then get ready for school. When she came back from going to the toilet, the accused asked her to come over to him, so she did. He told her to lie down, so she lay down in his bed. He then started to play with her clitoris underneath her pants and underwear. After about five minutes, he took off her pants and underwear and stuck his penis in her vagina. He pulled out when he was ejaculating.114 106 T 71.20-26. 107 T 73.29-74.13. 108 T 73.6-30. 109 T 74.17-35. 110 T 74.7-10. 111 T 74.27-28. 112 T 75.1-4. 113 Exhibit P5, diagram at bottom of page marked ‘Millard 1’. 114 T 76.32-77.11. -- 30 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 27 142 When asked to describe the second incident, JF said this occurred about a month before the other incident. It was about 9:00pm and JM had gone for a shower. She was lying in her bed (the top bunk). S was asleep in the bottom bunk.115 JF said:116 He decided to pull my butt off the bed. I was wearing underwear and a singlet that night because it was really hot and then he slid my underwear across but did not pull them off and then he stuck his penis into my vagina. 143 JF said that this happened for about ten minutes. It stopped when the accused heard her mum start to open the door. He then slid her underwear back, pushed her back onto her bed and went and sat down as if nothing had happened.117 She tried to go to sleep. About an hour later, her mum left the caravan to go to the toilet. While she was gone the accused said to her, ‘I’ll kill you if you tell anyone’.118 She did not tell anyone what had happened because she was really scared of the accused. 144 In cross-examination, JF estimated the bunk bed was about 50 cm away from the door of the caravan. She said she had heard her mother outside the door, hanging her up her towel, before she came back in.119 145 JF gave evidence that from Mataranka, the family moved to Katherine where they lived for about two years. Her little sister, C, was born in Katherine. JF said they lived in a caravan park for about two weeks and then moved to Knotts Crossing Resort, where JM worked as a house cleaner in the morning and as a bistro hand at night from around 4:30pm to 10:00pm, sometimes later.120 146 JF said the accused abused her multiple times when they were living at the Knotts Crossing Resort. She said:121 A. So sometimes he would pull me onto his bed when I was going to give him a hug goodnight because mum would be working at the restaurant, and then he would pull me into his bed, lay me on my back or on my side and start playing with my clitoris, putting his hands down my pants and underwear and then that would happen for about five minutes and then he would stick his finger up into my vagina for about another five and then he would stick his penis in my vagina and then there was another time where he did the same thing but instead, he flipped me on my side and then stuck his penis into my butthole. 115 T 78.36-38. 116 T 77.22-26. 117 T 77.27-31. 118 T 78.7-12. 119 T 196.27-38. 120 T 79.1-80.4. 121 T 80.32-81.4. -- 31 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 28 147 This was the first time the accused had inserted his penis in her anus. He did it multiple times thereafter, until she was aged 14. She estimated this had occurred between 10 to 20 times.122 148 JF gave evidence that in Katherine, the accused would abuse her while her mother was at work. S would either be asleep or playing outside. The offending occurred in a similar way each time.123 149 JF gave evidence that the family, which now included C, moved from Katherine to the Gold Coast in 2019. The first place they lived was Helensvale, where they lived in a Roadmaster caravan at a caravan park for about three months. JF had drawn a diagram of that caravan.124 JF said there was a triple bunk bed in this caravan. S slept on the top bunk and she slept in the middle bunk. C was meant to sleep on the lower bunk but refused to, so that area was mostly used for storage. C slept in the area marked ‘lounge’ instead.125 150 JF recalled an incident of abuse that occurred at the Helensvale caravan park. She said her mum had gone to have a shower in the shower block. She went to give the accused a hug goodnight as her sisters were already asleep. He then pulled her onto his bed and stuck his penis in her vagina. This went on for 20 minutes. After he ejaculated, she pulled her underwear and shorts back up and went back to her bed. Her mum came back about ten minutes later.126 151 JF gave evidence that the family moved from Helensvale to Upper Coomera in 2019. The family continued to live in the Roadmaster caravan. She recalled the details of three incidents of sexual abuse that occurred in Upper Coomera, one of which occurred in the caravan and two which had happened in the shower block.127 152 JF said the first time it happened, she and the accused walked to the shower block together. It was about 7:30am and JM was getting S ready for school. Instead of the accused going into the male shower block, he followed her into the female shower block. She tried to shut the door behind her but he pushed it open and came into the shower with her. The accused undressed and she had to get undressed too. He turned the shower on, they hopped into the shower and then he pushed her up against the wall and stuck his penis in her vagina.128 By this time, it did not hurt as much when he did this, as she was starting to get used to it. She said it stung a little bit.129 153 JF said there no other people around at the time. She explained that there were two different shower blocks and some people had showers in their caravans. 122 T 81.5-17. 123 T 82.7-9. 124 Exhibit P5, diagram on top of page marked ‘Roadmaster 2’. 125 T 82.10-37. 126 T 84.6-28; T 85.16-18. 127 T 85.25-86.16. 128 T 86.36-87.14. 129 T 87.28-31. -- 32 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 29 In fact, there was a shower in the Roadmaster caravan but they did not use it as the shower leaked and it was in the same area as the toilet. There was not enough room and it stank.130 154 JF described another incident in the shower block about four or five months later. It was about 8:30am and JM was in the caravan with S and C. The accused followed her into the female shower block again and the same thing happened.131 155 JF also recalled the details of an occasion when the accused abused her in the Roadmaster caravan at Upper Coomera. JM had taken C and S with her on a walk into town, meaning she was left alone with the accused. They were sitting in the caravan and the accused was watching television. He asked her to come and sit on the edge of his bed so she did. She said he pulled her towards the left side of the bed, put his hand down her pants and underwear and put his fingers into her vagina for about ten minutes. Then he stuck his penis in her vagina for about 20 minutes. Her mum came back about ten minutes later.132 156 JF said there were other times it happened in the same way at Upper Coomera, but she could not recall how many.133 157 JF gave evidence that when she was 13, the family moved from Upper Coomera to Roma. In Roma, they lived in a three-bedroom house, arranged through housing. Her mum and the accused each had their own bedroom and she shared a bedroom with C and S.134 158 JF gave evidence that the accused abused her about four to five times in a four-month period at Roma, with the abuse being the same on each occasion.135 While C, S and JM were asleep, the accused would come into JF’s bedroom at night. He would roll her over onto her back, take her underwear and pants off and stick his penis into her vagina. This would happen for about 20 minutes, then he would ejaculate, by taking his penis out.136 159 In cross-examination, JF agreed that when she was living in Roma, she ran away from the home for about a month. She had not told the police about this in any of her statements as she did not think it was relevant.137 JF was not questioned as to why she ran away, or where she ran away to or why she returned. She was 130 T 87.15-27. 131 T 87.35-88.14. 132 T 88.27-89.2. 133 T 86.27-33. 134 T 89.10-28. 135 T 90.25-30. 136 T 90.12-24. 137 T 182.31-183.13. -- 33 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 30 not questioned as to whether, and if not, why not, she had complained to anyone about the alleged abuse during the period she was absent from the home.138 160 JF gave evidence that at the start of 2021, the family moved to Hervey Bay, where they lived for about six months in the Roadmaster caravan. JM had a job working as a barmaid at the Torquay Hotel, working lunchtime and sometimes nighttime shifts. The accused was not working but had the responsibility of looking after C.139 161 JF gave evidence that while they were living in Hervey Bay, there was a period when the accused abused her for about four days in a row, when JM went to work. She said her sisters would be asleep and she would go and give the accused a hug goodnight. He pulled her onto his bed, put his hand down her pants and rubbed her clitoris. He grabbed her hair, stuck his penis in her mouth and made her suck his penis. She said this would happen for about ten minutes, then he would flip her on her back and stick his penis in her vagina for another ten minutes. This did not hurt as she was used to it by then. 140 162 JF first got her period about two months before she turned 14. She recalled there were two times when the accused had stuck his penis in her vagina at Hervey Bay and he had said to her, ‘I’m gonna get you pregnant. If you tell anyone, I’ll kill you. You say it’s some James at school’.141 He did not get her pregnant, as he would pull out before ejaculating.142 163 JF explained that JM left the family because of the accused’s violence towards her, just before they moved to Rockhampton about halfway through 2021.143 JF said that JM packed a bag of clothes, walked out, took her car and did not come back.144Thereafter, she pretty much became the mum for C and S. She had to shower them and make sure they were ready for the day and that C had fresh pull ups. She did not have the option of leaving with JM, as the accused refused to let her see her mum or talk to her.145 164 JF said the abuse got worse (as in, more frequent) after her mum left. Sometimes it would happen three days in a row, or sometimes once a week, or once every three or four weeks.146 The accused started drinking a lot more147 and 138 Noting JF gave evidence that the first person she told about the alleged offending was AW, from which it can be inferred that she did not disclose the fact of either the alleged offending or the uncharged acts, to anyone, when she ran away from home at this time. 139 T 90.31-91.38. 140 T 92.31-93.5. 141 T 100.38-101.10. 142 T 101.15-18. 143 See more detailed discussion below as to violence. 144 T 102.10-15. 145 T 106.8-23. 146 T 106.27-107.5; T 107.33-37. 147 See more detailed discussion below as to alcohol and drug use. -- 34 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 31 she recalled several instances of abuse in Rockhampton which had occurred when the accused was drunk. 165 JF gave evidence that when they first moved to Rockhampton, they stayed at a free camp for about a week and then lived at the Parkhurst caravan park for about eight months, in the Roadmaster caravan. During the last two months they were in Rockhampton, they stayed at a villa which the accused was looking after for some friends.148 166 JF said that while they were living in Rockhampton, they had visitors at both the caravan and the villa. One of those visitors was a woman called Cassie, with whom the accused was in a relationship for about three months, including for some of the time they lived in the villa. JF agreed with a proposition that Cassie and her three children would regularly stay overnight during that relationship.149 She was not asked, nor did she say, if this had happened at the villa or the caravan or both. She had not told the police about this as she did not think it was important.150 167 JF could recall ‘about three, four’ times the accused abused her at the Parkhurst caravan park.151 She said the first time occurred on the accused’s bed. He had gone out drinking with some mates. She stayed at the caravan to babysit S and C. The accused came back from the pub about two hours later and was so drunk he could barely walk. S and C were asleep. The accused pulled her hair and put it over his penis. He made her suck his penis for ‘a good 20 minutes’ and then he made her get on top and ‘hop on his penis’, so that his penis went inside her vagina. He blacked out after ten minutes, so she put her clothes back on and went to bed.152 168 JF gave evidence that she could recall other incidents happening at the caravan park in Parkhurst similar to the one she had described. She recalled the specific details of another incident that she said occurred on New Years of 2022.153 She said the accused had been drinking up at the hotel in the caravan park all day with a bunch of mates and she had also had a few drinks.154 169 JF said the accused was drinking apple cider and Jim Beam and had about 12 drinks. He was drunk and slurring his words.155 She had had about six drinks over a few hours - three cups of passion pop and three ciders. This had made her 148 T 107.10-25. 149 T 208.25-209.7. 150 T 209.8-13. 151 T 108.10. 152 T 108.12-26. 153 Noting that although JF said, at various times, this was New Years Eve 2022, she later confirmed that what she was describing occurred on 31 December 2021; see T 186.8-13. 154 See further discussion below about the provision of alcohol to JF. 155 T 112.13-29. -- 35 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 32 feel really dazed, such that she could barely see but had not affected her memory in anyway.156 170 In cross-examination, when it was suggested to JF that the fact she was drunk must have affected her memory, she gave the following evidence:157 Some of the memory had come back to me the day after, but I could see what was happening to me. I felt it. 171 She clarified that when she had said the alcohol had not affected her memory, this was because the next day she had recalled what had happened.158 172 JF said she remembered carrying her two sisters back to the caravan to put them to bed at around 11:00pm. She went to give the accused a goodnight kiss, he pulled her onto his bed, stripped off all her clothes and duct taped her hands together. She said he then licked her clitoris and played with it for about two hours.159 She said:160 I was already drunk and starting to black out and then after two hours of that, he decided to stick his penis into my vagina for another hour and then he passed out so when I woke up, I put my clothes back on and went to bed. 173 In cross-examination, JF agreed with propositions put to her that the accused had been drinking since about 1:00pm that day and had consumed about 18 drinks. She said he was really intoxicated and could barely walk or talk.161 174 She could not recall how she removed the duct tape from her hands.162 175 JF gave evidence that the accused had duct taped her hands a few times before this but the circumstances were different in that it would be a quick 20 minutes or so, he would be really drunk and pass out quickly so she would manage to break the duct tape off.163 176 On the occasion on New Years, the accused had taped her hands when they were above her head, so that they were clamped together and he put the duct tape around her wrists. She told him to stop as he was being really forceful and it was stinging and hurting, notwithstanding by this time, it normally did not hurt for her when they had penile vaginal intercourse.164 156 T 112.2-12. 157 T 187.38-188.1. 158 T 188.9-13. 159 T 109.21-30; T 111.23-31. 160 T 109.30-34. 161 T 186.27-187.1. 162 T 187.21-26. 163 T 110.16-23. 164 T 110.4-9; T 110.27-36. -- 36 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 33 177 JF said there were other similar incidents that had occurred at Rockhampton and that the accused would abuse her three or four times a month.165 178 JF gave no evidence-in-chief wherein she described the accused ever sexually abusing her on the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan. 179 However, during cross-examination, JF agreed that it was her evidence, consistent with what she had said in a police statement, that the accused had had ‘sex’ with her on, in some form, on at least one occasion, on the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan.166 JF was shown a photograph said to depict that middle bunk.167 She said that when the accused abused her on that middle bunk, the bunks were positioned in a different part of the caravan and all of the bunks were closer to the floor.168 However, she agreed the space between the middle and top bunk was about the same as depicted in the photograph and agreed with an estimate that this was a distance of about 600 mm.169 180 JF did not give any evidence as to where she was living at the time the accused sexually abused her in the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan, nor did she give any evidence as to the circumstances of that alleged abuse. The Alleged Offending in Murray Bridge (Count 2) 181 JF gave evidence that she, S, C and the accused left Rockhampton and then travelled with their caravan through central Australia to South Australia. They were on the road for about a month and a half and arrived in South Australia about two months before Christmas 2022.170 In cross-examination, she agreed that they arrived there a little bit earlier than that, but it was at least two months before Christmas 2022.171 182 After stopping briefly in Coober Pedy and Port Augusta, the family settled in Murray Bridge. JF gave evidence that they stayed at the Murray Bridge caravan park for three months, before they obtained emergency housing at 27 Owl Drive in Murray Bridge. She said they moved into that house two months before Christmas 2022. She was 15 at this time and was enrolled in Year 10 at Murray Bridge High School. 172 183 In addition to attending school, JF looked after the younger girls, did the cooking and the dishes. She also started attending football training on Wednesday 165 T 112.30-113.1. 166 T 190.26-29; T 192.12-15; T 194.2-9; T 195.7-10. 167 Exhibit D8. 168 T 194.10-23. 169 T 194.30-195.6. 170 T 113.2-12; T 114.3-4. 171 T 215.1-5. 172 T 114.5-32; T 116.19-33. -- 37 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 34 and Friday nights, however after about three months she ceased this activity as there were not enough players to form a team.173 184 JF gave evidence that while they were staying at the Murray Bridge caravan park,174 the accused raped her so badly that she could not walk the next day, her vagina was swollen and she had a hickey on her neck. She did not seek medical attention for this, as she ‘wasn’t allowed to go to a doctor or anything’. She confirmed that he would not have let her, nor did she ask to go.175 185 JF had drawn a plan of the house at 27 Owl Drive.176 This was a three- bedroom house. She had her own room at the back of the house, opposite a bedroom shared by C and S. The accused’s bedroom was immediately adjacent the girls’ room. 186 JF gave evidence that they lived at 27 Owl Drive for about six months. During this period, she commenced a relationship with her boyfriend, AW. He would visit the house, as did the neighbours from across the road.177 187 JF recalled there being about five or six incidents of sexual abuse at 27 Owl Drive. She could only recall some of them, as they were all pretty similar.178 188 The first incident occurred about two weeks after they moved into that house, about four months before Christmas. She said the accused was drunk and she went to give him a goodnight hug. It was around 8:30pm and her sisters were asleep in their room. She was wearing shorts and a T-shirt. He pulled her into his bed and on top of him, then pushed her down towards his penis, grabbed her hair and shoved his penis in her mouth. He made her suck his penis. This went on for about 20 minutes. She was still fully clothed during this. He then pushed her onto her back, started playing with her clitoris, pulled her shorts and undies off and stuck his penis in her vagina for about 20 minutes.179 189 She said the next three incidents at 27 Owl Drive occurred in the period leading up to Christmas and they happened in a similar way to the first, in the accused’s bedroom. As to whether she could recall the specific details of those incidents, she said:180 A. Well, the other three after the first incident, they were pretty much the same as the first. Q. When did those happen. 173 T 116.32-117.19. 174 Noting JF gave evidence that she was 14 when this occurred. JF turned 15 on 27 March 2022. 175 T 52.36-53.8. 176 Exhibit P6. 177 T 117.20-33. 178 T 118.2-8; T 118.20-23. 179 T 118.12-19; T 118.26-120.17; T 122.27-30. 180 T 120.37-121.7. -- 38 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 35 A. They happened about, say, three weeks after the first time and then the time after that, probably not even a week later. Q. At this point, how close are we getting to Christmas. A. It was probably three months before Christmas, two months before Christmas. 190 JF also gave evidence of the fifth and sixth incidents of abuse that she recalled at 27 Owl Drive, at night, when her sisters were asleep.181 She gave the following evidence:182 A. Yes. The fifth and sixth time was one time that he came into my room. I was going to bed. He shut my door behind me. I was about to lay on my bed and he's pushed me onto my bed, he's hopped on top of me. Started putting his hand down my pants and underwear and started playing with my clitoris and fingering my vagina and then he's hopped on top of me, made me suck his penis for about five minutes or so, and then he's put me on top of him, he's laid on his back and then he made me go up and down for about 10 minutes and then he's flipped me on my back and then he stuck his penis in my vagina again and went for another 10 minutes. Q. So on those two times, what time of day did those happen. A. Also at night-time, around 8.30, 9 o'clock. Q. Were they in his bed as well. A. The first time was in my bedroom and the second time was in his bedroom. Q. So the fifth occasion that you can remember was in your room. A. Yes, and the sixth was in his. They were pretty much the same. 191 JF gave evidence that about a month after Christmas 2022, the family moved to a new house at 34 Owl Drive. JF had drawn a plan of this house, incorrectly described on the plan as ’38 Owl Drive’.183 JF gave evidence that she lived at that house for about a month and a half or two months before she left.184 This was also a three-bedroom house, where JF had her own bedroom. 192 JF gave evidence that after she started seeing AW, he would come and visit the house at 27 Owl Drive. She said he visited more frequently once they moved to 34 Owl Drive, as it was the school holidays. He would come over every day and sometimes he would sleep at her house for a week at a time.185 193 When asked to give more detail about how often AW slept over at 34 Owl Drive, she said that he started sleeping over in January 2023 and that when it was the school holidays, ‘he slept over, I think it was like two weeks during school 181 T 122.34-36. 182 T 121.17-38. 183 Exhibit P4. 184 T 123.35-37. 185 T 124.12-20. -- 39 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 36 holidays every day’.186 She said she never went to AW’s house as the accused would not let her leave the house.187 194 In cross-examination, JF agreed with a proposition that AW spent a lot of time at 27 Owl Drive around Christmas 2022 and January 2023.188 She also agreed with a proposition that AW stayed over most nights.189 She said the accused would abuse her when AW went home.190 195 JF gave evidence that initially, during the holidays, the accused was seeing a woman called Tory, however when they moved to 34 Owl Drive, he started dating GW. JF said that she liked GW and described her as a good person.191 196 JF gave evidence that the last time the accused sexually abused her was at 34 Owl Drive, when she had been living there for about two months. She was 15. 197 She described the incident in the following terms:192 A. So [the accused] had been drinking beforehand and I had a few drinks as well, which I had about two to three, and then we were heading off to bed and then he decided to pull me in his bed, start putting his hand down my pants and playing with my clit under the underwear and then he pulled my pants off and my shirt off. I wasn't wearing a bra at this time. And then he decided to grab my hair and shoved his penis into my mouth and then that happened for about five minutes and then he flipped me onto his back - onto my back and then he put his penis inside my vagina and then went for about five to 10 minutes. 198 JF said that before this incident, GW was at the house. GW and the accused were drinking Jim Beam and had started drinking around 5 o’clock. They had dinner at around 6:00pm. They were all just chilling in the lounge room. She said she had a few drinks as well – probably one or two. GW had three to four, the accused had about six to eight. GW left with her kids to go home at around 7:30pm.193 199 JF gave evidence that thereafter, she and accused stayed in the lounge room and continued to watch television.194 At about 8:00pm, she and the accused both had a cone of cannabis. She said that the accused had been smoking cannabis all day. He kept pressuring her to smoke it too, so she did so. She felt numb and warm and her vision was a bit fuzzy. The accused was stumbling around and could barely talk.195 186 T 124.27-28. 187 T 125.2-3. 188 T 215.16-28. 189 T 215.29-30. 190 T 215.31-34. 191 T 158.38. 192 T 39.16-27. 193 T 39.36-40.19; T 43.6-9. 194 T 43.10-13. 195 T 41.26-42.10. -- 40 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 37 200 JF was asked to describe the layout in the accused’s bedroom. She said that he had a double bed in the middle of the room, with the bedhead being adjacent to the wall separating that room from the room marked ‘Kids lounge room’ on the plan. She said the accused was laying on the right side of the bed and pulled her across him onto the left side of the bed.196 201 JF was asked if she could remember any more details of this incident. She gave the following evidence:197 Q. Do you remember what you were wearing on that occasion. A. No, I do not. Q. Were you wearing underwear. A. Yes. Q. Do you remember what sort of underwear it was that you were wearing. A. Just normal. Q. And then in terms of tops and bottoms, do you remember at all what sort of top you had on. A. I had a T-shirt on, just a plain T-shirt and shorts. Q. Do you remember any more details about what you were wearing. A. No. Q. You had underwear, T-shirt and shorts on. A. Yes, and a sports bra on underneath the shirt. 202 JF explained that she did not resist him or ask him to stop as he had been doing this to her for years and she had given up on saying anything.198 203 The incident stopped when the accused ‘cummed inside her’. She pushed him off and he went and had a shower. She put her clothes back on and waited for him to finish in the shower, and then she went for a shower.199 204 In cross-examination, JF said she could not recall what day of the week this last incident of abuse had occurred. However, she said she knew it was a weekday in January and that she was back at school by this time.200 196 T 44.4-36. 197 T 45.22-36. 198 T 46.24-31; T 47.10-17. 199 T 48.20-27. 200 T 213.1-9. -- 41 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 38 205 JF gave evidence that there were other times the accused had sexually abused her at 34 Owl Drive and that the last incident was in fact one of three similar incidents that had occurred three days in a row. Although she could not recall the specific details of those other two incidents, she said she had not been drinking nor had she smoked any cannabis but as with the last incident, he had touched her clitoris, made her suck his penis and put his penis in her vagina. 201 206 JF said there were at least five or six occasions of abuse at 34 Owl Drive (including the three previously referred to).202 207 She could recall the details of one incident that had occurred about two weeks after they had moved into 34 Owl Drive. The accused had some of his mates over and they were drinking for the day. The mates left around 6:30pm. She cooked dinner and at around 7:30pm and started getting the girls organised for bed. She put them in their beds and then went to have a shower at about 8:00pm. Around 8:45pm the accused was going to bed. He was affected by alcohol such that he was barely talking, his eyes were glassy and he smelled of beer. She was wearing black tracksuit pants, a T-shirt, a sports bra and underwear. She went to give him a hug goodnight then he pulled her onto his bed, lay her on her back and stuck his penis in her vagina for about 20 minutes. She said she was really sick of it. She wanted to scream but could not do anything.203 208 Although she had not previously mentioned this incident as involving fellatio, when questioned further about this incident during examination-in-chief, JF was asked the following:204 Q. This time, when he got you to suck his penis, how long did he do that for. A. About five to 10 minutes. Q. And again, can you just describe the way that he did that. A. He was aggressive and he pulled me around and shoved my mouth on top of his penis. Q. This time, when he put his penis in your vagina, did that hurt at all. A. No. 209 In cross-examination, JF was asked whether AW ‘was in the picture’ at the time she alleged the accused had abused her over three consecutive days at 34 Owl Drive. She said he was not, as he was at his house. She explained that he had not been there for around a month or three weeks because he had stolen a pushbike 201 T 129.5-130.24. 202 T 130.34-36. 203 T 131.7-132.3; 132.36-133.3. 204 T 132.15-24. -- 42 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 39 from someone the accused knew and that as such, she was not allowed to see AW anymore.205 Running Away from 34 Owl Drive 210 JF gave evidence that about a week after the last incident of sexual abuse, she ran away from 34 Owl Drive. She ran away because she was sick of what was happening to her and what the accused was doing to her and her mental health was not that great.206 211 JF and AW had pre-arranged this. She jumped out of her bedroom window and AW was waiting for her across the road. He took her back to his house for the night and she ended up staying there.207 The accused did not abuse her again after she left 34 Owl Drive. Alcohol 212 As outlined above, JF described several incidents of abuse as having occurred in the context of her having previously been drinking alcohol and one occasion when she recalled having smoked a cone of cannabis. 213 JF gave evidence that the accused started giving her alcohol in grade 6.208 She could not really recall the details but did remember the accused giving her a sip of his drink and that it tasted strong.209 214 Thereafter, the accused continued to give JF alcohol, with increasing frequency after she turned 13. She said that sometimes she would be drunk when the accused sexually abused her but that he abused her more times when she was sober than when she was drunk.210 As to how often the accused would abuse her when she was drunk, she said:211 A. When I was drunk, it would probably be maybe once a month, sometimes maybe three days in a row because it was a holiday and we had nothing else to do so they would just give me alcohol. 215 JF gave evidence that the accused would give her anything from vodka to beer to bourbon to rum and shots of different kinds. Sometimes he would ask her to get him a drink and tell her she could have one too and she would take up that offer. Other times he would pressure her into drinking with him. Sometimes her mum would be present, but not very often. JM never said anything about it.212 205 T 216.2-23. 206 T 127.22-28; T 128.2-4. 207 T 127.29-128.1. 208 T 40.33. 209 T 93.26-34. 210 T 94.8-24. 211 T 94.17-20. 212 T 94.27-95.18. -- 43 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 40 216 JF gave evidence that before they moved to Hervey Bay, the accused drank alcohol on the weekends. He would have one or two and was not that bad. He would drink Jim Beam, Great Northern, or Woodstock – anything that was rum.213 However, once they moved to Hervey Bay in 2020, the accused’s drinking got really bad, such that he was drinking pretty much every day of the week.214 217 She would have about two or three drinks with the accused, whereas he would have between six and ten.215 When the accused was drunk, his behaviour changed. She said, ‘he would start getting all, like, pushy towards me and start mucking around, start play fighting with me.’216 This happened maybe three to four times a month.217 218 If the accused was drunk when abusing her, he would become more aggressive. He would pin her down and put his penis in her ‘really roughly and to where it really hurt’. This happened more once they moved to Hervey Bay and during school holidays because the accused did not have to go and pick them up from school or go anywhere.218 Drugs 219 JF gave evidence that she was aware that the accused and JM were using marijuana when she was younger when they were living in Tailem Bend. She said that at that time, she did not know they were using any other drugs. She first became aware of this when she was 13 and living in Roma. She could tell by their body language and they were staying up late at night.219 She said she had seen the effects methylamphetamine had on people. It either made them stay up all night or they became angry.220 220 JF gave evidence that the accused first gave her a cone when she was 14.221. As to how this came about, she said:222 A. So I was drinking with my mum and [the accused] in the caravan and I had probably about four beers that night and then I was sitting on the end of [the accused’s] bed, my mum was in the shower, and [the accused] passed me a cone and then I ended up smoking that, it was my first time ever and so I thought I would give it a try. And then I ended up passing out on the floor. 221 However, this did not happen regularly thereafter. She probably had one cone about a year later and on the very last occasion the accused had abused her at 213 T 95.37-96.5. 214 T 95.26-36. 215 T 95.20-25. 216 T 96.25-27. 217 T 97.1-3. 218 T 97.4-36. 219 T 162.10-38. 220 T 183.22-28. 221 T 42.23. 222 T 42.26-32. -- 44 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 41 34 Owl Drive. JF could not remember the accused giving her cannabis on any other occasions. 223 Prescription Drugs 222 JF gave evidence that S suffered from ADHD and that S was prescribed Ritalin for that condition from the age of six.224 223 JF said that when she was 13 and they were living in Roma, the accused started taking S’s Ritalin tablets. She said on one occasion, when she was 13 and she, JM and the accused had been drinking, the accused gave her five Ritalin tablets at about 4:00pm. She said she had started drinking at about 2:00pm and probably had about six drinks. She could not remember what she was drinking. The Ritalin kept her awake and she could not sleep. She was fidgety and up on her phone all night. The accused did not sexually abuse her on that occasion.225 224 JF said that when they were living in Rockhampton in the villa, the accused gave her 10 Ritalin tablets on two separate occasions. He also gave her Ritalin on one occasion at 27 Owl Drive. She described these as white pills, not even 5 mm thick.226 225 On one of the occasions in Rockhampton, the accused had sexually abused her. She said they were packing up the caravan before starting the trip to Murray Bridge. The accused started giving her drinks (Mishka – a vodka drink). She estimated she had about four such drinks between 4:00pm and around 7:30pm or 8:00pm. S and C were asleep. She was sitting with the accused on the bed in his room. He pulled off her clothes and stuck his penis in her for about 30 to 45 minutes.227 226 JF said she did not feel affected by the alcohol but the Ritalin made her feel really energetic. She could not sit down and wanted to keep doing the cleaning. She thought she had taken the Ritalin around 4:30pm, around the same time she was drinking.228 227 When asked in cross-examination if this incident had occurred in 2021, she said, ‘It was halfway through 2022’.229 She disagreed with a proposition put to her that S ceased taking Ritalin in 2020.230 228 JF gave evidence that when S was aged six, S was also prescribed Catapres, a sleeping tablet, to help her sleep at night. JF remembered an occasion when she was aged 11 and the accused told her to take two of these tablets as she would not 223 T 133.15-38. 224 T 134.3-9. 225 T 134.11-135.17. 226 T 135.21-136.8. 227 T 136.9-137.1. 228 T 137.4-15. 229 T 209.26. 230 T 210.2-4. -- 45 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 42 go to sleep. The tablets made her tired but she did not fall asleep by taking them. The accused did not sexually abuse her on that occasion.231 229 In cross-examination, JF said she was eight years old when the accused gave her Catapres.232 Physical Violence against JF 230 JF gave evidence that there were occasions when the accused was physically violent towards her and she described getting smacked, punched or whipped with cords and metal spatulas, ladles and spoons.233 231 JF said the first time the accused hit her was when she was aged six and they were living in Lucindale. She had apparently done something wrong. The accused came into her room with her mum’s plastic hairbrush and ‘whipped it over my butt’. He hit her twice with the brush so hard that it snapped and half of it landed on the other side of the room. She was crying that hard, her face was red.234 232 JM and S were in the lounge room and therefore did not see this happen.235 233 JF gave evidence that the last time the accused was ever violent towards her occurred at Upper Coomera when they were living at the Secura Lifestyle Caravan Park. She said this occurred when she was aged 11 but later corrected herself and said she was aged 12. She did not turn a tap off properly and flooded the wall of the caravan. She was outside the caravan. JM was inside with S and C. The accused walked past her and punched her twice in the chest. She said she was really scared as she could not breathe.236 She said:237 … [the accused] walked off to, and he walked past the neighbours, who was a female police officer living in the caravan park at the time, or staying there and he told her what he did and apparently she said ‘I would do the same thing if that was my child’. 234 She did not report this to anyone or go to the hospital as she was not allowed to and was only young then.238 235 In cross-examination, JF said that the accused had told her about his conversation with the police officer at the caravan park. She agreed that when she spoke to the police on 26 March 2023 and described this incident, she had not mentioned that she had been told this by the accused.239 231 T 137.19-138.23. 232 T 209.29. 233 T 138.24-32. 234 T 138.33-139.30. 235 T 139.32-35. 236 T 140.2-23; T 140.30-33. 237 T 140.24-29. 238 T 140.34-38. 239 T 217.4-14. -- 46 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 43 236 JF said that there were other occasions that the accused had hit her but it did not happen very often, perhaps four to five times over a year. However, when they lived in Merrimac, it was really bad. She described having problems sleeping, and that as result, the accused would make her stand in a corner and then smack her with a metal spatula or a metal ladle or a metal spoon or wooden ones. He hit her either on her butt, the back of her thighs or her lower back. She would get bruises from this and sometimes have trouble sitting down.240 237 In cross-examination, JF said that no one at school saw these bruises as she would wear long school shorts and a long T-shirt to cover them.241 238 JF also recalled an occasion when they were living in Katherine and she was aged 10. They had been to the shops and apparently, she was not listening. When they got back to the (Millard) caravan, the accused picked up a satellite cord, folded it in half and whipped her multiple times across the lower back, butt and thighs. She was on her top bunk when this happened and her mum, S and C were also in the caravan at the time. She said her mum was trying to stop the accused and S and C were standing behind her mum.242 239 JF said that she ended up with whip lashes (red lines or marks) over that whole area.243 The cord was about a metre long, black, about 5 mm thick and he folded it in half. She said he hit her with that cord about seven times.244 She did not seek any medical treatment as there was no point. The red marks had disappeared within about two to three hours.245 240 In cross-examination, JF was asked how long the cord would be when it was folded in half. She initially said 25 (mm) but then agreed with a proposition that if it was a metre long and folded in half, the cord would be about half a metre long.246 She agreed that in her prescribed interview with police, she had said the cord was at least 2 m long. She said that what she told the police was incorrect and maintained the cord was one metre long.247 241 JF also agreed that she had told police she would be whipped across the arms. When asked if she wore long sleeves at school in Katherine, she said this incident had occurred during the school holidays.248 242 She said neither S nor C were ever hit with the satellite cord, although S had been disciplined by being hit with ladles, spoons or other things.249 240 T 141.14-38. 241 T 197.12-35. 242 T 143.2-14. 243 T 142.3-12. 244 T 142.23-26. 245 T 142.38-143.1. 246 T 198.15-22. 247 T 199.9-16. 248 T 199.17-200.11. 249 T 200.12-18. -- 47 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 44 Medical and Other Treatment - Generally 243 JF gave evidence that during the period she lived with the accused, he never took her to a doctor, nor did anyone else ever take her to see a doctor. She said that the accused would not let JM take her to the doctor.250 She never discussed the fact of her irregular periods with a doctor or anyone as she thought this was normal.251 244 She confirmed that after she reported the offending to police, DCP arranged for her to be seen by a doctor, at which time she was found to be suffering from chlamydia.252 JF agreed in cross-examination that at the time of that examination, she was sexually active with AW.253 Physical Violence against JM 245 JF gave evidence that JM left the accused (and the family) because of the accused’s physical violence towards her.254 246 She described two occasions when she saw JM being physically abused by the accused. She said the first of these occurred when she was in her sisters’ bedroom at Roma. She said her mum and the accused were arguing in the lounge room, so she took her sisters into their old bedroom and shut the door. She heard her mum screaming, ‘Stop, stop’ and ‘Put that down’. She opened the door and saw her mum walking towards them holding her ribs and her arm against her body and she saw the accused with a metal pole, about 30 cm long and 10 cm wide. The next day she saw that her mum had bruises all down her back. 255 247 This incident had made her more scared of the accused and for her mum’s safety.256 248 The second incident described by JF was said to have occurred in Hervey Bay. JM and the accused had been drinking. JF said she had also had one or two drinks. She was in the kitchen doing the dishes and her two sisters were asleep. JM was talking to the accused when he snapped, picked up a Jim Beam bottle from the side of the bed and smashed it on JM’s head. When asked to describe this incident in more detail she said:257 A. [The accused] had got up onto his knees, because he was laying down, and then swung the bottle aggressively onto my mum's head where my mum was sitting on the end of the bed across diagonally from him. 250 T 210.27-37. 251 T 214.11-38. 252 T 53.11-13. 253 T 179.21-29. As such, this evidence does not add any weight to JF’s account of the alleged offending in count 2. 254 T 102.12-13. 255 T 102.18-104.6. 256 T 104.7-9. 257 T 104.34-37. -- 48 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 45 249 JF said the bottle struck JM in the forehead and she had an egg on her head right above her eyebrow, in the middle.258 She said her mother left the accused about three months after this incident. During that three-month period, JM and the accused were constantly arguing and the accused would ‘boot’ JM’s car and put dents in it.259 250 In cross-examination, JF maintained that the accused was holding the Jim Beam bottle when he struck her mother with it. She disagreed that he had thrown the bottle at JM and that the bottle had then struck her head.260 251 JF agreed that there was a time that she accompanied the accused when he went to the Maryborough Police Station but denied it was to report this incident. She maintained that the police had come to the caravan after that incident.261 Act for Kids 252 During cross-examination, JF gave evidence that she recalled going with the accused, S and C to a place called ‘Act for Kids’ in Rockhampton.262 She recalled meeting with a person there on more than one occasion.263 She could not recall ever meeting alone with that person, or her sisters ever talking with anyone there. She said they always had ‘group meetings’ when they went there.264 Initial Complaint 253 JF gave evidence that she told AW about the alleged offending in about the start of March 2023, about a month after she moved in to live with him and his mother and brother. He was the first person to whom she disclosed the offending.265 254 She said that some of AW’s friends had come over to smoke cannabis. Once they left, she was alone with AW in his bedroom. She felt really emotional. She said that she needed to tell him something that he was not going to like to hear. Then she told AW that the accused had been sexually abusing her for 11 years.266 She had also said that the accused had been raping her, as AW did not understand. She had not told him anything else about what the accused had done to her.267 255 JF gave evidence that she was crying during this conversation. AW had said to her, ‘why didn’t you tell me earlier’, that he was glad she was now safe but she would not be going anywhere.268 258 T 104.22-23; T 104.38-105.1. 259 T 105.10-106.3. 260 T 206.15-23. 261 T 207.15-29. 262 T 207.35-208.3. 263 T 203.23-32. 264 T 208.6-18. 265 T 143.26-144.11. 266 T 144.16-22. 267 T 145.3-4; T 145.11-13. 268 T 145.8-25. -- 49 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 46 Communications/Contact with the Accused Thereafter 256 JF gave evidence that about two weeks after she ran away from 34 Owl Drive and went to live with AW, she sent the accused an SMS wherein she told him she wanted her stuff back and threatened to go the cops if he did not give her back her ‘important stuff’ such as baby photos. She said she called the accused a paedophile in that message.269 She had asked for her photos back, to which he had replied ‘Runaway girls don’t get their stuff back’. She then said that if he did not give her stuff back, she’d go to the cops and called him a paedophile. She said he then responded, ‘[GW’s] coming with it now.’270 257 She said GW brought her the baby photos and that was the last time she heard from the accused or ever contacted him.271 258 JF was cross-examined as to a series of text messages exchanged between her and the accused, copies of which were tendered as Exhibit D7; namely:272 Monday 20 March 2023 4.35 am JF This is [JF], why did you sign me out of school. Monday 20 Mar 2023 6.33 am Accused Don't send me messages at 4.30 in the morning I've had the police come to my house over your shoplifting you don't belong to me no more so you're signed out of school go find somewhere to get your life back on track you’ll be in jail before you know it Monday 20 Mar 2023 2.36 pm JF Wow one mistake and u do this remember u have done worse and guess what asshole I am going to report u to the police for raping me if I don’t get my snow globes baby photos and I know I am missing my pink monster hat so if that’s not out the front of ur house tomorrow afternoon prepare to never see [S] and [C] again. And I want [JM’s] and [LF’s] phone numbers bc there my mum and dad And you got to repile in the next 1 hour or I going to the cops today and I am being serious and [AW] will help me bc he knows Accused 269 T 146.5-22. 270 T 147.1-10. 271 T 147.11-20. 272 T 150.12-154.32. -- 50 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 47 You can have all your s*** but I'm going to the police for you making false allegations with your boyfriend and I've got my family the back me up. JF Really, when it did happen, [S] saw it she told me Accused Go away troublemaker, you can have your s*** in the morning you're full of crap yes cause you don't get your way in life. JF Give me [LF’s] and [JM’s] phone number’s and I leave u alone and I will come pick the rest of my shit up tomorrow]. Accused I'm showing the police all these blackmailing messages. JF Ok I go to the police and tell them about the truth about everything. Accused I don't give a fuk take you s*** and go I've already been to the police they will not believe anything you say JF Okay [the accused] you can text me my parents' phone numbers and tell me when my shit is at the front I pick it and leave you to have a happy little life. Accused And your mother won't come to SA because she's got a warrant for her arrest I already told her what happened. JF I know I just want to talk to her and my real dad Or I go cops in minute Accused I deleted all the numbers when you moved out because I don't have to deal with you all them no more I don't know how you can get the number JF Can cops get the numbers for me Accused -- 51 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 48 I don't know where you can get it from look it up on her Facebook JF I’ll find out. Bc I have to find it even tho I know u have got [JM’s] number Tuesday 21 Mar 2023 5.21 am Accused Your stuff is at the front 259 JF could recall some but not all of these messages. 260 She explained that she sent the first message as she was trying to get back in school. She agreed that at that time she had a school laptop computer, which she would need to return if she was signed out of school.273 261 As to the message ‘Really, when it did happen, [S] saw it she told me’, JF gave evidence that S was starting to act weird whilst JF was still living with them. She was asked what S had told her. She said:274 A. She didn't tell me much, she just thought she saw that something happened between me and [the accused] but that's all she said. I don't recall what she said. 262 In cross-examination, JF agreed that she had told the police that she had sent the accused nasty messages and called him a paedophile in the messages she sent. She initially denied that she had sent the accused any other messages. She then said that there were other messages, before 20 March, including one where she called him a paedophile, on her old phone which had got smashed.275 263 JF confirmed that she did eventually get all of her stuff back. She said the accused left some of her belongings out the front of his house and she went to collect them. The rest was dropped off to her by GW or left out the front of GW’s house for her to collect.276 Report to Authorities 264 JF reported the alleged offending to the police at the Murray Bridge Police Station on 21 March 2023 at 3:00pm.277 She participated in a prescribed interview with the police five days later and a further interview in September 2023.278 273 T 150.23-151.19. 274 T 152.34-36, noting this is obviously hearsay. 275 T 180.22-38. 276 T 213.26-35. 277 T 147.21-27; T 154.38-155.13. 278 T 157.4-21. -- 52 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 49 265 JF disagreed with a proposition put to her in cross-examination that the only reason she reported the alleged offending to police was because she was unhappy with the outcome of her requests for the accused to return her belongings.279 JM’s Evidence Meeting the Accused 266 JM gave evidence that she met the accused at the shops a couple of weeks after she separated from LF, JF’s father. She then arranged to meet him at the train park in Tailem Bend a few weeks later. JF met the accused on that occasion and they got along fine. She commenced a relationship with the accused a couple of weeks thereafter.280 267 JM said that when she ‘first got with’ the accused, he was on home detention bail. She did not really know why he was subject to these conditions but thought it was something to do with his ex-partner. She said he was not on these conditions for long.281 When asked in cross-examination if this was because he had made a threat to a child protection worker, she said, ‘not that I’m aware of.’282 Tailem Bend and Lucindale 268 JM gave evidence that she and JF moved in with the accused at his two- bedroom rental house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, about two weeks later. She confirmed the house was as set forth in the diagram, Exhibit P3, for most of the time they lived there, but for about the first two weeks, bedroom 1 was the lounge room, the lounge room was the main bedroom and bedroom 2 was the girls’ room.283 269 JM said that they lived at Tailem Bend for roughly six months, or a little more, during which S was about a year old.284 She remembered that JF had a ‘Chuggington’ top when she was five and they were living at Tailem Bend.285 270 JM also explained that there were times when she would leave JF alone with the accused, for example, if she walked to the shop with S in the pram or went to the supermarket.286 271 Thereafter, she, JF, the accused and S moved to live in Lucindale for roughly six months, where they rented a three-bedroom house. She could not recall the address but said the school was right behind their backyard.287 279 T 211.5-12. 280 T 234.5-38. 281 T 264.28-265.2. 282 T 277.27-30. 283 T 236.3-11. 284 T 235.36-37; T 236.19-22. 285 T 236.23-35. 286 T 255.26-31. 287 T 236.36-237.13. -- 53 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 50 Living Interstate 272 JM gave evidence that after leaving Lucindale, she, the accused, JF and S travelled in a VN Commodore with a trailer on the back through Broken Hill up to Coffs Harbour, where they stayed in a caravan park for a while. All up, they travelled for about nine months, during which they camped in tents. Their travels ended in Queensland where they settled in a one-bedroom unit in Beatty Street, Southport.288 273 JM gave evidence that they stayed in Southport for roughly six months and then moved to Merrimac. She explained that they never stayed in the one place for very long. When asked why, she said, ‘Because [the accused] was always getting in trouble with the neighbours, starting things with them and, yep.’289 In cross-examination, she agreed that on occasions they moved because their rent was unpaid, albeit she maintained that they usually moved because of troubles caused by the accused with neighbours.290 274 In Merrimac, they rented a two-bedroom apartment. They stayed there for about six months, during which the accused worked as a mechanic. They purchased a 12-foot Millard caravan and then travelled up and down the east coast of Australia for roughly a year.291 275 JM described the layout of the Millard caravan. She said that when you went through the front door, the girls’ beds were on the left, the kitchen was in the middle and to the right was the bed she shared with the accused.292 She agreed this layout was as depicted in the bottom diagram on Exhibit P5 and that JF slept on the top bunk bed and S slept on the bottom bunk.293 276 JM gave evidence that after leaving Merrimac, and travelling, they settled in the Northern Territory, first in Mataranka, then Katherine. 277 In Mataranka they lived at the Cave Creek Station in the Millard caravan for about six months. She worked as a general farm hand at the station, usually in the mornings and afternoons. The accused also worked at the station, from 6:00am until 5:00pm, feeding the cows and doing general mechanics.294 If both she and the accused were working, JF and S would either be with her, helping or playing in the sandpit out the front of the caravan ‘within earshot’ of her.295 278 In cross-examination, JM gave evidence that she could not remember the accused taking any days off work at the station and agreed with a proposition that he worked from 5:00am until 5:00pm. She also agreed that on occasions, he would 288 T 237.19-38. 289 T 238.9-10. 290 T 302.16-27. 291 T 238.19-239.4. 292 T 239.5-13. 293 T 239.31-240.1. 294 T 241.21-242.17. 295 T 242.18-27. -- 54 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 51 go away for several days at a time for work.296 In re-examination, JM confirmed the accused worked from Monday to Friday on the station.297 279 After leaving Mataranka, the family moved to Katherine, where they stayed at a caravan park, the Knotts Crossing Resort, until shortly after C was born on 3 March 2018. JM gave evidence that she was working 13-hour days as a housekeeper, in the restaurant and in the office. The accused was also employed as gardener/maintenance man but was doing only minimal hours, three hours a day, a couple of days a week.298 280 JM gave evidence that she had a couple of weeks off work after giving birth to C. They then moved to another caravan park. She obtained work at the Katherine RSL as a maitre d’ where she remained employed for about three months.299 281 JM explained that in 2018, they got a different caravan, an Imperial Roadmaster. She described the layout of that caravan in these terms:300 A. Yep. So you'd go in the front door, to the left would be a lounge, you'd be looking straight at the double bunk beds where the girls were, you'd have the kitchen in the middle and my bed and [the accused’s] bed at the end with a cupboard, a vanity and a shower and toilet. 282 Similarly, she said this was consistent with what was depicted in the top diagram on Exhibit P5. When asked if the layout of this caravan ever changed, she said it did and that it was different when they first bought the caravan in March 2018. She gave the following evidence:301 A. It was a different layout. The girls' bunk beds weren't originally there, the lounge was the whole way along. It only had the bed at the back for [the accused] and I, so we had bunk beds built for the girls. Q. When did that happen. A. Immediately after we bought it. Q. What did the bunk beds look like. A. They were just wooden-framed bunk beds. Q. Did the bunk beds remain in the same location, or the same part of the caravan for the whole time. 296 T 301.2-13. 297 T 305.8-12. 298 T 243.17-38. 299 T 244.1-8. 300 T 239.23-27. 301 T 240.22-241.8. -- 55 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 52 A. They were originally across the front of the caravan, across the lounge section, with the lounge still left underneath and then moved to where they are sitting now so that it could be made a triple. Q. When were they first in that lounge room section. A. When we first, after we first moved, they made the bunk beds for them. Q. Looking at Exhibit D8 now produced to you, does that photograph look familiar to you. A. No. That was the way the bunk beds were made at the front of the van but they've been changed to the back of the van in this picture. Q. In the time that you were living in the caravan, were they ever in that position. A. No. 283 In cross-examination, she confirmed that the bunk beds were in the location marked ‘[C’s] bed’ on the diagram (Exhibit P5).302 284 The Roadmaster had toilet and shower facilities. However, they only used the toilet at night and at other times they would use the toilet and shower facilities in the toilet blocks at the caravan park.303 285 JM gave evidence that both the Millard and Roadmaster caravans had satellite cords. The Millard cord was grey and disconnected every time they needed to put the satellite out. The Roadmaster cord was white and was a permanent fixture on the top of the caravan. She did not know the length of either cord.304 286 Thereafter, the family moved to the Gold Coast. They lived first at the Big4 caravan park in Helensvale in the Roadmaster caravan. Neither she nor the accused were working during that time. After about six months in Helensvale, they moved to Upper Coomera, where they lived in the Roadmaster caravan at the Secura Lifestyle Caravan Park for about three to four months. Neither she, nor the accused, were working during that time.305 287 In cross-examination, JM agreed with a proposition put to her that while they were living in Upper Coomera, the accused used to buy and sell cars. At one stage he rented a second caravan site at the caravan park and put used cars on that site. When asked if that was the reason, they were asked to leave that caravan park, she said, ‘Yes and the domestic violence he was causing’.306 288 During 2020, the family lived at Roma in a three-bedroom rental property. Neither she nor the accused were working. She believed JF attended Roma High 302 T 274.14-26. 303 T 245.31-246.6. 304 T 245.7-22. 305 T 244.13-30; T 245.23-246.1. 306 T 276.14-30. -- 56 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 53 School. When asked if there was a time JF was home schooled, JM said this was earlier, for about six months in Mataranka.307 289 In cross-examination, JM confirmed that JF had run away for about a month while they were in Roma. She tried to ask her what was wrong, but JF did not want to open up about it. She said JF returned home ‘[because] I convinced her that she was all right to come home and that she’d be listened to no matter what.’308 290 JM gave evidence that from Roma, the family moved to Hervey Bay, where they lived in the Windmill Caravan Park in the Roadmaster caravan for about six to seven months. While living in Hervey Bay, JM worked at the Torquay Hotel, doing afternoon shifts on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, from 4:00pm until 1:00am.309 291 JM gave evidence that throughout her relationship with the accused, he was often left alone with the children. Indeed, she estimated this as high as 80% of the time. When further pressed on this issue, JM explained that when she left the house alone, the accused would be left with the children for at least 45 minutes to an hour on each such occasion. She also said there were a lot of times when he would stay up later than her.310 Physical Violence against JM 292 JM gave evidence that she left the accused when they were living in Hervey Bay because he was bashing her. She then went to live in Townsville and left JF, S and C with the accused.311 293 JM said that her relationship with the accused started out all right but changed once they left South Australia. She said he became very controlling with their finances and about whether she could go out or take the children out. She said she was not allowed to spend anything unless he said it was okay. The accused would not let her take the children out by herself, even to the shop or to school. Either he would go with her or he would abuse her by saying she could not take the children with her.312 294 In cross-examination, JM maintained that the accused would not let her go anywhere, except with his say so. For example, if she took S to the shop to get nappies, that would be because he had told her to do that. Although she left the house to work, she said that was because he wanted her gone from the house and that as he was living where she worked, he could keep an eye on her.313 307 T 246.3-32. 308 T 277.16-17. 309 T 247.2-9. 310 T 255.32-256.13. 311 T 247.10-17. 312 T 247.18- 248.6. 313 T 294.2-27. -- 57 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 54 295 JM maintained that the accused controlled her movements 24 hours a day after they left South Australia. Although she had a mobile phone, JM said the accused knew her passcode.314 296 JM gave evidence that after C was born, the accused’s behaviour towards her got worse and he became physically violent towards her.315 297 JM recalled four or five times when the accused was violent towards her. 298 The first such occasion was in Roma, when the accused hit her with a metal pole on the back of her right arm. She said this occurred in the lounge room and was precipitated by the fact that she had wanted to take the kids out. The accused had got abusive and told her she could not take them anywhere. He then chased her and hit her with the pole, causing a large bruise and welt. She said that JF screamed and said, ‘Stop hitting mum’. He then went to hit JF, so they ran out of the house.316 299 JM gave evidence that at the start of this incident, JF had been coming up the hallway towards the lounge and when the accused hit her, JF was standing behind him in the lounge room.317 300 JM did not seek any medical treatment after this incident, as the accused would not allow her to do so. She said:318 A. He just basically kept me inside and wouldn't let me out to even go seek medical advice or, if I did go to a doctors, he'd always make sure he was there so I couldn't speak freely. 301 In cross-examination, JM confirmed this incident occurred at the start of 2020. She agreed that in a statement she had made to police over the phone in June 2024, she had said this incident occurred at the end of 2020. She explained that she was very upset when making that statement and had only skimmed over what was in it. She maintained this incident occurred at the start of 2020.319 302 JM gave evidence about a second incident that also occurred at the house in Roma when the kids were in bed. She said they had been drinking when the accused got violent and started punching her on the left side, breaking two of her ribs. The accused had not let her go to the hospital.320 303 In cross-examination, JM confirmed that there were two errors in the statement she had made to police relevant to this incident. The first was that this incident occurred in Roma in 2020, whereas the statement said it occurred in Roma 314 T 298.19-26. 315 T 248.7-11. 316 T 248.18-249.4. 317 T 249.5-11. 318 T 249.20-23. 319 T 265.3-267.16. 320 T 249.26-36. -- 58 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 55 in 2021. The second error was that the statement referred to her reporting this incident to police at Hervey Bay a couple of days later. She said this was meant to be in reference to a subsequent incident when she was punched by the accused in Hervey Bay (see discussion below).321 The fact the statement also referred to the incident at Roma occurring in a caravan was also a mistake resulting from the two incidents at Roma and Hervey Bay being confused, as the family were in a house at Roma.322 304 JM said that a third incident had occurred in Hervey Bay in about February 2021 at the Windmill Caravan Park.323 JM gave evidence that they had been out to lunch together as a family at the pub where the accused had been drunk and was treating her and the children badly. On of the ladies there had grabbed S to try to stop her from leaving with the accused. When they got back to the caravan park, the accused had blamed JM for this. He was standing about one and a half or two metres away from her at the time, on the other side of the bed. JF, S and C were sitting on their bed. He then threw a Jim Beam bottle at JM, which hit her in the head, just above her right eye.324 305 JM said she had an egg size lump on her forehead right above her right eye and felt as if she had a concussion. She lay on the bed and did not seek any treatment. She said she could barely walk.325 306 JM was asked if she ever went to the doctor in the time she was with the accused and said, ‘only to go for normal things like my mental health and stuff like that.’326 She recalled taking JF to the doctor once during her relationship with the accused, when JF was five and having bad nightmares. She said that other than that, JF was a healthy kid and there was no other reason that she could recall as to why JF had not gone to see a doctor during that period of time.327 307 JM also gave evidence of one other incident of violence that occurred at the Windmill Caravan Park in Hervey Bay in 2021. She said the accused punched her several times in the abdomen and the rib and she ended up with bruises all up and down the right side of her body. This occurred in the Roadmaster caravan, at a time when JF, S and C were sitting on the floor on the kids’ side of the van, playing together. She did not seek any medical treatment after this incident.328 308 JM gave evidence that she left the accused a couple of days after that incident and reported it to the police. This was the only incident of violence involving the accused that she had reported to the police, as she was too scared to report the 321 T 268.1-269.3. 322 T 286.19-36. 323 It was suggested to JM in cross-examination that this incident occurred at the Pier Caravan Park. She denied this; T 291.1-4. 324 T 250.28-252.15. 325 T 252.16-33. 326 T 253.1-2. 327 T 253.3-18. 328 T 253.19-254.13. -- 59 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 56 earlier incidents.329 She said the reason she was able to report the abuse at that time was:330 Because that was the only time I could actually run away and get clear and actually finally be able to make the reports against him. 309 JM said she stayed in Hervey Bay for a couple of weeks thereafter. She obtained a Protection Order against the accused. He said that he would change and she believed him. However, the accused again turned nasty and violent and threatened to kill her if she took the children. As a result, she left the accused, without taking anything with her, even though she wanted to be with her children.331 310 JM was questioned further in cross-examination as to when she left the accused and the circumstances leading up to that decision. She said she left the accused a couple of weeks after the second incident in Hervey Bay when the accused had abused and hit her. This was in about March/April 2021.332 She gave the following evidence:333 Q. You left for three weeks or so, came back, and how long did you come back for. A. I stayed for a couple of weeks, two to three weeks. Q. And then you left - A. Yes. Q. - for good. So that would be maybe late April at the latest. A. There was roughly - yeah, March - May at the latest, which I did say May/June before. Sorry, it's hard to keep track of this. I've tried to put him out of my mind. 311 JM disagreed with a proposition put to her in cross-examination that the family was living at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay at the time she left the accused.334 She denied that she left the accused to move to Townsville with another man.335 She agreed that when she was in Townsville, she was in a relationship with another man but maintained that she did not leave the accused, to be with that man. She said that relationship did not develop for quite some time and was still ongoing.336 312 JM was also asked in cross-examination about why she had left her children with a man she claimed was a drug user and a violent drunk. She said that she had no choice - that it was the accused’s choice and that he had threatened her. She 329 T 288.16-26. 330 T 304.34-36. 331 T 254.21-255.3. 332 T 269.16-23. 333 T 269.24-34. 334 T 291.5-8. 335 T 291.22-26. 336 T 300.30-301.1. -- 60 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 57 gave evidence that she reported this threat to police.337 This was a separate report to the one she made, after the alleged incident in Hervey Bay when he had punched her in the abdomen and ribs and was made at a time when the accused had already gone ‘and left with the children on the run’.338 She said she told the police about the accused’s violence and drug and alcohol use. They then made a phone call to the accused. She said, ‘he has had the children put on the phone with him standing there and told them what to say from my knowledge’.339 313 JM gave evidence that she made another report to police about the accused once she was in Townsville. She said that as the police were unaware of the accused’s whereabouts, all they could do was make a further call to him.340 She contacted the police to see what could be done about the fact that he had been abusive and had the children. She was informed to go to the courts.341 314 JM contacted the accused by telephone from Townsville to check on her children ‘and to see if he’d actually be a human being.’342 315 JM gave evidence that after she left the family, she did not have any contact with JF until late 2023, when she called JF, after receiving a Facebook message from her saying she had run away from the accused.343 316 In cross-examination, JM confirmed that she had enrolled in a parenting program with Centacare and had also joined the waitlist for domestic violence counselling. As to the latter, she said she had done this as her youngest daughter was in the care of child protection and she was trying to get her back. As she had previously been in a relationship with a violent partner, she needed to demonstrate that she could see the signs of such violence so that her children were safe. She denied a proposition that she required this counselling because of her own violent actions.344 Physical Violence against JF 317 JM gave evidence that from what she observed over time, the relationship between the accused and JF appeared to be pretty normal. However, she gave evidence that there were three or four times when she saw the accused being violent towards JF.345 318 JM described seeing the accused smack JF really hard on her upper thigh, bottom and leg, such that it would leave bruises. She described this as a ‘beating’ rather than a ‘smack’, albeit he used an open hand. This would be precipitated by 337 T 291.27-292.7. 338 T 292.21-22. 339 T 293.1-3. 340 T 293.22-294.1. 341 T 299.30-35. 342 T 299.23-24. 343 T 255.6-10. 344 T 281.34-282.30. 345 T 256.20-27. -- 61 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 58 JF doing something wrong or just getting on his nerves. The first time she remembered this happening was in Roma and the last was at the Windmill Caravan Park in Hervey Bay. She never saw the accused hit JF with objects.346 319 In cross-examination, JM said that other than on those occasions, she had not seen JF with welts or bruises on her body. Specifically, she had not made any such observations in either Merrimac or Katherine.347 She said she had no reason to be concerned about the accused’s behaviour towards JF while they were in Katherine.348 Alcohol 320 JM gave evidence that the accused drank alcohol from the day she first moved in and met him. She said it started off as social drinking at nighttime, but over time it got worse such that by the time they were living in Roma, he was drinking from the morning until the night.349 She said by then he was drinking beer, bourbon and vodka, which would cause him to be nasty, violent and easily upset.350 321 JM first saw the accused give JF alcohol when she was aged 12 and they were living in Roma. She said he would be drunk and think it was funny for JF to be drinking. He would either pour her drinks or hand JF a premix bottle, such as Jack Daniels or Vodka Cruiser. She said she was upset about her daughter drinking at such a young age but the accused would just ‘shrug it off’ and tell her to shut up and let it be.351 322 JM said the accused gave JF three to four drinks on that first occasion and that as a result, JF vomited. She could recall two or three other times the accused had given JF alcohol, one in Roma and in the Windmill Caravan Park at Hervey Bay. As to the latter, she described coming home from work to see JF with her head in a bucket vomiting after having drunk premix shots. The second time in Roma had involved the accused pouring JF vodkas with a tiny splash of soft drink.352 Drugs 323 JM gave evidence that she never saw JF taking drugs (other than alcohol). 324 However, JM gave evidence that the accused consumed speed, meth and marijuana. She said the accused injected meth and that was something he had done from early in their relationship. At the start, he did this ‘only every so often’, but 346 T 256.28-257.21. 347 T 275.5-13. 348 T 275.25-28. 349 T 257.22-38. 350 T 258.3-14. 351 T 258.20-259.9. 352 T 259.19-260.2. -- 62 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 59 towards the end, it was every day.353 She could remember the accused injecting meth once or twice in JF’s presence.354 325 JM said that when the accused took meth, it did not affect him much, other than causing him to stay up for longer periods of time.355 326 JM gave evidence the accused started using cannabis a few weeks into their relationship and that he would use it daily. This continued until the end of their relationship. She said the accused used a bong to smoke cannabis and would consume a couple of grams a day, if not more. She said this did not really affect his behaviour, ‘it was more the alcohol.’356 327 In cross-examination, JM maintained the accused was using cannabis early in their relationship, notwithstanding he was on home detention bail. JM agreed that she used to accompany the accused to drug testing, where she would wait in the car out the front.357 328 JM agreed that she was also using cannabis and meth and that she drank alcohol while the family were living at Tailem Bend and that this continued throughout the duration of her relationship with the accused.358 329 JM gave evidence that she had last used methylamphetamine three years ago. She agreed that a hair follicle test she had undertaken in November 2023 had tested positive for methylamphetamines for the proximate period of 31 July to 31 October 2023. She maintained she had not used meth for three years and said it was not her fault that meth was still showing up in her hair follicles at that time. She had no explanation for these results.359 330 JM also agreed that she had tested positive for cannabis on 21 November 2023.360 However, she had tested negative to all substances at a random drug screening undertaken on 6 December 2023.361 Ritalin and Catapres 331 JM gave evidence that S started taking both Ritalin and Catepres from the age of four and a half and was still taking those drugs when JM left the accused. She said the dosage increased when S was about six and then again when she was eight and this increase would be at the accused’s instigation. She said the accused would take S’s Ritalin tablets when they were in Roma, because S was being prescribed more than she needed. She described the accused as eating five to ten 353 T 260.3-19. 354 T 260.20-22. 355 T 260.23-26. 356 T 261.1-6. 357 T 277.34-278.6. 358 T 278.11-21. 359 T 278.22-279.16; T 283.23-284.14. 360 T 281.30-32. 361 T 298.8-11. -- 63 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 60 Ritalin tablets at a time, every time he could. She never saw JF take any of S’s tablets.362 AW’s Evidence 332 AW was 16 when he gave evidence.363 He said he first met JF on 22 November 2022 in Murray Bridge, through his next-door neighbour. JF lived about 10 to 15 houses from his house in Plover Court. He started dating JF at the end of November 2022 and she moved in to live at his house at the end of February 2023, after she ran away from home.364 333 In cross-examination, AW agreed that in a police statement made on 10 May 2023, he had said that JF moved in to live with him in about the middle of February 2023. He said it probably was closer to the middle of February but he could not now fully remember.365 334 In cross-examination, AW agreed that there were times he stayed the night at 27 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge. He said he stayed overnight a couple of nights. When asked if that was all, he said:366 A. I would say the total would have been maybe a week's worth but in different days. Like, there was once when I think I slept over there for three nights in a row, but that's it, that's the highest I slept there. 335 He said that at this time, his neighbour also stayed overnight at 27 Owl Drive for a night or two.367 336 AW gave evidence that he stayed at 34 Owl Drive for one or two nights but then he was not allowed to go back there. As to why, he said:368 A. Can't remember the reason but I remember it started because of [the accused]. Q. It's because you'd stolen a bike, isn't it. A. I didn't steal no bike. It was one of my friends, he did, but I didn't. I wasn't even on the same street. Q. So did [the accused] give you a reason for not permitting you to be in the house. A. Yes, because he thought that my friend was me, because we have the same hair and all that, sort of, and the same body shape. Q. The question really is: did he actually give you a reason and, if he did, what was that reason. 362 T 261.9-262.31. 363 T 308.29. 364 T 309.3-310.21. 365 T 315.2-15. 366 T 315.22-25. 367 T 315.26-33. 368 T 318.1-20. -- 64 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 61 A. The reason why he thought I stole the bike was because he thought the person that was behind the gate on the photo, he thought it was me, but it wasn't. Q. So you're saying that he was mistaken. A. Yeah. He was basically judging a photo. Q. And you continued seeing [JF], continued dating. A. Yes, but not in, like, not really because our parents didn't let us see each other so we stopped. 337 AW gave evidence of a conversation he had with JF in his bedroom one afternoon about a week after she moved in to live at his house. He could not fully remember the lead up to the conversation, other than the fact that JF had gone to the bathroom before and had been in there for around 20 to 25 minutes. He said JF told him that she had something personal to tell him and that she had been raped by the accused since the age of six or seven up until recently, that is, 2021, 2022.369 He said the exact words she used were ‘[the accused] raped me’.370 338 He said he could not remember everything about that conversation. JF had said that it started when her dad left and that when she was about eight or nine, she had been drugged once. He thought JF had said it was ice or something like that and that the accused put the liquid out of a needle into a drink.371 339 In cross-examination, AW agreed that in a statement he had made on 21 June 2024, he had said that JF told him those drugs were ‘crushed tablets called perkies or something similar’ and that the accused then had sex with her. He agreed that was a reference to a different drug and not ice.372 340 AW said that during this conversation, JF had not said much as she was really scared. She was breaking down and shaking.373 341 In cross-examination, AW was asked if during the week after JF ran away to his house, that is, leading up to this conversation, he had discussed with her anything about her previous living arrangements. He said he had tried to ask her but that she ‘kept freezing and staring into nothing and start shaking randomly’.374 He was asked if JF had ever behaved similarly before she ran away from home. He said:375 A. Yes but no. 369 T 311.2-16; T 312.25-35; T 313.12-28. 370 T 312.24. 371 T 311.27-312.14. 372 T 320.23-26; T 322.10-32. 373 T 312.36-313.6. 374 T 317.14-16. 375 T 317.20-26. -- 65 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 62 Q. Was that a 'Yes' or a 'No'. A. It was like on and off. Like every time when I mentioned, like, even near the house or [the accused] or anything, she would just do it. Like, she would just start staring and start shaking and then there was one time where she had a fit. 342 AW also gave evidence that he went with JF to pick up some of her belongings from outside the accused’s house (being a train set and a black jumper). There was also a Coles bag which contained other items which they collected later from outside GW’s house, after JF ‘made a thing to the cops’.376 343 AW was also asked in cross-examination about what he knew of an alleged incident which occurred shortly after 10 May 2023 where two cars were damaged outside 34 Owl Drive. He responded, ‘I think so’.377 He said he knew two or three cars were smashed up but that was all he knew. He denied being involved in that incident but thought LF was involved. He did not know if JF was also there.378 Police Evidence 344 As previously stated, both Officer Wilson and Officer Forbes gave evidence relating to the accused’s arrest and attempts made by police to locate the accused prior to his arrest. 345 Officer Wilson gave evidence that on 11 and 12 May 2023, in the hours immediately prior to the accused’s arrest, he attended at various properties, looking for the accused, including 34 Owl Drive and houses in two other streets. The accused was not located at any of those properties.379 346 At about 12:30am on 12 May 2023, Officer Wilson and other police attended at GW’s house in Lorikeet Ave. He found the accused hiding under a bed, against the wall, behind a blow-up mattress, in a bedroom at the home. He gave verbal commands to the accused to get out from under the bed, which were complied with. He then applied handcuffs to the accused.380 347 Officer Wilson recalled that the accused was visibly upset but did not recall him being visibly intoxicated.381 348 Officer Forbes was also involved in the search for the accused prior to his arrest. He gave evidence that he attended at 27 Owl Drive at around 4:00pm on 11 May 2023 to find the house empty. Shortly thereafter, he attended at 34 Owl Drive. The accused was not at that address. At around 5:00pm, he attended at GW’s house and found no one was present. He subsequently returned to that same 376 T 326.9-27. 377 T 315.37. 378 T 316.1-26. 379 T 225.34-226.37. 380 T 226.38-227.3; T 227.37-228.229.34. 381 T 230.28-33. -- 66 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 63 property a further three times between 5:00pm and 11:00pm on 11 May 2023 but did not find the accused at the property on any of those occasions.382 349 Officer Forbes gave evidence that he attended three other locations that evening, searching for the accused, but the accused was not present.383 350 Officer Forbes was at the station at the time of the accused’s arrest. He conveyed the accused back to the station in a police cage and conducted a record of interview with the accused (the ROI).384 351 Officer Forbes confirmed that other than the subject matter, the accused was not being sought by police with respect to any other alleged offending, nor did he have any active warrants.385 352 He described the accused’s presentation following his arrest as being ‘more that he was upset than drunk.’386 He said, ‘he didn’t blow over on the alco when he got in the cells so he was deemed okay’.387 If the accused had been deemed to be drunk, he would have been taken to hospital.388 Accused’s Record of Interview (ROI) 353 The ROI commenced at 1:56am on 12 May 2023, that is, about an hour and a half after the accused’s arrest. The accused appeared noticeably distressed throughout the ROI. 354 The accused stated that he had only just arrived at GW’s house shortly prior to police attending there at 12:30am that day, at which time they found him hiding under the bed.389 He said, ‘I seen the car’.390 355 Officer Forbes informed the accused that JF was alleging that he had raped her on multiple occasions from when she was aged about five, until approximately six weeks prior, that is, mid-February 2023. The accused responded, ‘Yeah, nah’.391 356 The accused was informed that he had been arrested for the offences of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child and aggravated assault. As to the latter, the accused stated, ‘I haven’t touched her’.392 357 Officer Forbes told the accused that JF alleged the offending had occurred in the context of him being her carer (or stepfather) and that it had occurred in 382 T 340.3-341.4. 383 T 341.7-342.6. 384 Exhibit P12. 385 T 344.3-8. 386 T 350.26. 387 T 350.30-31. 388 T 350.34-35. 389 MFI P13 at Q9. 390 MFI P13 at Q11. 391 MFI P13 at Q33. 392 MFI P13 at Q40. -- 67 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 64 multiple states, since she was five and when they had lived together at quite a few different houses (or addresses). When Officer Forbes asked the accused if he wanted to hear further details of what he was alleged to have done, he said, ‘I’ve already heard mate she’s already told one of my friends what she’s done.’393 358 The accused stated that he was not guilty of the charges.394 Professor Jason White 359 Professor White is an Emeritus Professor at the School of Clinical and Health Sciences at the University of South Australia and has a particular expertise in pharmacology. 360 Professor White gave evidence as to the therapeutic and other effects of each of the drugs, Ritalin (Methylphenidate) and Catapres (Clonidine), either when taken alone, in combination or with alcohol. 361 In his report dated 11 April 2024,395 Professor White confirmed that Ritalin is used to treat ADHD and in particular is beneficial in treating (and reducing) symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention. The tablets are of 10 mg strength and a normal dose for a child weighing 19 kg would be 20 mg/day, although a lower dose of 10 mg/day may also be effective.396 As the drug is a stimulant, it is normally taken in the morning to reduce the risk of it impacting on the patient’s sleep. 362 Professor White also noted that there is some research which indicates that psychotic symptoms (hallucinations, delusions, paranoia) may occur as a rare side effect of the drug, with other research suggesting no such risk is evident.397 363 Catapres is prescribed for several purposes, including to improve the sleep of children with ADHD and autism. In those circumstances, a common dosage is in the range of 50-80 mg/day, taken at bedtime. The effects of the drug (fatigue, drowsiness) are generally felt within an hour of ingestion, with maximal effects two to four hours after administration. The main effect of the drug is to reduce the time of onset of sleep but it may also increase total sleep duration. 364 If these two drugs are used together, and administered at the times as recommended, then the stimulant effect of the Ritalin ought to have subsided by bedtime and the Catapres assists to produce a sedative effect and therefore with the onset of sleep. 365 Professor White confirmed that the effects of alcohol on children, with little or no experience of alcohol use, are relatively pronounced due to their lack of 393 MFI P13 at Q42. 394 MFI P13 at Q48. 395 Exhibit P11. 396 Exhibit P11 at p 1. 397 Exhibit P11 at p 2. -- 68 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 65 tolerance and small body weight. As such, even the consumption of a small amount of alcohol by a child can lead to pronounced effects. Generally, these effects include sedation and drowsiness, slowness of movements and some impact on vision. The child may also experience dizziness and nausea.398 366 The sedative effects of alcohol will add to the sedative effect of Catapres if consumed together. If Ritalin is taken early in the day, and Catapres and alcohol at night, the effects of the Ritalin should be diminished by nighttime. If there are any residual effects from the Ritalin, they will negate the sedative effects of the Catapres/alcohol.399 367 During examination-in-chief, Professor White was asked several hypothetical questions based on him making certain specific assumptions. 368 The first related to the effect of a combination of Ritalin and alcohol on a 13- year-old female, who was assumed to have started drinking at the age 12, with some alcohol tolerance by the age of 15, and who weighed 64 kg. Professor White was asked to assume that same female consumed Ritalin (for the first time) at 4:00pm one day, comprising five Ritalin tablets of 10 mg each, in circumstances where that child had consumed six unidentified alcoholic drinks by 4:00pm, after having started drinking at about 2:00pm that same day (first hypothetical scenario). 369 Professor White gave evidence that the effects of Ritalin in this quantity on a first time user would be relatively strong. They could include increased alertness, feelings of energy, greater activity, elevation in mood, disinhibition and an inclination towards risky or reckless behaviour. Such a large dose may also be accompanied by feelings of agitation, disorganisation of thinking, increased heart rate and nausea. It would likely prevent sleep for several hours.400 370 Professor White estimated that at 4:00pm, the blood alcohol reading of the hypothetical person would likely be in the order of 0.13% gm, assuming each drink consumed was a ‘standard drink’ containing 10 g of alcohol. If the consumer weighed only 54 kg, this would produce a slightly higher blood alcohol concentration.401 This would produce significant effects such as disinhibition, impairment of cognitive function and confused thinking. The alcohol alone would be sleep inducing.402 371 As such, if alcohol of this quantity was consumed in addition to Ritalin at the time and in the quantity as assumed, the alcohol would likely have a sedative (or calming) effect. However, the two combined would produce a likelihood of more 398 Exhibit P11 at pp 3-4. 399 Exhibit P11 at p 4. 400 T 331.33-332.20. 401 T 337.1-7. 402 T 332.33-333.19. -- 69 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 66 impulsive, risky or reckless behaviour (disinhibition), with greater impairment of cognitive functioning and the potential for confusion.403 372 Professor White confirmed there may also be some effect on the consumer’s memory insofar as they would most likely remember major events but may fail to recall those events with the usual level of detail.404 373 Professor White was then asked to assume a hypothetical situation where the consumer was a 14-year-old female, weighing 64 kg, who had consumed four Mishka/Vodka drinks from between 4:00pm and 7:30pm and at about 4:30pm took ten 10 mg Ritalin tablets (second hypothetical scenario).405 374 Professor White gave evidence that this would produce similar effects on the consumer, with them initially likely to feel the more pleasurable effects (energy, alertness, disinhibition) but as the concentration of the Ritalin rose in the body, the effects would likely include agitation, confused thinking and irrational thoughts.406 The alcohol may have a modest effect on the consumer’s level of agitation, with the primary effects on disinhibition, confused thinking and impaired judgment being those from the Ritalin.407 375 The final assumed scenario involved the same female, but at age 11, for the first time taking two x 100 mg Catapres tablets (third hypothetical scenario). Professor White said this would result in a degree of sedation, which could result in sleepiness. In addition, the consumer may experience some relief of pain (if experiencing pain) and a reduction in anxiety. It should not have any impact on a person’s ability to recall events.408 Defence Case Accused’s Evidence Meeting JM and JF 376 The accused gave evidence that he met JM when he was on home detention bail. At that time, he was living at Webb Street, Tailem Bend, with his daughter, S. JM and JF moved in to live with him about two weeks after that first meeting.409 377 The accused gave evidence that he was placed on home detention bail after he ‘said something wrong’ to a DCP officer, over the phone. DCP had become involved with him and his (then) family, after his former partner assaulted her 403 T 333.23-37. 404 T 336.33-38. 405 T 334.1-10. 406 T 334.11-21. 407 T 334.36-335.8. 408 T 335.26-336.8. 409 T 359.7-22. -- 70 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 67 young son. He had spent some time living with an aunt while on home detention, before moving to the house at Tailem Bend.410 Living in Tailem Bend 378 The accused gave evidence that while living at Tailem Bend, he was employed working in a scrap yard at Murray Bridge.411 JM was not working.412 379 The accused said that he and JM worked together as a team to look after the family. He said he would do the cooking, cleaning and washing and JM would help out.413 He denied ever ordering or coercing JM to leave the house at Tailem Bend, or of being controlling of her.414 380 He denied ever sexually assaulting JF by putting his hands down her pants when they were living in Tailem Bend.415 381 During his evidence-in-chief, the accused initially denied that he was using drugs and alcohol when he was living with JM in Tailem Bend. He explained that he was on home detention bail and said, in response to questioning by me, as to how long he was on home detention, said:416 A. I was on home detention bail for about nine months and I was being behaved and doing everything right by my daughter and that. Then I met [JM] and between me and [JM] doing the right thing they took me off home detention. … 382 The accused gave evidence that when JM moved in, he was both drug and alcohol free and required to do urinalysis tests every week at Murray Bridge.417 However, when he got off home detention bail, ‘the marijuana started up and drinking started up’.418 383 However, during cross-examination, the accused acknowledged that when he first met JM, and when she first moved in with him at Tailem Bend, he was using cannabis on a recreational basis and said that he had been addicted to cannabis all his life.419 He said that he and JM used cannabis together and they would consume a ’50 bag’ per week. He generally smoked at night and would consume a couple of cones, every three days, three times a week. This would relax him and make him feel calmer. He denied it had any other effect on him or that it affected his memory.420 410 T 359.6-360.16. 411 T 362.9-12. 412 T 362.17-19. 413 T 405.8-12. 414 T 361.22-29. 415 T 361.30-35. 416 T 360.19-23. 417 T 360.31-38. 418 T 361.6-7. 419 T 396.31-397.21. 420 T 397.19-398.12. -- 71 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 68 384 The accused was cross-examined at length about his evidence as outlined at paragraph 381 herein. 385 He acknowledged that he had used marijuana while on home detention bail but denied using amphetamines. He said, ‘I just forgot about my breaches. It’s been 11 years. I’ve cleaned my life up since then’.421 When pressed as to why he had said earlier in his evidence that he had not used drugs while on home detention, he said that after hearing counsel discussing this, he remembered he had been breached for using marijuana. He said it was not a big deal and that everyone smoked marijuana. He said he had smoked marijuana all his life and it was a hard thing to get off.422 386 When asked how many times he had smoked marijuana while on home detention bail, the accused gave the following evidence:423 A. I'm not sure how many times, but I smoked until I got my breaches and then I stopped smoking. Q. You said after our conversation you remembered the fact that you'd had cannabis while you were on home detention. A. Yes. Q. Had you thought about that issue before coming to court and giving evidence. A. No. Q. So before you sat in the witness box yesterday, had you thought about whether or not, while you were on home detention in Tailem Bend, you had smoked cannabis. A. I forgot all about that. Q. You forgot all about it yesterday too, didn't you. A. What do you mean? Q. When you were sitting in the witness box yesterday and you were answering questions from my learned friend about that, apparently you forgot about the fact that you'd smoked cannabis on home detention. A. I didn't know breaches like that were going to come up from my past. Q. Well, you answered direct questions about it from my learned friend, didn't you. A. Yeah, and I forgot - it's been over 11 years. 421 T 458.1-2. 422 T 458.3-38. 423 T 459.4-460.6. -- 72 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 69 Q. Do you agree that her Honour asked you a question yesterday, her Honour asked you this question yesterday: 'How long were you on home detention bail for', you agree that she asked that question. A. Yes. Q. And you said 'I was on home detention bail for about nine months and I was behaved and doing everything right by my daughter and that'. Is that what you said. A. Yes. Q. Is that true. A. Well, I was smoking cannabis, so it's not true. Q. You said you were being 'behaved and doing everything right by your daughter and that'. A. Yes, you just asked me that question. Q. Yes. Was smoking cannabis it's only thing that you did that wasn't behaving. A. I'm pretty sure. 387 Thereafter, the accused was cross-examined in some detail about incidents that had occurred during the period he was on home detention bail which, as a result, saw him charged with and plead guilty to various offences, including various breaches of those home detention bail conditions. By way of summary, these included:424 • On 20 June 2011 the accused tested positive for THC on urinalysis and on 14 November 2011, he pleaded guilty to breaching his bail agreement by virtue of that conduct.425 • On 15 July 2011 the accused tested positive for THC on urinalysis and on 14 November 2011, he pleaded guilty to breaching his bail agreement by virtue of that conduct.426 • On 11 October 2011 the accused tested positive for THC on urinalysis and on 14 November 2011, he pleaded guilty to breaching his bail agreement by virtue of that conduct.427 424 Noting that it was an Agreed Fact that on 21 March 2011, the accused was released on home detention bail from custody where he was on remand for two counts of aggravated threatening to kill. It was a further Agreed Fact that on 10 February 2012, the accused was sentenced for that offending by way of the imposition of a suspended sentence bond and at that time was not otherwise subject to home detention conditions on any other matter; Exhibit P15 at [1] and [5]. 425 Exhibit P15 at [6a]. 426 Exhibit P15 at [6b]. 427 Exhibit P15 at [6c]. -- 73 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 70 • On 5 September 2011 the accused attended at Cash Converters. His former partner was observed by police sitting in the driver’s seat of his vehicle in the Cash Converters’ carpark. On 12 June 2012, the accused pleaded guilty to breaching his bail agreement by attending at Cash Converters when he did not have permission to do so, and he also pleaded guilty to the offence of ‘Unauthorized person drive motor vehicle on road’ which related to him allowing his partner to drive this vehicle when she was not authorised to do so.428 • On 6 September 2011, the police attended at the accused’s Webb Street home and found him to be in possession of cannabis (for which he was issued an expiation notice) and a flick knife, for which he was reported for the offence of possessing a prohibited weapon. On 12 June 2012, he pleaded guilty to that offence.429 388 The accused could not recall testing positive for cannabis on urinalysis on 20 June 2011, 15 July 2011 or 11 October 2011 or subsequently pleading guilty to three counts of breach of bail as a result of those positive tests.430 389 The accused could not recall speaking to police at Cash Converters on 5 September 2011, or of attending there, when he was on home detention bail, in the absence of having been given a pass out to do so by Corrections.431 390 The accused could not recall allowing his partner to drive his vehicle on that day when she was unlicensed, nor could he recall pleading guilty to the offence of ‘Unauthorized person drive motor vehicle on road’ for having allowed his partner to drive his vehicle in those circumstances. He could not recall pleading guilty to breaching his bail for attending at Cash Converters.432 391 The accused could not recall police searching his house at Webb Street, Tailem Bend on 6 September 2011 and locating cannabis and a bong.433 He could not recall having a flick knife in his possession at that time, nor being reported for doing so or pleading guilty to the offence of possessing a prohibited weapon as a result.434 392 The accused therefore acknowledged that his earlier evidence, namely that he had been drug and alcohol free while living in Tailem Bend with JM, was inaccurate. He said he had simply forgotten about the fact he had breached his home detention bail in Tailem Bend.435 428 Exhibit P15 at [6d]. 429 Exhibit P15 at [6e]. 430 T 471.12-472.9; T 475.17-31; T 477.12-18; T 477.21-479.28. 431 T 460.17-461.4; T 464.27-31; T 465.11-33. 432 T 466.12-20; T 467.16-468.15. 433 T 464.32-465.3. 434 T 468.35-470.38. 435 T 480.16-38. -- 74 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 71 393 During evidence-in-chief, the accused gave evidence that both he and JM used methamphetamines while in Tailem Bend and in cross-examination he said that they started using amphetamines ‘probably a week before’ they left Tailem Bend.436 He denied that his use of methamphetamine had had any effect on his memory.437 394 In cross-examination, the accused was asked if he and JM would drink together when they were living at Tailem Bend. He initially said that they did not really drink in Tailem Bend but then qualified that by saying that they would have ‘one or two on the weekends’.438 395 The accused gave evidence that they left Tailem Bend after a falling out with their landlord, when he started adding utilities to their rental payments and they stopped paying the rent. He was also hanging out with the wrong sort of people in Tailem Bend and wanted to get away from them. He explained that one of his mates had brought stolen mags to his house, which the police then found in his front yard.439 Living in Lucindale 396 The accused gave evidence that when the family (he, JM, JF and S) left Tailem Bend, they moved to Lucindale. Neither he nor JM were employed when they were living at Lucindale, with each collecting a Centrelink pension.440 397 At this time, the accused was subject to the terms of a two-year good behaviour bond, which did not include any conditions as to supervision or prohibitions on the use of alcohol or drugs.441 398 The accused denied ever sexually assaulting JF by putting his hands down her pants when they were living in Lucindale.442 399 The accused gave evidence that they were evicted from the house in Lucindale. He explained that he and JM were ‘on the drugs’ and, as a result he would be up until the early hours, working on cars at 2:00am or 3:00am in the morning, creating noise and JM would be ‘doing her hair, make-up, changing clothes 50 million times, just tinkling about’. He said they never paid any rent on the house from the day they moved in.443 400 The accused gave evidence in cross-examination that while in Lucindale, he was drinking only on the weekends, but that he and JM were using methamphetamine ‘a bit’, consuming about four or five points together, every 436 T 361.9-17; T 403.2-6. 437 T 398.14-16. 438 T 396.30; noting this issue was also further explored in cross-examination at T 411.19-412.36. 439 T 401.36-402.30. 440 T 362.13-16; T 362.20-26. 441 T 361.36-362.8. 442 T 362.27-37. 443 T 363.2-21. -- 75 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 72 afternoon. They were both also consuming cannabis. He agreed with a proposition that on a typical day in Lucindale, he and JM were together using up to four points of methamphetamine and smoking up to two to three cones of cannabis.444 401 As a result, they could sometimes be up for two or three days at a time and at the end of those three days, they would simply get more methamphetamine and ‘go again’, such that they would go for weeks on end without sleeping and never experience a ‘come down’ period.445 When asked how he felt after being up for weeks on end without sleep and continually using methamphetamine, the accused could not really remember, but said:446 A. No, we'd just - when we were ready to crash we waited until all the kids were in bed and we went to sleep. We'd sleep to, like, 10 o'clock the next morning, get up and do it all over again. 402 He denied that using methamphetamine made him feel either impulsive or aggressive.447 Notwithstanding this cycle of consistent methamphetamine use, it had not affected his memory too much.448 403 As to where the children were when he and JM were using these drugs, the accused said, ‘We never used methamphetamines in front of our children.’449 He said they would go to the bathroom or lock their bedroom door. In Lucindale, it would be either in the bathroom or out in the back shed. He said the girls would have been in bed at the time.450 He denied that the use of methamphetamines affected either his or JM’s parenting in any way.451 Living Interstate 404 The accused gave evidence that when the family left Lucindale, they had no pre-determined destination. They travelled towards the east coast and used a book called ‘Camps Australia’ to identify where there were free caravan parks to stay. They would pick a location from the book and head there. They would all sleep in the car. He said:452 A. We had to wait for another payday. So we'd drive as far as we can on what we could afford for fuel, food shopping, then when we starting to get low on money, we would find a little town, buy drugs, sit in that town till next payday. 405 By ‘payday’, the accused meant Centrelink payday.453 444 T 400.13-16. 445 T 398.31-399.38. 446 T 401.1-4. 447 T 401.32-35. 448 T 429.7-13. 449 T 403.14. 450 T 403.16-22. 451 T 404.20-21. 452 T 365.5-9; T 400.17-33. 453 T 365.10-12. -- 76 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 73 406 The accused gave evidence that after about four weeks, they arrived in Helensvale, in the Gold Coast and settled there at the Big4 Caravan Park. They stayed there for six months, being the maximum time they were allowed to stay. While there, they lived in a 12-man tent with a big tarp over the top of it.454 They put JF into school at Helensvale, because otherwise JM’s Centrelink payments were going to be cut off.455 407 Thereafter, the family moved to Southport. The accused explained that in fact they ‘got kicked out’ of the caravan park in Helensvale as ‘they figured out we were on the drugs’.456 JF moved schools, because Southport was 35 minutes away from Helensvale.457 408 The accused confirmed that the family lived in a one-bedroom unit in Southport for about three months. They were evicted due to unpaid rent and not because he did not get along with the neighbours and/or because he was causing problems.458 409 When asked if anything of note occurred in Southport, for example, whether he or JM were working, the accused said, ‘the kids were at school and me and [JM] would be at the house, or the unit block.’459 410 He denied sexually abusing JF while they were living in Southport. 411 From Southport, the family moved to Merrimac, which was about a 45- minute drive away. JF changed schools again.460 The accused gave evidence that while in Merrimac, he started his own call-out business as a mechanic, which he continued until they left Merrimac.461 He denied that any sexual activity occurred between him and JF in Merrimac.462 412 In cross-examination, the accused confirmed that drug taking of the type he had previously described as having occurred in Lucindale, that is, he and JM would stay up for days or weeks at a time after consuming methamphetamines, continued both at Southport and Merrimac.463 413 The accused gave evidence that from Merrimac, the family travelled throughout Australia for a little longer than a year, during which they stayed in a Millard caravan. They travelled to Babinda Boulders, to Cairns, down to Melbourne and then back to the Gold Coast. Throughout this period, JF was not at 454 T 365.33-366.3. 455 T 367.25-31. 456 T 366.21-24. 457 T 367.32-368.1. 458 T 366.15-18; T 366.25-367.3. 459 T 370.25-26. 460 T 368.2-9. 461 T 371.5-8. 462 T 372.32-38. 463 T 413.12-18. -- 77 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 74 school. The accused denied that the government had given JF an exemption to miss school because she had been bullied by her Year 2 teacher. He said:464 A. Once we bought the caravan in Merrimac and started travelling for a year, we just took [JF] out of school and we travelled up until we settled back down in the next town and the school - the government, or Centrelink, was going to cut her off if she didn't put [JF] back into a school. [JF] got put back into a school and she got held down a year because there was no school work done over that year. 414 The accused gave evidence that they then settled in Mataranka in the Northern Territory, where they lived for 18 months.465 As to the allegation that he had sexually abused JF on three separate occasions in Mataranka, the accused said, ‘No, it did not happen’.466 415 The accused explained that upon arriving in Mataranka, he obtained work at a cattle station through a chance encounter with some of the other station workers. He met the owners and started work the next Monday. He said he worked from 5:00am to 6:00pm, five days a week, sometimes on weekends. At times, his work involved him fighting fires at night or going away to work overnight at other locations.467 416 The accused gave evidence in cross-examination that when he started work at the station, he told the boss he used cannabis and was told he could not use it at work. As such, although he continued to smoke cannabis, he only used it when he came home from work. He said he would smoke two or three cones and was exhausted.468 He continued to drink alcohol at Mataranka and would have a couple of drinks after work and on the weekends.469 He denied that he and JM were using methamphetamines at Mataranka in the way they had at Lucindale, Southport and Merrimac.470 417 The accused gave evidence that he never took any time off work at any stage when he was in Mataranka. He said that as he started work at around 5:00am or 6:00am, he did not have any role in helping JF to get ready to go to school. He said the boss’ wife took the kids to school as JM did not have a licence and he would be at work.471 JM helped out at the station by feeding the calves, chickens and pigs but never got paid for this.472 418 The accused gave evidence that the family moved from Mataranka to Katherine at the end of cattle season. In Katherine, they lived at the Knotts Crossing Resort, a motel/caravan park, where JM obtained work making beds and 464 T 372.13-20. 465 T 372.27-31. 466 T 373.1-5. 467 T 373.12-38. 468 T 413.24-414.5. 469 T 414.6-20. 470 T 413.19-20. 471 T 414.21-415.24. 472 T 415.25-29. -- 78 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 75 cleaning rooms. He was approached by the boss to do maintenance work. He said he would turn the sprinklers on at 6:30am then off at 10:00am and do the same at 3:00pm to 5:00pm. He said that when he was not doing maintenance, he was detailing rental cars for Hertz.473 419 They had to move to another caravan park because ‘[JM] got the sack from Knotts Crossing ‘cos of money going missing out of the office’.474 He obtained work as a mechanic for a company, Brownies Autos. However, he and JM got caught selling marijuana at the caravan park and were asked to leave after the police became involved. They then moved to stay with a mate in Katherine but had to leave when the mate was involved in a motorbike accident.475 420 Although the accused acknowledged he was using a lot of cannabis at this time, he said that neither he nor JM used other drugs (that is, amphetamines) while they were living in the Northern Territory.476 421 The accused gave evidence that while they were living in Katherine, both JF and S attended school. As to the allegation that there were multiple times he engaged in sexual activity with JF in Katherine, he said, ‘No, it did not happen’.477 422 The family then moved to Helensvale, where they lived in the Big4 Caravan Park. He explained that they moved there as they had a membership pass for the Big4 caravan parks. As to the allegation that sexual activity took place there between him and JF, the accused said, ‘No, it did not happen’.478 423 The accused acknowledged in cross-examination that when they moved to Helensvale, he and JM returned to using methamphetamines in the same way they had when in Lucindale, Southport and Merrimac. He was also smoking cannabis as he normally did, that is, during the afternoons and in the mornings. He denied using cannabis had much effect on him, other than as a kind of sedative, while the methamphetamine gave him energy.479 424 The accused gave evidence that they were asked to leave when management received complaints about the marijuana smell coming out of their van. They then moved to the Secura Lifestyle Caravan Park, also in Helensvale.480 The accused gave evidence that they had to leave the Secura Lifestyle Caravan Park because of the drug use and the fact he was buying and selling cars there, which was not allowed.481 473 T 374.11-24. 474 T 374.35-36. 475 T 374.37-375.11. 476 T 416.12-27. 477 T 374.32. 478 T 375.25. 479 T 416.28-417.18. 480 T 375.29-32. 481 T 376.15-18. -- 79 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 76 425 From Helensvale, the family moved to another caravan park, near the beach. The accused could not recall the name of this caravan park but agreed with a proposition that from Helensvale the family moved to Upper Coomera. 426 He and JM continued to use amphetamines and cannabis in the same way at Upper Coomera.482 427 As to the allegation that on two occasions he had sexual activity with JF in the shower block at Upper Coomera, the accused said, ‘No, that did not happen.’483 428 The accused gave evidence that they stayed for two months in this caravan park but when Covid struck they were forced to find alternative accommodation. After ringing around various agencies and government authorities, they were told if they travelled to Roma, a three-bedroom house would be made available for them. As such, they packed up, sold two cars and then travelled in their Landcruiser, with their Roadmaster caravan, to Roma.484 The accused gave the following evidence:485 A. So we got to Roma. So we moved into the housing house, organisations helped us get beds, furniture and stuff like that. Then we met some people in Roma, that's when we got really bad on the amphetamines and drinking. So while we were living there, I had my window smashed on the house. I had my car smashed up. We had [JF] run away for a month. So her mum was - by the time we had our house smashed up and the car smashed up, I was just, didn't want to go out so I stayed home, the kids were at school, [JM] would go to her friends around the corner, the lady's down the road on the corner house, we got really bad into the drugs where we had serious drug debt outstanding in Roma. Then the house got smashed up again. The car got smashed up again. So in the end, I put the caravan back together because I was rebuilding it, and we decided to just walk out on the housing house. 429 The accused gave evidence that they rented a 3-bedroom house in Roma, so that both he and JM could continue to receive the pension. He said, ‘if the government walked into the house, we could say we had two separate bedrooms. So that’s supported our habits and stuff like that.’486 430 The accused said his drinking got worse in Roma after the death of his mother. He went on a bender for two weeks after receiving news of her death. He would drink Jim Beam, starting at around midday and then drink until 10:00pm or 11:00pm at night. JM would drink around the same amount as him.487 As to whether the drinking affected their relationship, he said:488 A. Towards the end of living at Roma, getting the house smashed up and the car smashed up, knowing that she had a $7,500 drug debt outstanding, that's why they 482 T 417.19-29. 483 T 376.8. 484 T 376.20-34. 485 T 377.13-29. 486 T 389.33-35; T 427.12-23. 487 T 417.30-418.22. 488 T 418.24-29. -- 80 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 77 all come to the house, it was just time to pack up and go, or we would have had to live there and keep putting up with it. The police come, the people were charged. 431 The accused explained that a brick was thrown through their window at Roma as a result of an outstanding drug debt of $7,500, being a debt accrued by JM. He said he would give JM money for drugs and she would go and buy them from around the corner. She would come back with extra drugs and tell him that was what they gave her for that money. However, unbeknown to him, she was purchasing these extra drugs ‘on tick’. He said the house got smashed up twice while they were living in Roma because of JM’s drug debt. The girls were at home on both occasions and were scared by it.489 432 As to whether there were four or five instances when he had sexually abused JF in Roma in a four-month period, the accused said, ‘No, that did not happen.’490 433 The accused gave evidence that after the house in Roma was bricked for the second time, they packed up, sold everything that was in the house and left at around 5:00am in the morning, without anyone knowing.491 434 The next place they settled was Hervey Bay. While there, they lived at various caravan parks including the Windmill, the Big4 and the Pier.492 435 The accused gave evidence that they ‘detoxed’ during the time they travelled from Roma to Hervey Bay, but once they arrived, they started buying drugs (methamphetamines and marijuana) from JM’s current boyfriend, RH.493 436 The accused gave evidence that the family was in Hervey Bay for about six months. He said that during that period, ‘we had a bad drug addiction, drinking problem, gambling problem’.494 He and JM were spending a lot of time playing the pokies while the kids were at school. He said they won about $35,000 on the pokies, which was spent on things for the kids, doing up the car and the boat, general living expenses, drugs and alcohol.495 437 He said both he and JM were consuming large amounts of methamphetamine and using every day, funded by their winnings on the pokies.496 438 As to an allegation that he had sexually abused JF four days in a row at Hervey Bay, the accused said, ‘That did not happen.’497 489 T 419.9-420.32; T 424.3-425.5. 490 T 377.7. 491 T 421.28; T 422.31-37. 492 T 429.32-430.11. 493 T 430.26-37. 494 T 378.30-31. 495 T 431.22-37. 496 T 432.15-24. 497 T 378.5. -- 81 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 78 439 The accused gave evidence-in-chief that JM left the family unit while they were living at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay. He said JM’s mood changed when they went out drinking and could not get any amphetamines. He said she then went on at him for hours yelling and screaming, demanding he go find her some drugs. He had had enough of drugs by that stage so told her no. After she continued to go on for hours about this, he told her to leave. She grabbed a bag of stuff, hopped in her car and drove away. He was asked by the people at the caravan park to leave about 24 hours later. He asked for a week to sort things. During that week, four police officers came to the caravan park and asked him and JF questions.498 440 The accused gave evidence in cross-examination that after JM walked out on the family, he did not touch any more amphetamines.499 441 After this, he contacted JM and told her he was leaving Hervey Bay. He said he needed to get away from the drugs and go somewhere where he did not know anyone. He arranged to meet JM in Maryborough. JM then tried to put the kids in the car and take off with them. He stopped her. He and the family stayed in Maryborough for two weeks. He then found JM with her new partner, RH, at his caravan at the back of the pub on the side of the road.500 442 Thereafter, the accused packed up to leave Maryborough. The next morning, he went to the police station and explained to them that he had the three kids and that JM had left. He was served with a restraining order which allowed him and JM to talk to each other and communicate but ‘we weren’t allowed to fight, argue and carry on anymore.’501 443 He said he discussed with the police what would happen to JF. He explained to the police that JF was his step-daughter and that he did not have custody of her. He said:502 The police officer asked [JF] how old she was. She said she was 14 years of age. And the police there told us that because she's 14 and I've raised her since she was five, that she had a choice to be taken into custody with the police and taken to child welfare, or that I could take responsibility and take her. I took responsibility and took [JF]. So from there we travelled along, we ended up in Mount Isa. Then we moved on to Rockhampton. 444 The family, (without JM), then settled in Rockhampton. At first, they stayed at a carpark attached to a reserve and then temporarily at a Big4 caravan park. The accused gave evidence that through an organisation called ‘Act for Kids’, he was able to secure a permanent site at another caravan park in Rockhampton, where 498 T 378.35-379.18. 499 T 433.28-29. 500 T 379.19-31. 501 T 380.4-5. 502 T 380.9-17; noting part of this evidence is hearsay. -- 82 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 79 they then stayed for over a year. Act for Kids also assisted by providing food and school supplies and helping him to apply for Centrelink benefits relating to JF.503 445 The accused gave evidence that he saw an officer at Act for Kids on four separate occasions. The officer had spoken to the children to see how things were going, to confirm they were in school and that he was not on drugs, alcohol or marijuana. He said, ‘I stayed clean from when I left [JM]’.504 446 While in Rockhampton, the accused spent about three months working as a maintenance man for a motel company. He said that when he lost that job, the kids would be at school and he would be at the caravan park.505 447 As to the allegation that there was sexual activity between him and JF in Rockhampton, the accused said, ‘No, there was not.’506 448 The accused gave evidence that he was in a relationship for about three months while the family lived in Rockhampton. When that broke up, he decided to leave and travel to Mt Isa. The family stayed in truck bays on the way. They then drove down through the Northern Territory to South Australia, via Alice Springs. He was reliant on Centrelink and money was running low. Family and friends then sent him money to complete the final portion of the road trip from Coober Pedy to Murray Bridge.507 Living in Murray Bridge 449 The accused gave evidence that upon arriving in Murray Bridge, the family stayed at the Marina caravan park where they remained for about three to four months, before he was successful in securing emergency housing at 27 Owl Drive. 450 He arranged for all three children to be enrolled at school. JF was enrolled in Year 10 at Murray Bridge High School. He said he had no involvement with the Department for Child Protection while they were in Murray Bridge.508 451 The accused agreed with a proposition that the family was living at 27 Owl Drive over the Christmas period when the children were on holidays. He lived at 27 Owl Drive for about three months. About two weeks after moving in, JF met AW through the next-door neighbours. JF and AW became friends and then commenced a relationship.509 452 Thereafter, AW visited the house regularly. During the school holidays, ‘he stayed one night and he didn’t leave for the whole entire school holidays’.510 The 503 T 381.4-25. 504 T 382.1-2. 505 T 382.4-9. 506 T 380.29. 507 T 382.10-37. 508 T 383.25-384.20. 509 T 384.21-385.5. 510 T 385.9-11. -- 83 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 80 accused said it was hard enough for him to look after JF, S and C, together with other homeless mates, who were always over, so eventually he told AW he had to go home to his mother’s house and he left. He estimated AW stayed at 27 Owl Drive for about a month and a half. 511 453 In cross-examination, the accused was pressed further on how often and for what period AW had stayed at 27 Owl Drive. He said he stayed there the full school holidays, so over a month and a bit or two months. He then clarified that this included both dropping in and staying full time. He denied that AW only stayed over for about seven days.512 454 The accused gave evidence that he did not touch amphetamines the whole time he lived at 27 Owl Drive.513 However, he still used cannabis ‘pretty much every day’ and he would have a few drinks on the weekends. He would consume about five cones a day and ‘[g]et up in the morning have cones, afternoon, night- time’.514 455 The final house the accused and JF lived in together was at 34 Owl Drive. The accused said he continued to smoke cannabis daily and drink on the weekends at 34 Owl Drive. He would only ever drink Jim Beam or Great Northern beer. He denied ever drinking vodka or rum.515 456 As to the allegation that there was sexual activity between him and JF at 34 Owl Drive, he said, ‘No, that did not happen’.516 457 As to the allegation that there was sexual activity between him and JF two days before Christmas and about two weeks thereafter, at 27 Owl Drive, the accused said, ‘No, that did not happen’.517 Alcohol and JF 458 The accused acknowledged that he was a regular drinker and that the kids were always around, or in the house, while he was drinking. He gave evidence that his preferred drink was Jim Beam and other than that, the only other alcohol he drank was Great Northern beer.518 459 He denied giving JF alcohol when she was in grade 6.519 As to the allegation he started giving JF sips of alcohol at Upper Coomera, he said, ‘No, that did not happen’.520 511 T 385.11-386.7. 512 T 451.10-452.10. 513 T 433.30-33. 514 T 434.32. 515 T 434.35-435.16. 516 T 386.13. 517 T 383.9. 518 T 386.14-28. 519 T 387.15-18. 520 T 376.12. -- 84 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 81 460 The accused gave evidence that the only time JF had ever drunk alcohol was at 34 Owl Drive, at which time she had one drink. He said he saw her go to the fridge and get it. It would have been Jim Beam, from the large bottle he used to buy. He thought she had about half a shot in her drink. On this occasion, there were others at the house for a barbecue, including GW.521 Drugs and JF 461 The accused acknowledged that the kids would be around when he and JM were using cannabis, however he would tell them to get out of the room and they would go to the other end of the house. He denied ever offering JF cannabis or any other drug.522 462 The accused gave evidence that AW smoked marijuana and he became aware that JF was also smoking it. He acknowledged that at that time he gave JF cannabis but denied having done so prior to this.523 He said:524 When she met [AW], [AW] smoked marijuana as well, so I know it wasn’t the right thing but I was just trying – I’d rather them do it at home than wandering the streets doing it. 463 He denied giving JF other drugs without her knowledge.525 He denied ever giving JF Ritalin or Catapres.526 He denied ever taking S’s Ritalin or Catapres.527 Physical Violence against JF 464 The accused had a role in parenting JF from when JM and JF moved in to live with him at Tailem Bend. 465 He described JF’s behaviour during ‘the first couple of years’ as ‘excellent’ and, initially, denied that there were ever periods when she would act out or misbehave.528 He then acknowledged that from time to time JF might misbehave, like any typical child, by stealing lollies from the cupboard or similar. 466 His way of disciplining JF for any such behaviour, would be to get her to stand in the corner and put her hands on her head. 467 The accused gave evidence that he did not like smacking kids. However, he acknowledged he had smacked JF but said this happened only once or twice during the whole time she lived with him. One such occasion was when JF was about six and a half and he gave her a smack on the hand for taking money out of his wallet. 521 T 387.19-36; T 447.25-34; T 448.6-11. 522 T 447.23-24; T 448.2-5; T 448.16-449.4. 523 T 387.37-388.7. 524 T 388.9-12. 525 T 388.13-17. 526 T 449.27-29. 527 T 450.13-18. 528 T 405.13-19. -- 85 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 82 He said JM gave JF ‘a bigger smack’ on the bum for doing this. He could not recall the details of the other occasion he had smacked JF.529 468 The accused denied ever being violent towards JF or physically assaulting JF either with a hairbrush or a satellite cord, or by punching her.530 He denied there was an incident of the type described by JF in Upper Coomera when he punched her in the chest when she did not turn the tap off properly and it flooded the wall of the caravan. He said, ‘[w]e lived off water tanks and a 12-volt pump. There is no way you can flood the van.’531 469 He denied ever making any threat to JF that he would kill her.532 Physical Violence against JM 470 The accused denied that after leaving South Australia, his behaviour changed and/or that he became more overbearing towards JM.533 471 He denied that he had ‘total control’ over JM and her movements. He said:534 A. I didn't have total control over her. She spent time with friends, she - we were pretty much travelling in a caravan, we spent 24/7 together, we went everywhere together, we drank together, we used drugs together, we partied and we spent 10 years living off each other's support. 472 When asked whether he had assaulted JM with a metal bar in Roma, the accused said, ‘No, that did not happen’.535 As to the allegation that while in Roma, the accused assaulted JM by punching her to the left side of the abdomen, the accused said, ‘No, that did not happen’.536 473 During cross-examination, the accused was asked whether the fact JM had incurred the drug debt in Roma, resulting in their house being damaged on two occasions, had caused any strain on their relationship. He initially said, ‘not really’ and that they were pretty good together.537 However, he later acknowledged that it was in Roma that his arguments with JM started.538 474 The accused gave evidence that after the house was bricked for a second time, he found out about JM’s drug debt from the police. She denied it but he eventually put ‘two and two together’.539 He said:540 529 T 405.27-407.4. 530 T 390.3-6; T 411.1-11. 531 T 410.4-5. 532 T 390.7-9. 533 T 365.28-32. 534 T 389.19-24. 535 T 378.9. 536 T 378.13. 537 T 419.2-4. 538 T 420.33-37. 539 T 422.23-24. 540 T 422.4-10. -- 86 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 83 A. It ended up her yelling and screaming at me, so pretty much the next day after it all calmed down, we got our windows fixed and I said 'Who cares about the drug debt, let's just pack up and get out of here, take our boat, take the two cars and the van and let's go to Hervey Bay, let's go somewhere near the beach where we can take our boat'. 475 He explained that they were yelling and screaming at each other, such that the police came and told them to stop. When asked if the kids would have been able to hear this argument, from where they were in the house, he said, ‘[JM] always screamed’.541 476 The accused denied that he remained angry with JM after this incident.542 477 Later in cross-examination, the accused gave evidence that when they first moved to Hervey Bay, his relationship with JM was ‘really good’ and they were a team again. They had sorted out their problems from Roma and things were ‘going really good’.543 478 The accused acknowledged that while they were living at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay, he threw a bottle of Jim Beam at JM which hit her on the head.544 When asked to explain the circumstances of that incident, he gave the following evidence:545 A. The constant abuse and screaming and yelling and being evicted from nearly every caravan park in Hervey Bay. Q. So how many caravan parks did you stay at in Hervey Bay. A. Approximately four to five. 479 He denied assaulting JM on any other occasion.546 480 In cross-examination, the accused gave evidence that he and JM had agreed to try and get off the drugs after leaving the Windmill Caravan Park. Although he was no longer getting drugs, JM was still getting drugs from RH and he was ‘pretty sure’ she was still using, as she would still be up at 2:00am.547 481 Notwithstanding this, he said he and JM still got along well, going to the pub and having drinks together, even after the Jim Beam bottle incident.548 JM had walked out on the family a couple of weeks after this. He said that during the last 541 T 425.17. 542 T 423.33-424.13. 543 T 435.23-436.2. 544 T 378.17; T 436.18. 545 T 378.19-22. 546 T 390.1-2. 547 T 439.25-440.3. 548 T 441.22-25. -- 87 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 84 week or so before she left, it was yelling and screaming at each other, all the time. He gave the following evidence:549 Q. You say that she was yelling at you. A. Yes. Q. She was abusing you. A. Yes. Q. You said these were all acts of domestic abuse towards you. A. We were both in the wrong. Q. You were both in the wrong. A. Yes. Q. Why did you throw the bottle at her. A. Because when you're being screamed and yelled at for three hours straight, I got frustrated. 482 The accused gave evidence that he had always been remorseful for throwing the bottle at JM and that the fact it hit her was an accident. He explained that he had usually responded to JM’s yelling and screaming by walking away, taking the kids out to hook the boat up and go fishing. He had not done that on this occasion as he was drunk and it was night-time.550 The kids, including JF, were in bed in the caravan at the time of this incident. He had no idea whether they were awake or asleep.551 483 He maintained this was the first and only time he had used violence towards JM.552 Contraception and JF 484 The accused was asked to explain the circumstances in which JF came to have a contraceptive device implanted in her arm. He said that when they were living in Rockhampton, JF commenced a relationship with a younger boy. They would each stay over at each other’s houses. When he found out from the boy’s mother that they were having intercourse, he took JF to the doctor to discuss her either being put on the pill or getting a bar in her arm. JF chose the bar, which was collected from a chemist but inserted by a doctor.553 549 T 442.33-443.6. 550 T 443.37-444.18. 551 T 445.11-26. 552 T 445.36-446.12. 553 T 386.32-387.14; T 449.9-26. -- 88 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 85 JF runs away from 34 Owl Drive 485 The accused said his relationship with JF was good until he told her she could not date AW. He said AW got caught stealing around Murray Bridge and his photo was all over Facebook in connection with an expensive pushbike. He did not want AW hanging around his house as he did not want to be known as a thief.554 486 He agreed that JF had run away from 34 Owl Drive but was unsure of the date she ran away.555 Communications/Contact with JF thereafter 487 The accused was asked questions in cross-examination about why it was that he had returned JF’s property to her about 16 hours of her sending the text messages as set forth on page 2 of Exhibit D7. 488 He denied that he had arranged for JF’s things to be made available for her to collect so soon after receiving this message because he was worried she would go to the police and report the offending. He said that it was simply the case that JF had left and wanted her stuff back. He did it to simply help her out and not because she had threatened to go to the police.556 Circumstances leading up to Accused’s Arrest 489 The accused explained that when JF ran away from home, she made a report to welfare and that as a result, welfare removed S and C from his care and took them to live with his cousin. Thereafter, he had an empty household and ‘pretty much just went on a bender of drinking, smoking marijuana’.557 He was rarely home, instead spending time sleeping at his uncle’s or mates’ houses or at GW’s house.558 490 The accused gave evidence that on the day before his arrest, he had been drinking from about 8:00am and then throughout the day. He found out from various friends and relatives that the police were looking for him. He knew the police were looking for him in connection with allegations of sexual abuse made by JF.559 He was not concerned about this, ‘[b]ecause I never did it’.560 491 During cross-examination, the accused gave the following evidence:561 Q. … it's obviously your version of events that you never sexually abused [JF], is that right. 554 T 450.27-38. 555 T 450.21-24. 556 T 453.5-454.30. 557 T 388.27-28. 558 T 388.22-33. 559 T 454.31-455.26. 560 T 455.38. 561 T 452.11-34. -- 89 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 86 A. No, I did not. Q. When you became aware that police were becoming involved in this matter, that wouldn't have caused you any concern because she was lying about it, is that right. A. I actually rang the police station. Q. How did you become aware that she had - A. Family. Q. Who was it that told you. A. My Uncle [E], cousin [L] and [A], other friends, [T] at one of the houses the police officers searched. Q. Someone's house got searched. A. Well, everyone's. Everyone I knew. My aunties, my uncles, a mate of mine, my other mate's house got searched, my house got kicked in and searched. Q. Are you talking about 11 May, the day before that you got arrested. A. I'm not too sure - I think so. Between the 11th and the 12th they searched houses and stuff. Q. And this is the period that you're talking about, when everyone's house was getting searched. A. Yes. That's when I found out. 492 He spent time at various houses during the day where he smoked marijuana. He went to fetch his dog as he did not want the dog taken to the pound when he was arrested.562 He said:563 … So that's how I ended up at [GW’s] house, probably at 15 past 12. While I was there, I smoked marijuana, then a pile of police knocked on the door, I panicked, and I hid under the bed. 493 As to why he had not simply handed himself in after hearing about the allegations, he said:564 I was under the influence of marijuana, I was drinking, wasn't thinking straight. I'd just lost my kids to welfare. 562 T 388.36-389.12. 563 T 389.12-15. 564 T 456.3-5. -- 90 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 87 494 He denied he was worried about police investigating this or of being arrested. He was just worried about his house and dog.565 The following evidence was elicited in cross-examination:566 Q. So rather than going and handing yourself into the police station, you went and hid under [GW’s] bed. A. No, I wasn't at [GW’s]. I got to [GW’s] about, I think at about 12.20 or something like that at night, between the two, the 11th and the 12th. Q. So shortly before police got there. A. I was there for about, not even five minutes before the police come in and found me. Q. You said you had marijuana when you were at [GW’s] house. A. No, I was smoking around town. Q. Your evidence before was that you got to [GW’s] - A. I smoked at [GW’s] too, yeah, but I was smoking around town too. Like at other people's houses where I was going, just wandering around to. Q. But I just asked you a second ago whether you smoked at [GW’s]. A. Sorry, I didn't know you meant just there. Q. You did smoke at [GW’s]? A. Yes. Q. How much did you smoke at [GW's]. A. Before the cops come I probably had two cones. 495 The accused denied he had hidden under the bed because he was worried about police arresting him or investigating JF’s allegations. He said he ‘[w]asn’t thinking. I should have just walked out’.567 GW’s Evidence 496 GW gave evidence that she first met the accused through their children’s primary school at the beginning of February 2023. They were then in a relationship until ‘he got arrested, just after he got arrested in July’.568 She later clarified that the accused had been arrested in March and that their relationship had ended in July, when he was taken into custody.569 565 T 456.6-11. 566 T 456.21-457.6. 567 T 457.14-24. 568 T 491.28-30. 569 T 494.35-495.14. -- 91 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 88 497 GW gave evidence that her relationship with the accused ended because of abuse and threats from LF (JF’s father).570 She said that shortly after the accused’s arrest, LF followed her and smashed up her Hyundai Trajet and that ‘they’ were smashing on her front door and yelling abuse. By ‘they’, she meant, LF, his partner and AW. She said, ‘JF was standing on the corner in plain sight’.571 498 In cross-examination, GW said this incident occurred in July 2023. She said she called the police and told them everything. 499 GW gave evidence that during her relationship with the accused she would stay overnight at 34 Owl Drive as often as she could, but if she did not stay, she would be back there between 6:00am and 7:30am for coffee.572 500 GW said that she had three children aged 10,12 and 13, all of whom loved the accused. During the relationship, they would all hang out together and have movie nights. She agreed that there was alcohol consumed at some of these social gatherings. As to who consumed alcohol at those gatherings, GW listed herself, the accused and one of the accused’s mates. She said ‘[JF] would have one if she had convinced us that it was just going to be the one, but that’s when arguments would start if we would say no’.573 501 In cross-examination, GW was asked if she had any recollection of an occasion which occurred in early to mid-February 2023, shortly after she had met the accused, when she and some of her children came to the accused’s house for dinner. She explained that she attended at the accused’s house most nights for dinner around that time. She agreed that there was an occasion when she and her children came over for dinner at 6:00pm and left at around 7:30pm.574 502 She gave the following evidence:575 Q. Can I suggest to you that on this particular occasion that I'm talking about, [JF] had a drink of Jim Beam, does that sound right. A. It was normally beer, actually. Q. Was there an occasion on which she had a drink of Jim Beam. A. Not that I'm aware of, no. Q. What sort of beer do you say that she drank. A. It was a goldy/tan coloured - it was Great Southern - not exactly sure of the name but it's Great Southern something. 570 T 491.17-32. 571 T 493.32-33. 572 T 493.15-16. 573 T 493.5-8. 574 T 496.36-497.4; T 499.12-21. 575 T 497.27-37. -- 92 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 89 503 When asked if she agreed or disagreed that JF drank Jim Beam on this occasion, GW said she was unable to say yes or no. As to how much the accused drank on these sorts of occasions, GW said that they would never get drunk and would ordinarily have three or four drinks (beers) over the space of four or five hours.576 504 GW said she first learned of the details relevant to this matter in March 2023, when she was sitting next to the accused, as JF ‘was sending him blackmailing text messages’ asking for her stuff back.577 Specifically, she recalled that JF wanted a train track, some school badges, some photo frames and photos returned to her. She agreed that she helped the accused to pack up those personal items and a few other things, in a box, which they then left out the front of 34 Owl Drive for JF to collect.578 505 GW was asked in cross-examination if the accused said anything to her about why he was returning these items to JF. She gave the following evidence:579 A. Because she asked for them. Q. Is that what he said. A. He didn't need to say or ask. I was right there. That was the messages. She asked for stuff, we piled it up, we packed it up and we put them out the front of [the accused’s] house for her. Q. And in doing that, you saw the messages between them. A. Yes. Q. Or did he tell you what was in the messages. A. It was a bit of both. I was sitting right next to him. I could read some of them if I was looking. Others I would get told what they said. Q. Did you see something in the messages about - I think you mentioned this earlier - that she said something about sexual acts towards her. A. It was - in my exact memory it said 'If I don't get back my train set, I will go to the police tomorrow and tell them what you did to me'. Q. It was the next morning that you left the property out the front. A. That one I couldn't tell you exactly because I had my own things going on with my kids at that time. 576 T 498.33-499.7. 577 T 491.37-38. 578 T 499.28-500.9. 579 T 500.16-37. -- 93 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 90 506 GW said that JF had left 34 Owl Drive over arguments about AW living at that address and because of drugs. By this she meant JF ‘not wanting to quit pot, always smoking pot with [AW]’.580 507 She said she and the accused had recently reconnected when she saw details of the matter in the court case list. She came to court one day because she was worried and cared about the accused.581 She denied that she had spoken with the accused either about what evidence he would give or about what evidence she would give.582 508 During cross-examination, GW was asked about her recollection of what occurred immediately prior to the accused’s arrest. She said the accused arrived at her house about ten minutes before the arrest and that he had attended there to drop his dog off. She knew the police were coming to her house because of conversations she had had with them earlier. She denied the accused had consumed either alcohol or drugs upon arriving at her house and said they simply stood in the front yard and talked, while he handed over the dog. She said they panicked when they heard the cops and that the accused then went inside and hid under the bed. She described the accused as being distressed and upset.583 Closing Addresses Prosecution 509 In his closing address, the prosecutor focussed on the following discrete issues: • Why the Court should reject the accused’s denials of the offending as not being a reasonable possibility. • Why the Court should make particular findings as to the accused’s conduct being indicative of him harbouring a guilty conscience. • Why the Court should accept JF’s evidence as to the offending beyond reasonable doubt (and ancillary to this, why the Court should accept JF’s evidence of the various uncharged acts such that it could be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act on that interest).584 Accused’s Evidence 510 It was submitted that the evidence given by the accused as to the time he spent on home detention bail while living at Tailem Bend was, in itself, so unreliable as to cause the Court to have serious concerns as to the reliability (and 580 T 492.13-14. 581 T 494.5. 582 T 501.7-12. 583 T 495.20-496.20. 584 Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338; DPP v Roder [2024] HCA 15. -- 94 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 91 credibility) of his evidence as a whole, such that it should reject that evidence when making findings on disputed issues. 511 In this respect, it was submitted that the accused had clearly put in issue the topic of whether he was using cannabis when he first met JM and JF. JM had given evidence that he was using cannabis at that time, with that evidence being challenged in cross-examination. The accused had told the Court that when JM (and JF) moved in, he was both drug and alcohol free as he was required to do urinalysis tests every week. The accused had told the Court he was well behaved and doing everything right while on home detention bail. 512 However, when later questioned about his multiple positive drug tests and convictions for offending committed while on home detention bail, the accused acknowledged that he had used cannabis while on home detention bail. As to why he was now giving different evidence on that topic, he had said, at first, ‘I just forgot about my breaches’ but then acknowledged that he had heard both counsel discussing this topic earlier, which had caused him to remember those breaches. The Court was directed to the evidence given by the accused, namely:585 Q. And you heard our discussion in court earlier about that, didn't you. A. Yes, I did. Q. And that's what's made you change your evidence, isn't it. A. No. Q. What made you change your evidence then. A. I just heard youse talk about it and I remembered that yes, I did have breaches for marijuana and my correctional officer at the time, it wasn't a big deal. It was a deal, you know, but everyone smokes marijuana. Q. So the answer is it was the conversation that we had in court earlier that reminded you that you had, in fact, smoked cannabis while you were on home detention. A. Yes. Q. And you've changed your evidence now - A. No, I just remembered, like, because I heard youse talking about it. Q. And that caused you to remember that you'd done that. A. No, I heard youse talking about it. Q. Yeah, and that conversation that was had in court caused you to remember that you'd had cannabis. 585 T 458.3-34. -- 95 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 92 A. No-one asked me about it. Like yeah, I had breaches of marijuana. I've been a dope smoker all my life. Q. And no-one asked you about that. A. Well youse did, but yeah, I forgot about it and youse reminded me. Q. But you just said two seconds ago no-one asked you about it. A. Well, I forgot about it. Q. That's not the same as not being asked about it, is it. A. I forgot about it. 513 It was submitted that this evidence simply could not be accepted in circumstances where the accused had clearly turned his mind to this issue at the outset of trial and had put forward a positive position that he was drug free (and why he was drug free). He was then forced to ‘backtrack’ when presented with evidence to the contrary. It was submitted that by this evidence, the accused had positively committed to an untrue account of events, such that the Court should have serious doubts as to the accused’s credibility. 514 Further, when the accused was questioned about the various breaches, he said he had no memory of them, which also told against the reliability of his evidence. This was said to be consistent with the accused’s memory of events being unreliable in any event because of his years of drug abuse. 515 As such, it was submitted that the Court should give no weight to the accused’s denial of any offending at Tailem Bend or Lucindale, given that this likely occurred shortly after he was released from home detention bail and therefore, on his own evidence, at a time when his drug use and drinking had ramped up. It was submitted that the evidence the accused had given about his time on home detention bail demonstrated that he had made no attempt to honestly confront his conduct, or to even acknowledge the limits of his memory. Further, when all other possible alternative explanations had been exhausted, he had simply reverted to an absence of any recollection of certain events. 516 The Court was reminded of the evidence given by the accused as to the nature of his relationship with JM at Roma and Hervey Bay. The Court’s attention was directed in particular to the evidence the accused gave about the occasion when he threw the Jim Beam bottle at JM in Hervey Bay and the immediate aftermath of that incident and his evidence about the house being damaged at Roma. It was submitted that, in each instance, this evidence was both self-serving and implausible. In each instance, the accused had tried to minimise his own responsibility and paint JM as the antagonist. The accused had also endeavoured to portray JF as the villain, rather than accepting responsibility for his own actions. 517 It was submitted that the accused had refused to acknowledge any limitation or shortcomings on his memory from his years of persistent drug use and that the -- 96 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 93 Court should reject his claims that there was effectively no ‘come down’ period in the cycle of his drug use while at Lucindale (and in Southport and Merrimac). This evidence was said to have been tailored to minimise the potential opportunity for any alleged offending against JF. 518 Although collateral aspects of the accused’s account may have had some support from the evidence of GW, the Court was asked to consider the nature of the relationship between the accused and GW and the fact that GW was clearly sympathetic towards the accused, as demonstrated by her description of JF’s text messages as blackmail. 519 It was the prosecution case that the accused was willing to lie at every turn where the truth appeared inconvenient to him and that the Court should find that the accused was neither a reliable nor credible witness, such that it could safely conclude that there was no reasonable possibility he was telling the truth when he denied the offending. Consciousness of Guilt/Admissions 520 The accused was found hiding under the bed at GW’s house after the police had attended at multiple locations connected with the accused in order to find and arrest him for the offending. It was submitted that although the accused claimed to be unconcerned about the prospect of his arrest, given he was innocent, his conduct was clearly inconsistent with this, particularly in circumstances where he knew the police were looking for him (and why) and when he was not wanted by police on any other matter. It was submitted that the most cogent and probable explanation for this conduct, particularly when considered in combination with the accused’s earlier return of JF’s property within hours of her sending the text messages in Exhibit D7, was that such conduct arose out of a consciousness of guilt with respect to the offending. 521 As to those text messages, it was also submitted that the way the accused responded to JF’s message wherein she threatened to go to the police and tell them he had raped her, if he did not return her belongings, amounted to an implicit acquiescence to the truth of that assertion. The accused had not responded, ‘What are you talking about’ or question what she meant when she had accused him of being a paedophile. It was submitted that the accused’s responses were consistent with him and JF having a mutual understanding of the basis for the assertions made by her in those messages, being, in effect, an admission as to his conduct. JF’s Evidence 522 It was submitted that notwithstanding that JF’s evidence covered a period of some ten years and involved numerous allegations of sexual activity involving the accused, it was detailed and specific in terms of both the charged and uncharged conduct and has not been undermined in cross-examination. -- 97 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 94 523 Specific memories as to the location of where she was living, what school she was attending and whether either JM or the accused were working had given context to her memories of the offending and had assisted to serve as ‘anchor points’ for the various occasions of abuse. 524 It was submitted that JF’s evidence was impressive in terms of its level of detail – with an example being the evidence she gave as to the uncharged, but first, act of penile vaginal intercourse in Southport, including her recollection that it stung very badly.586 This was not just a vague or uncertain memory, but a vivid recollection of a lived incident. It was submitted that JF had given a careful and direct account of what she could remember but had also been candid in acknowledging any limitations on her memory. 525 In this respect, the prosecutor submitted that the volume of abuse and its frequency and repetitiveness had necessarily blurred some aspects of JF’s memory. However, she could clearly recall particular incidents which stood out as being different in some way or heralded a change in the nature and/or severity of the abuse being inflicted upon her. 526 The Court was asked to consider the progressive nature of the offending, how it became more intrusive and violent over time, consistent with the accused having embarked upon a pattern of grooming, and becoming more emboldened to offend, knowing that JF would not tell anyone about the offending and knowing that he was able to get away with it, having subjugated her to this behaviour over a long period of time. 527 It was submitted that the progression of the offending, and the fact that it was, over time, facilitated by the introduction of drugs and alcohol and occurred against a background of domestic violence, had a ‘ring of truth’ about it, as did other features of JF’s evidence. In particular, the Court was directed to JF’s evidence about the pain she had experienced as a result of sexual intercourse when she was young, but how that pain diminished over time as she simply got used to it. Similarly, the fact that JF had initially protested, but later succumbed to the abuse, resonated as being a truthful account. 528 JF’s evidence of the uncharged acts which occurred interstate had been nuanced, detailed and compelling. It was submitted that the Court should not hesitate in being satisfied on the balance of probabilities that this conduct had occurred, thus demonstrating that the accused had a sexual interest in JF and that he was prepared to act on that interest, thus increasing the likelihood that he did so at the time of the alleged offending. 529 It was acknowledged that there were some differences in the evidence given by JF and JM as to the details of the incidents of domestic violence perpetrated by the accused as against JM. It was submitted that these differences were expected given the passage of time since those events and the differing viewpoints of each 586 As outlined at T 68-71. -- 98 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 95 witness. Further it was submitted that those differences told against any potential suggestion that JF and JM had concocted their evidence. It was also submitted that simply because JM and JF have a different recollection as to detail should not be used to impugn JF’s evidence, given the evidence which demonstrated that JM had spent many years battling with a drug addiction, including during the period when the family lived in Hervey Bay. 530 It was submitted that JF’s evidence as to why JM left the family was consistent with that given by JM, namely that it was because of the accused’s violence towards JM. JF had witnessed this violence and been the victim of physical violence inflicted upon himself by the accused, providing further context with respect to the offending and why it was that she came to submit to the offending and did not complain earlier. The Court was urged to accept the evidence of both JF and JM that the accused struck JM with a metal pole at Roma, that he caused JM to be hit by a Jim Beam bottle in Hervey Bay and that it was only a few weeks thereafter that JM had left the accused. 531 The prosecutor also acknowledged that there were discrepancies in the evidence given by JF and JM about the physical violence inflicted upon JF by the accused - specifically that JM could not recall the accused ever hitting JF with any objects. However, the Court was reminded that JF’s evidence was that one such occasion (with the hairbrush) occurred in Lucindale, during a period when JM and the accused were on a cycle of methamphetamine use. 532 The Court was directed towards the level of detail recalled by JF with respect to the very first occasion of abuse in Tailem Bend – including the precise configuration of the house and where everyone was sleeping, how the accused touched her, how she felt at that time and what the accused had said to her afterwards that is, that he would kill her if she said anything. It was submitted that this evidence was compelling and the slight variation in JF’s evidence over time in terms of her recollection of what clothes she was wearing at this time should not impact on the Court otherwise accepting her account beyond reasonable doubt. It was submitted that JF’s account of the subsequent incidents in Tailem Bend and in Lucindale was similarly detailed and impressive. 533 Insofar as it was submitted there as an inconsistency in JF’s account as to the frequency of the offending, compared to what she had told the police (that is, that it happened all the time), the Court was urged to consider this evidence in the context of JF giving a detailed account of a large volume of offending over what was effectively her entire childhood. As such, it was submitted that it must have felt to JF that the offending did occur, all of the time in the sense that there was no pattern to it – it did happen around Christmas and around her birthday and randomly on multiple other occasions. It was submitted that the Court should consider that all JF was endeavouring to do was to encapsulate ten years of sexual abuse into three words. -- 99 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 96 534 As to the offending in count 2, it was submitted that this was proximate in time to the uncharged offending interstate and simply a continuation of the accused acting on his sexual interest in JF. 535 As with the first occasion of abuse, JF had a detailed recollection of the last time the accused had sexually abused her, being after GW and her family had visited and in the context of the accused offering her cannabis. It was submitted that the Court should conclude that JF’s evidence as to the offending in Murray Bridge was a truthful and compelling account of reliable memories. 536 The prosecutor submitted that the circumstances in which JF first complained about the offending to AW, that is, shortly after the last occasion of abuse at 34 Owl Drive and after she had run away to live with AW and his family, her emotional state at the time of that disclosure and what she told AW, demonstrated consistency of conduct on her part. 537 Finally, it was submitted that the Court should reject any purported motive for JF to lie about the offending to facilitate the return of her property. It was submitted that the evidence established that the property was returned before JF went to the police and that JF had complained to AW about the alleged offending before the exchange of the text messages in Exhibit D7. 538 It was submitted that after a careful consideration of all of the evidence, including careful scrutiny of JF’s evidence, the Court could resoundingly reject that she had contrived or fabricated ten years of abuse and that it should be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt as to the accused’s guilt with respect to both counts. Defence 539 Counsel for the accused acknowledged that the accused had given a false narrative, at times, during his evidence and that on other occasions he simply had no recollection or had attempted to adjust his evidence. However, notwithstanding any apparent deficiencies in the accused’s evidence, it was submitted that there were numerous reasons why the Court should have a reasonable doubt as to both the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence, and that given by JM and AW, such that it could not be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the accused’s guilt as to either count. 540 Before dealing with those witness’ evidence, counsel for the accused briefly addressed the evidence given by Professor White and Officers Wilson and Forbes. As to Professor White, it was submitted that little weight could be attributed to his evidence which was described as being ‘a general run-down of a hypothetical of what certain drugs may or may not do’.587 541 While there was no specific challenge to the evidence of either Officer Forbes or Wilson, it was submitted that again, their evidence carried very little weight. 587 T 547.22-23. -- 100 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 97 The fact that the officers had taken various steps to locate the accused prior to his arrest, demonstrated nothing more than that they were simply doing their job. The Court was urged to accept the accused’s evidence that he knew the police were looking for him and that he had in fact spoken to them earlier during the night prior to his arrest. He also knew why the police were looking for him, both from what he had heard from family members and from the text messages in Exhibit D7. He had prior experience with police and the criminal justice system and therefore must have appreciated the seriousness of the situation. 542 It was submitted that it was apparent that the accused was upset and distressed during the record of interview conducted shortly after his arrest. As such, the Court was urged to find that the accused’s actions immediately prior to his arrest were simply those of a scared man, fearful for his future, rather than demonstrative of any consciousness of guilt. 543 Turning to JM’s evidence, it was submitted that there was no doubt that JM had struggled for a long period of time with a drug addiction. Her unreliability was said to be demonstrated by the numerous inconsistencies in the evidence given by her as to the occasions of alleged domestic violence perpetuated upon her, and specifically those said to have occurred in Roma and in Hervey Bay, compared to what she had only very recently told the police on this topic. JM’s evidence also included an additional allegation of domestic violence that she had not mentioned in her statement. Her evidence had also differed from what JF had said in terms of the circumstances of the alleged metal pole incident. 544 It was submitted that JM was clearly exaggerating in terms of her description of the accused’s control over her movements. This evidence was said to be inconsistent with JF’s evidence, wherein she described JM as having left the home to go out with her mates and her own evidence that she often left the accused in charge of the children when she was away from the house or caravan. It was also inconsistent with JM’s evidence as to the accused’s work commitments while living at Mataranka. 545 It was submitted the Court should simply not accept JM’s evidence about the two occasions she claimed to have reported the accused’s domestic violence to police – first in Hervey Bay and again once she had moved to Townsville. It was submitted that it was incredulous to ask the Court to believe that the police would respond to such significant allegations by only attempting to contact the accused by telephone. 546 The Court was asked to reject JM’s evidence that the accused was violent towards her, save for the incident involving the Jim Beam bottle, and to accept the accused’s evidence on this issue. It was submitted that it was simply implausible that JM would leave her two young daughters in the care of the accused, if he was the violent and controlling man she had described him to be. -- 101 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 98 547 However, counsel for the accused also emphasised aspects of JM’s evidence which differed from that of JF, in order to impugn JF’s evidence on these issues. That evidence included JM’s description of the satellite cords in the two caravans (which differed in terms of the length and colour of those cords from that given by JF) and the fact that JM never observed any bruises on JF, whereas JF was said to have described ‘constant whippings’ and bruises that had lasted up to three days.588 548 It was submitted that importantly, JM had not observed anything of concern in terms of the relationship between the accused and JF, despite living with them in very close proximity and confined quarters at a time when JF described regular and frequent sexual abuse by the accused. 549 Counsel for the accused also submitted that AW’s evidence ought to be rejected as it was confused and simply unreliable. AW could not recall how many police statements he had given in 2023 and erroneously believed it to be two. He now had no recollection of what he claimed was said during the second of two conversations he claimed to have had with JF about the alleged offending. He gave evidence that JF told him the accused had drugged her by giving her ice in a liquid form but had told the police it was crushed up tablets or perkies. In addition, AW’s evidence as to how often he slept over at 27 Owl Drive was inconsistent with the evidence given by JF and the accused. 550 As JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case, it was necessarily the primary focus of the defence closing address. 551 Although counsel for the accused outlined in detail various reasons why the Court should find that JF’s evidence simply could not be accepted, curiously, before undertaking this task, he described JF as ‘a very competent witness’.589 This observation was made when assessing JM’s evidence insofar as it was otherwise potentially inconsistent with aspects of the evidence given by JF on the topic of the accused’s level of control over JM and the alleged incidents of domestic violence. 552 As to JF’s credibility, albeit not expressly mentioned in the closing address, the accused sought to rely on two apparent motives for JF to lie about the alleged offending – that is, one because she was unhappy with the outcome of her requests for the return of her property after she left 34 Owl Drive and another said to relate to JF’s desire for AW to ‘join them’ at 34 Owl Drive.590 553 In addition, it was submitted that aspects of JF’s version of events were either implausible or highly improbable. These included the following: 588 T 551.34-38, noting this was not an entirely accurate description of the evidence. JF did not give evidence of ‘constant whippings’. JM gave evidence that she had seen bruises on JF in connection with incidents in Roma and Hervey Bay. 589 T 551.4. 590 T 547.6-14. -- 102 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 99 • if JF had been the victim of persistent and recurrent sexual abuse by the accused, why did she not simply leave him, with JM, when JM left the family unit? • Despite there being evidence that JF attended the police station at Maryborough and other agencies such as Act for Kids, how was it that none of these authorities ‘picked up’ on the sexual abuse being perpetrated upon her? • JF was adamant she had been sexually abused in the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan, where there was simply inadequate space for any alleged sexual assault and intercourse to have occurred. • JF was adamant that the occasion she was abused in Lucindale ended when the accused received a text message from JM advising she was on her way home from the shops. Why would JM see the need to inform the accused of this, when she was only ten minutes away? It was submitted that for the Court to accept JF’s evidence on this topic required it to make ‘a leap of faith’.591 • JF had described the accused as being highly intoxicated on New Years Eve in Rockhampton and of having consumed some 12 to 18 drinks. However, while he was in this intoxicated state, he had taped her hands together, engaged in oral and digital sex for two hours and then had penile intercourse with her for an hour. It was submitted this was simply incredible and/or an example of gross exaggeration. • JF’s evidence that the government had allowed her to take a year off school because she had been bullied by her grade 2 teacher was simply fanciful. • JF’s evidence about the circumstances in which the accused had sexually abused her in the toilet block at the caravan park in Upper Coomera at around 7:00am or 8:00am in the morning, when one would expect the shower blocks to be busy and there being every prospect of the offending being detected by others, was implausible. • JF’s evidence of occasions of alleged penile vaginal intercourse in the caravan at both Mataranka and Helensvale when her mother had left to go for a shower. Why would the accused undertake such risky behaviour, given that JM could have returned at any time? As to the alleged occasion at Mataranka, the caravan door was only 50 cm away from the bunk bed where the alleged abuse was occurring, yet there was time for the abuse to end and for there to be no sign of anything untoward, despite JM being right outside the caravan door. 591 T 556.25. -- 103 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 100 554 Counsel for the accused also highlighted apparent inconsistencies in the evidence given by JF and the other evidence. JF was adamant she had never seen a doctor during the period she lived with the accused. Not only was this demonstrably untrue (given that she must have seen a doctor to enable the contraceptive bar to be inserted) but was inherently unlikely in any event, given JF’s evidence about her very long and irregular periods. 555 As previously stated, JF’s evidence of having suffered bruises as a result of being beaten by the accused or of being beaten with objects, was not corroborated by JM. JF’s evidence as to the nature of the satellite cords in the caravans, was inconsistent with that of JM. JF was adamant the accused struck JM with the Jim Beam bottle at Hervey Bay, whereas both JM and the accused agreed he had thrown the bottle towards her and it had hit her. JF’s description of the alleged metal pole incident differed in several aspects to the version given by JM. 556 In addition, counsel for the accused identified what he submitted were internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence. 557 Although JF claimed that the accused had anal sex with her on ten to 20 occasions, this was only a feature of one of the occasions of abuse, described in detail by JF. It was submitted that if this was such a frequent feature of the abuse, one would have expected it to feature more prominently in the allegations. As it did not, it was submitted this estimate (of ten to 20 times) was fanciful and simply stated to enhance her story. 558 JF had variously described the alleged abuse in Rockhampton as occurring ‘weekly or every three to four weeks or three days in a row’,592 being an example of why JF’s evidence could not be relied upon. 559 It was submitted that when JF gave evidence about the last occasion of alleged offending, at 34 Owl Drive, she initially claimed to have no specific memory of that occasion, but then proceeded to give a very detailed account of the circumstances surrounding that alleged offending, including the fact that she had not been drinking, nor had she consumed cannabis and that the same things had occurred to her at this time as had occurred on the second and third to last occasions of abuse.593 560 Importantly, it was submitted that there was a critical difference in JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending at Tailem Bend in count 1 compared to what she told the police when she gave her detailed statement on 26 March 2023. In evidence she described a recollection of only two specific instances of abuse in Tailem Bend, whereas it was submitted that the only possible interpretation of what JF said to police was that, when she was aged five, and in Tailem Bend, the accused had abused her ‘every second day or daily, or it happened weekly or 592 T 561.30-31. 593 Noting this was not an accurate description of the evidence – see [196]-[205] herein; JF said she could not recall the specific details of the other two occasions, not the last occasion. -- 104 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 101 fortnightly’.594 The Court was urged to reject JF’s explanation as to what she was intending to convey to police (that is, simply that throughout the entire period of the abuse, it had occurred with that frequency). 561 The Court was also referred to JF’s inability to recall either the fact she had seen a doctor in Rockhampton or what had happened when she attended at the Maryborough police station (or why she was there). 562 The Court was also asked to carefully consider JF’s demeanour and affect when giving her evidence and particularly when describing the various incidents of sexual abuse. It was submitted that JF showed no emotion when describing any of the alleged offending and instead was confident and matter of fact in her presentation, so much so that it was said that she appeared to have either practiced or rehearsed her evidence. 563 Finally, it was submitted that if the Court scrutinised JF’s evidence with great care, it would become apparent that while she seemingly recalled incidents of abuse in great detail, the common thread that flowed through her evidence was that what had occurred on one occasion of abuse, was simply the same as that which had occurred before. In this way, JF had made it easy for herself to avoid her evidence of each occasion being challenged in terms of inconsistencies and the like. 564 It was submitted that when careful regard was given to all of the evidence, the Court could not be satisfied as to where the truth lies, such that it could not be satisfied as to the accused’s guilt as to either count, beyond reasonable doubt. Analysis/ Assessment of the Evidence Preliminary Observations 565 I have paid careful regard to all of the evidence in order to make various findings. The fact that my discussion of the evidence appears in the order as presented, is simply a matter of form, rather than substance. It should not be interpreted to mean that I have drawn conclusions or made findings of fact, without carefully considering all of the evidence. 566 On any interpretation of the evidence, JF’s childhood was one of significant disadvantage, poverty and upheaval. 567 From when she first met the accused until she ran away from 34 Owl Drive, JF had no real stability in her life in terms of where she lived or which school she attended. 568 The family unit moved from one location to the next, often staying in one place for only several months at a time. Even when the move was to a town in quite close proximity (for example, Helensvale to Southport or Southport to 594 T 164.34-36. -- 105 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 102 Merrimac), JF was required to change schools, so that the drive to and from school would be shorter for the accused and JM. 569 As a result, not only was JF’s education continually disrupted but she never had the proper opportunity to make friends (and/or maintain friendships) or to develop close and enduring relationships with another trusted adult or relative. 570 Much of JF’s childhood was spent living in a caravan at various caravan sites at different locations in the Northern Territory and Queensland. 571 Although JF described undertaking some activities with the accused (camping, four-wheel driving and fishing), JF gave no evidence about spending any quality time with JM or undertaking activities such as sport, craft, or music. The only sporting activity mentioned by JF as being undertaken by her, was attending AFLW training with a small group of girls in Murray Bridge. Nothing came of this and JF’s involvement ceased after only a few months because there were insufficient numbers to make up a team. 572 JF, JM and the accused all gave evidence that when JF and JM first moved in to live with the accused at Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused was subject to home detention bail conditions. 573 I am satisfied and I find that as from 10 February 2012, when the accused was sentenced by Judge Griffin for two counts of aggravated threatening to kill, those home detention bail conditions were removed. As such, JF and JM must have commenced living with the accused when JF was still aged four, noting she turned five on 27 March 2012. 574 Ultimately there was no real dispute, and I find, that from the period when the accused, JM, JF and S were living at Webb Street, Tailem Bend (and the accused was no longer on home detention bail), until JM left the family unit in Hervey Bay, both the accused and JM were addicted to illicit substances. At times, that addiction was so overwhelming that for days at a time, both the accused and JM were high on methamphetamine, in particular during the period the family lived in Lucindale and at various locations in or about the Gold Coast and in Roma, Queensland. 575 In addition, I am satisfied that while the family lived in the Northern Territory, the accused regularly used both cannabis and alcohol. 576 While I do not doubt that JM very much loved (and loves) JF, I am satisfied, from all of the evidence, that her ability to properly care for and to protect JF, was significantly compromised, either because of her own addiction to illicit substances, the demands of her work (and her new baby, C) while in the Northern Territory, and/or the toxic relationship she had with the accused. 577 For reasons I will outline hereunder, I am satisfied that during her relationship with the accused, JM was the victim of physical violence inflicted -- 106 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 103 upon her by the accused. I am satisfied that some of that violence occurred in the presence of JF. I am further satisfied that, from time to time, the accused hit JF, either by hand or with objects, sometimes leaving marks or bruises. 578 I accept JM;’s evidence that she left the accused because he had been physically violent towards her. Notwithstanding JM’s evidence to the contrary, I consider it likely that another factor influencing her decision was that she had met RH, meaning the decision to leave was made much easier for her. 579 JF was only 14 when JM left the family unit. For reasons I will explain hereunder, I accept JM’s evidence that she endeavoured to take her children (including JF) with her when she left but was prevented from doing so by the accused. I accept the accused’s evidence that thereafter, JF remained in his care as the only alternative was for her to then go into police custody and be taken to child welfare. 580 JF had ‘lost’ both her mother and biological mother. There was no other trusted or responsible adult available to assume care of either her or C. As such, I am satisfied that once JM left the family, JF effectively had no real choice but to stay with the accused, as he was the only adult she knew and the itinerant life that they led, was the only type of life that she had known. 581 There was real no dispute and I find, that thereafter JF took on a maternal role with respect to the care of both S and C. She would babysit, cook and assist the children to get ready for bed. She was forced, by circumstance, to assume a role well beyond her years. 582 JF did not describe the accused using methamphetamine after JM left the family, I therefore accept that after JM left the accused, the accused either did not use or reduced his use of methamphetamine. However, he continued to use cannabis and to drink heavily. The accused did not engage in any gainful employment from the time JM left him, until JF ran away from 34 Owl Drive, with the family reliant on Centrelink benefits and other government assistance. 583 Due to a combination of all of the above matters, I am satisfied that throughout the entirety of the period that the accused fulfilled the role of step- father to JF, that is, from when they lived at Webb Street, Tailem Bend, until she left 34 Owl Drive, Murray Bridge, JF was in a particularly vulnerable position. 584 It was in this context and against this background that the alleged offending occurred. Expert Evidence 585 I accept the evidence given by Professor White. 586 This evidence was led for several purposes. It was relevant to an assessment of JF’s reliability and credibility insofar as she described being given both Ritalin -- 107 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 104 and Catapres by the accused (being drugs she said were prescribed for S, who suffered from ADHD) and what she said was the impact of those drugs on her. 587 Professor White was asked to provide an opinion on the potential effect of the use of Ritalin, Catapres and/or alcohol in three different hypothetical scenarios, each of which required him to rely on a series of different assumptions. The underlying assumptions were (partially) derived, in each instance, from JF’s evidence. 588 The first scenario related to JF’s evidence that the accused had given her five Ritalin tablets at a time when she had also been drinking during the day. This was in Roma when she was 13. She said this made her fidgety and kept her awake so she could not sleep. 589 JF’s evidence as to how the consumption of these substances affected her is supported, in part by Professor White’s evidence.595 His evidence, which I accept, is that the Ritalin would have resulted in increased alertness and feelings of energy, agitation and increased heart rate, consistent with what JF described. However, Professor White also confirmed that the alcohol would have had a sedative or calming effect, in effect counter balancing some of the effects of the Ritalin. 590 JF gave evidence of only one occasion when she recalled the accused sexually abusing her after he had given her Ritalin, being an occasion in Rockhampton when he gave her ten Ritalin tablets at the same time as she had been drinking. The circumstances described by JF on this occasion are similar to the assumptions relied upon by Professor White with respect to the second hypothetical scenario.596 591 JF said that she did not feel affected by the alcohol on that occasion but the Ritalin made her feel really energetic and made her want to keep cleaning. Professor White’s evidence, which I accept, lends support to JF’s evidence of this occasion, insofar as he confirmed that the consumer would feel energetic, alert and disinhibited, and that as the concentration of Ritalin rose in their body, this was likely to produce agitation. 592 I am satisfied that Professor White’s evidence lends support to the evidence given by JF as to her consumption of both Ritalin and Catapres and the circumstances in which it was prescribed to S. 595 Noting Professor White was asked to assume the consumer weighed 64 kg. There was no evidence as to what JF weighed when she was aged 13 and living in Roma, albeit JF gave evidence that she weighed 64 kg at the time when she was last sexually abused by the accused at 34 Owl Drive; T 66.28-30. 596 Again, Professor White was asked to assume the consumer weighed 64 kg. There was no evidence as to what JF weighed when she was aged 14 and living in Rockhampton. -- 108 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 105 Police Evidence 593 Officer Wilson and Officer Forbes both gave their evidence in a very professional and straight forward manner, with the benefit of their notes. 594 I accept the evidence given by each officer as being both credible and reliable. 595 The police evidence was relevant insofar as it outlined what occurred in the periods immediately prior to and after the accused’s arrest and the officers’ observations of the accused at and/or immediately after his arrest. 596 There was ultimately no dispute, and I find, that the accused was found by Officer Wilson hiding under a bed at GW’s house and that the police had spent several hours looking for the accused, prior to his arrest, to effect that arrest. He was not otherwise wanted by police with respect to any other alleged offending or any outstanding warrants. 597 I accept the evidence of each officer that, in their view, although the accused was visibly upset, he did not appear overly intoxicated and Officer Forbes’ evidence that if the accused had been drunk, he would have been taken to hospital. 598 This evidence was led to support the prosecution hypothesis that the accused’s conduct before and at the time of his arrest, was indicative of him harbouring a guilty conscience. 599 The accused gave evidence that he contacted the police earlier on the day prior to his arrest. Officer Forbes agreed in cross-examination that prior to the accused’s arrest, the accused had rung the police and that he had spoken to him on several occasions.597 600 I find that the accused knew of the nature of the allegations from the text messages and because his children had been removed by Child Protection. 601 GW gave evidence that she knew the police would come to her house because of earlier conversations she had with them. Although neither Officer Forbes nor Officer Wilson were questioned about any communications between the police and GW in the period prior to the accused’s arrest, Officer Forbes confirmed he had attended at GW’s home three times between 5:00pm and 11:00pm, during which the accused was not present. He did not say if GW was present on any of those three occasions. 602 The accused knew that the police were looking for him to arrest him for the offending. He must have also known that the police knew of his connection with GW and that they were likely to attend there as part of their ongoing search. 597 T 344.37-345.3. -- 109 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 106 603 The accused had previous involvement with the criminal justice system. Notwithstanding my concerns about the veracity and accuracy of many aspects of his evidence, I find that the accused simply panicked when he saw the lights of the police vehicle arrive at GW’s house, and as a result went and hid under the bed. He was simply trying to avoid the inevitable, that is, his anticipated arrest for serious offending and a potential period on remand in custody. 604 I also accept that it is likely the accused’s thought process was impacted by some earlier consumption of cannabis (and possibly alcohol), albeit he was not grossly affected by either substance at the time. He was clearly distressed during the ROI only a short time after his arrest, during which at times he was incoherent. 605 In these circumstances, I consider there is a satisfactory innocent explanation for the accused’s conduct immediately prior to his arrest, that is, he was simply frightened and scared about what would happen upon his arrest, which he knew was inevitable given both the seriousness of the allegations and his prior knowledge of and experience within the criminal justice system. 606 As such, I have not used this evidence as circumstantial evidence supporting an inference of the accused’s guilt. AW’s Evidence 607 AW presented as a young, unsophisticated teenage boy, somewhat overwhelmed by the formality and seriousness of the occasion, which was unsurprising for someone of his age and upbringing. 608 My overall impression of AW was that he was a defensive witness, who was concerned to avoid any blame or criticism that may be directed towards him. 609 AW was quite certain he had given three police statements. I am satisfied from the evidence of Officer Forbes, that in fact AW only gave two police statements, one in 2023 and one just prior to trial in mid-2024. 610 There was disparity in the evidence AW gave about what he said JF told him at the time of her initial complaint as to the accused providing her with illicit drugs, and what he told the police on that topic. 611 AW was quite adamant he had not stolen a pushbike (being conduct he attributed to a friend of similar appearance), notwithstanding both JF and the accused gave evidence to the contrary. Similarly, AW’s evidence as to the frequency with which he stayed at 27 Owl Drive was at odds with the evidence given by both JF and the accused on this topic. 612 As such, I have some doubts about the credibility and/or reliability of aspects of AW’s evidence. My doubts as to his credibility relate to the evidence he gave about himself and/or his actions, rather than the evidence he gave as to his observations of JF and/or his relationship and interactions with her. My doubts as -- 110 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 107 to his reliability relate to his ability to accurately recall the finer details of events, rather than his ability to recall the fact of an event. 613 AW’s evidence was relevant to corroborate JF’s evidence on several different topics. Specifically, it was relevant to establish the fact of, timing and content of JF’s initial complaint, the circumstances in which JF left 34 Owl Drive and the issue of opportunity regarding the allegations in count 2. 614 Notwithstanding my concerns as previously outlined, I accept AW’s evidence that JF did tell him that the accused had been raping her for about 11 years, that is from about the age of six or seven until recently,598 during a conversation shortly after she had left 34 Owl Drive and moved in with him and his mother. This was (largely) consistent with JF’s evidence on this topic, which I accept. 615 I accept that AW has a recollection of being told by JF about the accused providing her with illicit drugs. However, because of the differences in detail on that topic in AW’s evidence compared to his recent police statement, I cannot accept his evidence as to the precise detail of the drugs that he said JF told him had been given to her. While AW was certain about being told about the drugs, I consider he may now be confused or mistaken in terms of his recollection of what drugs JF told him had been given to her by the accused. It is also possible that this discussion occurred at a time other than the conversation in which JF made the initial complaint.599 616 As to precisely when that conversation occurred, AW said it was about one week after JF moved in with his family, whereas JF said it was about a month later, at the start of March. Having regard to all of the evidence, and the evidence about the period during which JF lived at 34 Owl Drive, I am satisfied JF left 34 Owl Drive towards the end of February 2023. I consider it likely and find that this conversation occurred in early March 2023, shortly after JF fled 34 Owl Drive. JM’s Evidence 617 JM’s evidence was relevant to corroborate aspects of JF’s evidence as to the family’s living arrangements from time to time. It was also relevant to lend support to JF’s description of the accused’s drug and alcohol use and violence towards both JM and JF. There were several differences in the evidence given by JM and JF on this latter topic. 618 After carefully considering the evidence given by JM and JF, I am satisfied that this is not a case where JF and JM have colluded or conspired to give false evidence against the accused. Not only were there differences in their evidence about occasions when the accused was physically violent, but other aspects of JM’s 598 Noting AW stated that JF told him the abuse had continued ‘up to recent, 2021-2’. 599 Noting JF was not asked about any other conversation had with AW whereby she may have provided any elaboration of the initial complaint. -- 111 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 108 evidence were such that I am satisfied she was not merely telling a story agreed upon by her and JF. For example, JM gave evidence that she had not seen the accused give JF cannabis, or either Ritalin or Catapres, nor was she concerned about the way the accused interacted with JF. 619 However, I have carefully considered where there were differences in the evidence given by JM and JF on certain topics in my assessment of the evidence and, in particular, whether those differences, in the context of all of the evidence, cause me to doubt the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence on the critical issue of whether the accused engaged in unlawful sexual activity with her and the nature of any such activity. 620 For reasons I will outline hereunder, I have concerns about the reliability of aspects of JM’s evidence. Insofar as there are differences in JM’s evidence, compared to that given by JF, those differences do not cause me to doubt the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence on those topics. However, generally speaking, I consider that JM was an honest witness, endeavouring to tell the Court as much as she is now able to recall, viewed from her perspective, of this period of her life. 621 JM was giving evidence about a time in her life when she was struggling to deal with an addiction to illicit substances and involved in a toxic and turbulent relationship with the accused. It was my impression that although JM was doing her best to recall relevant events which had occurred during the relationship, I consider her ability to give an accurate account was impacted because of the effects of both drug and alcohol use during that period. 622 A simple example of this is that although JM recalled a period when the children were home schooled in Mataranka, she had no recollection of them being home schooled in Roma. The family lived in Roma at a time which coincided with the early months of the Covid pandemic. I consider it likely and find that the children were home schooled while the family lived in Roma and that JM has simply forgotten this. 623 JM was being examined about circumstances ancillary to horrific allegations of sexual abuse committed by her ex-partner on JF, at a time when JM was ill equipped to properly care for JF, both because of her drug and alcohol use and the nature of her relationship with the accused. 624 However, at the time she gave her evidence, JM was actively seeking to have C returned to her care. She was taking steps to abstain from drug use. She was seeking counselling to demonstrate to the authorities that she was able to see the signs of domestic violence and to keep C safe from harm. 625 It is therefore understandable that JM may be reluctant to acknowledge, or even search her memory, for any potential ‘warning signs’ she may have missed which should have alerted her to any harm being caused to JF during the relationship, including signs of physical abuse. -- 112 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 109 626 JM acknowledged that when the family lived at Tailem Bend, she used alcohol, cannabis and methylamphetamine and that she continued to do so (albeit not constantly) throughout the duration of her relationship with the accused. 627 Although the nature and extent of JM’s drug use was not explored in detail with her, I am satisfied and find that JM struggled with a significant addiction to illicit substances throughout her relationship with the accused.600 628 I consider it likely that JM’s use of methylamphetamine decreased while the family resided in the Northern Territory, during the period when she was working and/or pregnant with C. However, I am also satisfied that both the accused and JM regularly consumed methylamphetamine while living in Lucindale, Southport and Merrimac (before moving to the Northern Territory) and in Helensvale, Upper Coomera, Roma and Hervey Bay. Living Arrangements 629 JM’s evidence as to where the family lived from time to time, and in what type of accommodation, was largely consistent with JF’s evidence. I consider it likely and I find that JF and JM did discuss this timeline together. However, I accept JF’s evidence that she prepared Exhibit P2 of her own accord and she had little difficulty giving a coherent account of the various locations the family had lived from time to time. 630 There was a minor difference in the evidence given by JM and JF about the floorplan of the house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend. Importantly, JM gave evidence that the plan in Exhibit P3 accurately depicted the house and its layout at the time the family lived there and, consistent with what JF said, that the children had slept in a different room when they first moved in. However, JM recalled the children previously slept in the room marked bedroom 2, whereas JF said she and S had previously slept in the room marked ‘lounge’. Notwithstanding JF’s young age at that time, I prefer and accept her evidence on this issue, noting she had a specific recollection that she found it difficult to sleep in the room marked ‘lounge’, being the reason for the move. 631 JM’s evidence as to the configuration of the Millard caravan was consistent with that given by JF. 632 As to the Roadmaster caravan, JM gave evidence, consistent with that given by JF, that the triple bunks were not in the position as depicted in Exhibit D8, at any time when she lived in that caravan. JM also confirmed that although there was a toilet and shower in the Roadmaster caravan, they did not use the shower, and instead used the shower blocks at the various caravan parks. 600 For example, JM was never cross-examined as to whether she agreed with the accused’s description of the couple’s mutual drug use both before and after they moved to live in the Northern Territory nor was she cross-examined about incurring a drug debt in Roma or any consequences thereof. -- 113 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 110 Accused’s Physical Violence against JF 633 There were differences in the evidence given by JM and JF as to the extent to which the accused was physically violent towards JF. 634 Although JM gave evidence that she observed the accused smack JF hard on several occasions, leaving bruises, she first recalled this happening in Roma and then again in Hervey Bay, being contrary to JF’s evidence, namely that the last time the accused hit her was in Upper Coomera. JM had no recollection of seeing the accused hit JF with objects and as such, her evidence did not support JF’s claim that the accused regularly hit her with a spoon or ladle in Merrimac or JF’s evidence that JM was present when he hit her with the satellite cord in Katherine.601 635 While I consider JM’s evidence was honestly given, for the reasons as outlined at paragraphs 621 to 628 herein, I have doubts as to the reliability of that evidence. Relationship between JM and the Accused 636 The relationship between JM and the accused has irretrievably broken down. Both sought to blame each other for various things that had occurred in the relationship. 637 As to JM, her explanation for why the family moved from place to place so frequently was because the accused was always getting into trouble with the neighbours and starting things with them. Although JM subsequently agreed that at times they were forced to leave because they had not paid the rent, she maintained that they usually moved because of issues with the neighbours caused by the accused. She gave no evidence that any aspect of her behaviour may have been a contributing factor towards the couple’s itinerant lifestyle.602 638 I consider it likely that JM has over-emphasised the accused’s responsibility and under-estimated her own responsibility for the more negative aspects of the couple’s lifestyle. I do not consider this was done deliberately to erroneously paint the accused in a bad light. Rather I consider JM’s evidence reflected what she now recalls occurred in the context of their relationship and bearing in mind my earlier comments about the context in which her evidence was given. 639 It is likely, and I find, that the accused did cause issues with the neighbours, which meant the family had to leave various places, both by way of his drug use, buying and selling cars from various caravan parks, working on cars at all hours of the night and/or similar. However, I also consider it likely that the couple’s mutual drug use, anti-social behaviour and failure to pay the rent (because money 601 I note JM also gave evidence that the satellite cord for the Millard caravan was grey and the satellite cord for the Roadmaster caravan was white. JF described being hit with a black satellite cord. 602 Albeit JM was not cross-examined on this specific issue or why they left one location for another. -- 114 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 111 was prioritised towards drugs and alcohol), were significant contributing factors to many of their moves. 640 JM described the accused as becoming increasingly more controlling of her and her movements over time, ultimately resulting in him committing acts of physical violence against her in Roma and in Hervey Bay, such that she decided to leave the relationship. 641 JM gave evidence that the accused controlled her movements, 24 hours a day, after they left South Australia. However, this evidence is seemingly inconsistent with JM’s evidence that she obtained employment from time to time and JF’s evidence that there were times that JM was not home, either because she had left to go to the shops or was out with friends. The accused was also working full time at the station in Mataranka. As such, I consider that this aspect of JM’s evidence was exaggerated, when considered “literally”. 642 However, I accept JM’s evidence that the accused was controlling of her. I accept that felt as if the accused had full control over her during the relationship. 643 JM’s evidence in this respect is supported by aspects of JF’s evidence. JF described JM as being scared of the accused. She also described her relationship with her mother as distant because the accused would not allow them to do things, like go to the shops or the park together, alone.603 JF also described the accused as controlling aspects of her behaviour, for example, she did not go to visit AW at his house as the accused would not let her. I accept this evidence, which supports JM’s evidence as to the fact the accused did control aspects of both of their behaviour. 644 While the accused denied he controlled JM, he described their relationship as being one where they were together 24/7 and did everything together. 645 When JM left the relationship, she left her children with the accused, despite attempting to leave with them. The accused readily acknowledged that when JM left him, she tried to put the kids in the car and take them with her, but he stopped her. The fact that the accused was able to prevent JM from taking her children with her (particularly JF, who was not the accused’s biological daughter) demonstrates the significant degree of control the accused had over JM. 646 I have carefully considered all of the evidence given by JF, JM and the accused about the nature of the couple’s relationship. Having done so, I accept JM’s evidence that the accused did control her behaviour. I find that her description of that control being, in effect, all consuming, represents her genuine recollection of the way he acted towards her during the relationship. 603 T 29.12-14. -- 115 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 112 Accused’s Physical Violence against JM 647 JM described four specific incidents of physical violence inflicted upon her by the accused (see discussion at paragraphs 298 to 307 herein. These were: • The metal pole incident at Roma. • Another occasion in Roma when the accused punched her in the left side, breaking two of her ribs. • The Jim Beam bottle incident in Hervey Bay. • Another occasion in the Roadmaster caravan at Hervey Bay, when the accused punched her in the abdomen and ribs, causing bruises to the right side of her body. 648 JM said the accused was first physically violent towards her in Roma, being at a time when he was drinking heavily. 649 JF described the first occasion that she could recall the accused being physically violent towards JM occurring in Roma, and specifically she recalled that incident as involving the accused hitting JM with a metal pole. 650 However, there were several differences in the details of the metal pole incident as described by JM and JF. 651 JF described JM and the accused arguing in the lounge room, such that she left the room and took her sisters into their bedroom. She heard JM yelling at the accused to stop and put something down. When she opened the door, she saw her mother walking towards her, holding her arm up against her ribs, and the accused holding the metal pole. She said the next day she saw bruises up and down JM’s back. 652 JM recalled JF walking towards the lounge room at the start of the incident and said JF was standing behind the accused when he hit her and saying, ‘stop hitting mum’. She said the accused hit her on the back of the right arm with the pole, causing a large bruise and welt. 653 JF was 13 when the family lived in Roma. According to the accused, JM was heavily addicted to methamphetamine and drinking heavily when the family were in Roma. He also said that his drinking and drug use became worse in Roma. 654 The accused acknowledged that the couple’s arguments started in Roma and he described them yelling and screaming at each other when they were there. He also described two incidents when bricks were thrown into the Roma house being, on his version of events, JM’s fault because she had accrued the drug debt. Notwithstanding this, he maintained he never hit JM with a metal pole in Roma. -- 116 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 113 655 I consider the differences in the accounts of JM and JF with respect to this incident are of a type which may be expected, given they were attempting to recall the details of a traumatic event, from several years ago, viewed through their own lens (or perspective). JM was dealing with the trauma of being the victim of the assault. JF was a young teenager, who was, for the first time, witnessing her mother being beaten by the accused. She was scared for the safety of her mother, her sisters and herself, given what she saw and heard. 656 Further, this incident occurred at a time when I am satisfied JM was addicted to methamphetamine, such that her memory as to precisely where JF was at the time of the incident may be inaccurate. While JM described bruising to the back of her right arm, whereas JF said she saw bruises down JM’s back, I consider it likely that JF saw bruising on the back of JM’s body, such that she is now mistaken in her recollection the bruising was on JM’s back, rather than the back of her arm. 657 Although JM was quite adamant this incident occurred at the start of 2020, I am satisfied from all of the evidence that the family only moved to Roma during 2020 at a time when caravan parks closed down because of Covid. As such, I am satisfied that they did not move to Roma until, at the very earliest, April 2020. I consider JM is mistaken in her recollection that the metal pole incident occurred at the start of 2020 and find it likely occurred in mid to late 2020.604 658 Notwithstanding these inconsistencies, I accept the evidence of JM, supported by that of JF, that the accused did hit JM with a metal pole in Roma.605 659 As to the other two incidents of physical violence described by JM, there were inconsistencies in JM’s evidence, as compared to her police statement, about those two incidents. 660 I accept JM’s evidence that at the time she gave her police statement, she was very upset, being perfectly understandable given the nature of the allegations under investigation. I accept that her description in her police statement of a second incident in Roma, when the accused punched her in the ribs, is inaccurate insofar as it has confused certain details of that incident with those relating to the subsequent (similar) incident that occurred in Hervey Bay. 661 JM recalled the children being present in the caravan, and sitting on the floor playing, at the time the accused punched her in the abdomen and ribs at Hervey Bay. JF did not give any evidence about this incident, nor was she specifically asked about it. It may be that JM is mistaken in her recollection of where the children were. It may be that JF was simply preoccupied with C and S and unaware of the fact of this incident. 604 Being consistent with what she told the police. 605 I have discussed the accused’s evidence of this topic in detail later in these Reasons. I have considered all of the evidence, including the accused’s evidence, in making this finding. -- 117 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 114 662 Notwithstanding these potential inconsistencies, I accept JM’s evidence that the accused did punch her in the ribs at Roma and that he later punched her in the side of the abdomen at Hervey Bay. I consider it likely and I find, notwithstanding the accused’s evidence to the contrary, that the couple’s relationship was particularly fraught at this time and they were constantly arguing. Both JM and the accused were drinking heavily and using amphetamines. This must have had an impact on their behaviour. I find that it was in this context that these incidents of physical violence occurred. 663 The accused acknowledged he threw the Jim Beam bottle at JM in Hervey Bay and that JM left the relationship a few weeks thereafter. He acknowledged he was served with a Restraining Order after that incident. 664 I am satisfied and I find that JM left the accused after he had become physically violent towards her, in the context of an otherwise controlling relationship, characterised by excessive mutual illicit drug use. 665 I also accept JM’s evidence that she endeavoured to take the children with her when she left the accused but that he stopped her from doing so, noting the accused acknowledged this in his own evidence. 666 JM gave evidence that the accused stopped her from taking the children by threatening to kill her and that she subsequently reported this to the police, whose only response was to call the accused and to tell her to go to the courts for help. 667 While it is certainly possible that the accused threatened JM in this way, I consider it unlikely the police would not have taken further steps to actively locate the accused if such a report was made. As such, I cannot accept this aspect of JM’s evidence. 668 I consider it likely that JM harbours enormous guilt for leaving JF with the accused. I consider her evidence on this topic may be impacted by an understandable reluctance to accept any potential role she may have played in exposing JF to harm, during her relationship with the accused. Drugs and Alcohol 669 JM gave evidence that the accused drank alcohol from the start of their relationship and that he started using methylamphetamine and cannabis early in their relationship. 670 This evidence is consistent with both that of JF and the accused. I accept this evidence. 671 I also accept JM’s evidence, consistent with that of the accused, that the accused’s drinking got worse when they were living in Roma. I accept her evidence, consistent with that of JF, that the accused would drink from morning until night. I also accept JM’s evidence that the accused became nasty and violent when drunk. -- 118 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 115 672 JM gave evidence, consistent with that of JF, that she saw the accused first give alcohol to JF when they were living in Roma and JF was about 12. She described the accused as giving JF vodka, again consistent with JF’s evidence. Notwithstanding the accused’s evidence to the contrary, I accept the evidence given by both JM and JF on this topic. 673 JM never saw JF take drugs, meaning she never saw the accused give JF drugs. This was also consistent with JF’s evidence, namely that the first time the accused gave her a cone, was when she was aged 14 and JM was in the shower. JF said the second time was about a year later (noting JF was only 14 when JM left the accused). 674 JM’s evidence that the accused used to take the Ritalin tablets prescribed for S, when they were living in Roma, was also consistent with JF’s evidence. I accept that evidence.606 675 JM said she never saw the accused give JF Ritalin. Although JF described the accused giving her Ritalin on an occasion when she, JM and the accused had been drinking, she did not say that JM was present when the accused gave her that Ritalin. JF said the other times the accused gave her Ritalin occurred in Rockhampton and therefore after JM had left the family unit. Summary 676 JM’s evidence supported important aspects of JF’s account, as outlined above. 677 Although there were differences in the evidence given by JM and JF, particularly on the issue of physical violence perpetrated by the accused on each of JM and JF, such differences, considered in the context of all of the evidence, do not cause me to have a reasonable doubt about the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence either on those topics where there were such differences, or with respect to the alleged offending. GW’s Evidence 678 GW’s evidence was confined to her recollection of events during the short period of time she was in a relationship with the accused in Murray Bridge. 679 Although GW gave evidence to the effect that she and the accused were previously in a relationship, it was evident that GW remains supportive of the accused and that, she has renewed a friendship with him, after reconnecting with him recently. In my view, aspects of her evidence were tailored to present the accused in the best possible light, and JF in the worst light. 606 Although defence counsel submitted in his closing address that the accused gave evidence that S ceased being prescribed Ritalin in 2020, there was, in fact, no such evidence given. -- 119 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 116 680 GW only met the accused in February 2023, that is shortly before JF left 34 Owl Drive. GW had three children, all of school age, during this period. Notwithstanding her family obligations, she claimed that she would stay overnight with the accused as often as she could and if she did not stay overnight, she would return the next day for coffee as early as 6:30 am. 681 Although I consider it likely and find that GW did stay overnight with the accused at 34 Owl Drive on occasions during her relationship with him, I consider that the evidence GW gave on this topic was tailored, and exaggerated, in an attempt to reduce the potential opportunity for the offending as described by JF to have occurred. 682 I am satisfied and find that there were nights during February 2023, when JF still lived with the accused at 34 Owl Drive, that GW did not stay overnight. Indeed, GW agreed with a proposition put to her in cross-examination that there was at least an occasion when she and her children visited the accused at 34 Owl Drive, stayed for dinner and then left and went home together at around 7:30pm. 683 As such, notwithstanding the fact GW and the accused were in a relationship during February 2023, I am satisfied that there remained the opportunity for the accused to sexually offend against JF at 34 Owl Drive as alleged by her. 684 GW gave evidence that JF left 34 Owl Drive because of arguments about AW living there and because she wanted to smoke pot all the time. This evidence suggests that it was the accused, rather than JF, who initiated JF’s departure from 34 Owl Drive. I am satisfied this was not the case, rather JF made the decision to leave 34 Owl Drive, independently of the accused. 685 Further, it was never put to JF that she left 34 Owl Drive because of her cannabis use, nor did the accused give any such evidence. Indeed, the accused even acknowledged he had given JF cannabis to smoke at this time. I consider this evidence, namely that JF left because of cannabis use, was another detail which was untrue and intended to cast aspersions on JF’s character and to falsely portray the accused as an upstanding guardian. 686 I acknowledge that both the accused and JF gave evidence that the accused disapproved of AW attending at 34 Owl Drive as he was alleged to have stolen a pushbike and that he then banned AW from attending there. I also accept the accused’s evidence that he disapproved of AW spending so much time at his home. 687 I consider it likely that the accused was concerned to avoid 34 Owl Drive being an object for police attention, which is not surprising given he must have had a volume of cannabis in his possession there. This is consistent with the accused being concerned in the past about others bringing stolen property to his home, thus attracting unwanted police attention on him. -- 120 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 117 688 The fact that GW described the text messages sent by JF in which she demanded the return of her belongs as ‘blackmailing text messages’, demonstrated her level of support for the accused. 689 I note that much of GW’s evidence was directed at establishing that she (or her property) had been targeted by persons associated with JF after the accused’s arrest. If that is so, whilst any such conduct is inexcusable, it was likely an inappropriate response to the anger and frustration felt by those persons, upon learning of the nature of the allegations. 690 GW gave evidence that she saw JF standing on the corner, and therefore nearby, at the time LF and AW were bashing on her door and damaging the Hyundai Trajet. After carefully considering all of GW’s evidence, I am unable to accept this evidence, in the absence of any independent evidence to support it. 691 As previously stated, it was my impression that by her evidence, GW was careful to describe the accused in only positive terms, while simultaneously intending to portray JF in the worst possible light. 692 Further, even if JF was nearby when LF (and/or AW) damaged the Hyundai Trajet, that does not cause me to otherwise doubt the reliability and credibility of her evidence as to the allegations. JF was aged only 16 at the time of the accused’s arrest (and the alleged incident involving the Hyundai Trajet). Her mother had left her and it is quite clear from the text messages in Exhibit D7 that she was desperate to reconnect with her mother and/or biological father. LF was JF’s biological father. 693 Given JF’s age, upbringing and personal circumstances, I consider it most unlikely that she would have had either the emotional (or physical) strength to control LF’s actions at that time, even if she disagreed with such actions. Accused’s Evidence 694 Although the accused bears no onus, for me to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the accused’s guilt as to either count, I must reject his denials of the alleged offending, as not being a reasonable possibility. 695 I have had the opportunity of observing the audio-visual record of the accused’s interview with police, conducted in the early hours of Friday 12 May 2023 shortly after his arrest. I also had the opportunity to observe the accused give evidence. 696 The accused was in obvious distress during the ROI and clearly anxious to be given the opportunity to be released on bail. He was shaking and at times appeared to be finding it difficult to speak. He spent much of the ROI with his hands in his head and at times seemed to be either crying or close to tears. -- 121 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 118 697 For the reasons as previously outlined, I have not used the evidence relating to police attempts to locate the accused, or the fact he was the found hiding under a bed at GW’s house at the time of his arrest, as circumstantial evidence supporting an inference of the accused’s guilt. 698 During the ROI, when first confronted with the allegations of sexual abuse, the accused simply responded, ‘Yeah, nah’. However, he later expressly stated he was not guilty of the allegations. 699 The accused presented at trial as a simple and unsophisticated man. He was quite composed when giving his evidence-in-chief, which was, for the most part, given calmly. He responded to the various allegations of abuse without demonstrating emotion, saying simply, as to each alleged occasion of abuse, that it did not happen. 700 I acknowledge that given the delay, and the general nature of the allegations, the accused was at a forensic disadvantage in defending the allegations. It was difficult for him to refute them other than simply denying they had occurred. I have taken this forensic disadvantage into account in my assessment of the evidence. 701 When the accused was confronted with apparent inconsistencies in his evidence during cross-examination, he became noticeably confused and emotional. It would be fair to say that during cross-examination, the accused’s evidence unravelled. 702 In assessing the reliability of the accused’s evidence by reference to his evidence as to where and when he lived at various places, it is important to note that at the commencement of the accused’s evidence-in-chief, he was directed to the contents of Exhibit P2. Thereafter, he was consistently referred to the contents of that schedule. He agreed with what was in the schedule, save that he recalled living for six months at the Big4 caravan park in Helensvale after leaving Lucindale and before settling in Southport. 703 It was therefore difficult to ascertain whether he accused had any independent recollection of when and where he had lived while JF lived with him. 704 While the accused appeared confident about the specific names of some of the caravan parks in which he claimed the family had lived at various locations, neither JF nor JM were cross-examined as to whether they had stayed at specific caravan parks mentioned by the accused.607 There was also no independent evidence to enable the accuracy of that evidence (or indeed the accuracy of the schedule) to be tested. 607 However, it was put to JM that the Jim Beam incident had occurred at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay, not the Windmill Caravan Park and that they were living at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay when she left the accused. JM disagreed with both of these propositions (T 291.1-8). -- 122 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 119 705 The accused gave inconsistent evidence as to where the family was living when JM left the family unit. He initially said this occurred when they were living at the Coral Holiday Caravan Park in Hervey Bay.608 He subsequently said that JM left him when they were staying at the Pier Caravan Park in Hervey Bay.609 706 There were inaccuracies in the accused’s evidence about the periods during which the family lived in Rockhampton and at different locations in Murray Bridge. The accused was unable to recall when the family left Hervey Bay although he thought it could have been August 2021. He then agreed with a proposition put to him during examination-in-chief, that it was ‘fair to say you got to Rockhampton, maybe September, at the latest October 2021.’610 However, he then said the family stayed there for ‘just over a year’,611 before leaving to travel to South Australia. As such, on the accused’s evidence, the family did not leave Rockhampton until around September or October 2022. 707 He said they then travelled to Murray Bridge, where they stayed in the Marina Caravan Park for about four months.612 They then moved to 27 Owl Drive where they lived for three months,613 before moving to 34 Owl Drive in ‘probably January’ 2023.614 708 There are obvious issues with this timeline. There were similar discrepancies and inconsistencies with JF’s evidence on this topic.615 However, the accused is an adult who was being asked to confirm what had happened, less than two years ago. This was when he was charged with the sole responsibility of caring for three children and claimed to have ceased using methylamphetamine. The fact the accused was unable to give a clear and accurate description of where and for how long he lived during that period is of concern. 709 My overall impression of the accused was that he did not think carefully about a question, before answering it. His evidence outlined above is an example of this. Another example is the evidence the accused gave about the period immediately prior to his arrest. He gave evidence-in-chief that upon arriving at GW’s house he had smoked marijuana.616 However, in cross-examination, he said:617 A. I was there for about, not even five minutes before the police come in and found me. Q. You said you had marijuana when you were at [GW’s] house. 608 T 356.22. 609 T 378.35-36. 610 T 356.9-10. 611 T 356.13. 612 T 357.1. 613 T 357.24. 614 T 357.35-36. 615 See discussion hereunder. 616 T 389.12-15. 617 T 456.28-457.6. -- 123 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 120 A. No, I was smoking around town. Q. Your evidence before was that you got to [GW’s] - A. I smoked at [GW’s] too, yeah, but I was smoking around town too. Like at other people's houses where I was going, just wandering around to. Q. But I just asked you a second ago whether you smoked at [GW’s]. A. Sorry, I didn't know you meant just there. Q. You did smoke at [GW’s]. A. Yes. Q. How much did you smoke at [GW’s]. A. Before the cops come I probably had two cones. 710 The accused was seemingly upfront and frank about aspects of his drug use and how the couple illegitimately maximised their social security benefits. However, when the accused’s evidence is carefully analysed, it is apparent that much of his evidence was given on a superficial level and that there were numerous inconsistencies in that evidence. 711 For example, the accused gave evidence that when they were living in Rockhampton, Act for Kids were concerned to ensure he was able to properly care for the three children and that he was not on drugs, alcohol or marijuana. He said, in that context, that he had ‘stayed clean’ after he and JM broke up.618 712 However, the accused then gave evidence which demonstrated that he did not ‘stay clean’ thereafter. He continued to smoke cannabis and use alcohol. Indeed, while living at 27 Owl Drive, the accused acknowledged that he smoked cannabis pretty much every day (in the morning, afternoon and at night). He was also regularly drinking alcohol. 713 The accused’s evidence about the time he was on home detention bail in 2011 was littered with untruths and inconsistencies. 714 I acknowledge this evidence concerned events from over a decade ago, such that the accused may now have difficulty remembering the specific number of times he breached his bail agreement, or detail such as the date of any breach or precisely what the breach entailed. 715 The accused’s evidence, carefully elicited in cross-examination, was that he simply could not recall any of the alleged breaches and the other offences committed by him as outlined at paragraph 387 herein. 618 T 382.1-9. -- 124 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 121 716 However, this evidence was also given in the context of the accused putting forward a positive case that he had not taken drugs while on home detention bail and that he ‘was being behaved and doing everything right by my daughter and that’.619 The accused’s explanation for giving such evidence, which was demonstrably false,620 was that he had simply forgotten about his breaches until he heard them being discussed in court by both counsel,621 and/or that he did not know that breaches from his past would come up.622 This is inherently inconsistent with his evidence that he now had no recollection of these breaches. 717 While this is an example of the accused’s evidence being inaccurate (and therefore unreliable), importantly I consider that this was an example of the accused giving evidence which was not true, in circumstances where he thought that falsity would not otherwise become known to the Court. 718 The accused gave evidence about his abuse of methylamphetamine while in Lucindale, Southport, Merrimac, Helensvale, Upper Coomera, Roma and Hervey Bay. However, he refused to accept that there had been any impact on his memory either because of this or his long-term consumption of cannabis. Similarly, he refused to accept that his drug use ever compromised his ability to properly parent the children. 719 Notwithstanding the absence of expert evidence on the impact of the consumption of such substances, in the quantities as described by the accused, I am satisfied, as a matter of common knowledge, that the accused’s consumption of both cannabis and methamphetamine over time has had a negative impact on his ability to recall events of the past with accuracy. I am further satisfied that it is a matter of common knowledge, that excessive consumption of alcohol can impact a user’s ability to remember what they may have done (or what happened) at a time when they were under the influence of that alcohol. 720 I find that the accused’s memory of events during the period when JF lived with him has been compromised by his consumption of cannabis, methylamphetamine and alcohol during that period. 721 The accused denied ever using methylamphetamine in front of the children, contrary to JM’s evidence that there was at least one occasion when he injected meth in front of JF. He said that when he and JM smoked cannabis, he would tell them to get out of the room and they would be at the other end of the house. However, the family were living in either a car or a tent or a caravan for large periods of JF’s childhood, including when he was using methylamphetamine regularly. There was often simply no ‘other end of the house’ for the children to go to. 619 T 360.20-21. 620 Having regard to the Further Agreed Fact, Exhibit P15. 621 T 458.1-38. 622 T 459.23-24. -- 125 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 122 722 I cannot accept the evidence the accused gave on this topic, particularly given what he described to be his pattern of methamphetamine use and his persistent and daily use of cannabis. In my view, the accused’s evidence on this topic was simply untrue. 723 Having regard to all of the evidence, I find that the accused did use cannabis in front of the children, including JF and that there was at least an occasion, if not more, when he used methamphetamine in front of JF. 724 The accused denied ever giving JF alcohol and claimed to have only seen her consume one alcoholic drink, namely half a shot of Jim Beam, at 34 Owl Drive. This evidence was not only at odds with the evidence of both JF and JM, but inconsistent with what GW said, namely that JF ‘usually’ drank beer and that there were arguments caused by the fact that JF would start by having one drink but would want more than one. 725 I do not accept the accused’s evidence that he never gave JF alcohol. Similarly, I do not accept his evidence that he only gave JF cannabis in the context of her and AW smoking cannabis together. The accused’s evidence that he only ever offered JF cannabis in this context and to stop her and AW ‘wandering the streets doing it’, appears at odds with his evidence that smoking marijuana was no big deal and that everyone does it. 726 Further, having regard to all of the evidence, I reject the accused’s evidence that he never took the Ritalin prescribed for S. Both JF and JM gave evidence that they saw the accused consume Ritalin in Roma. I accept JM’s evidence that at this time, S was being prescribed more Ritalin than she needed, thus enabling the accused to consume some of those tablets. Further, I am satisfied and find, having regard to all of the evidence, that when living in Roma, the accused was consuming both cannabis and methylamphetamine. Neither he nor JM were working. On his own evidence, he was drinking heavily as he struggled to deal with his mother’s death. 727 He and JM were in debt to drug dealers. I am satisfied that money was incredibly tight. Ritalin is a stimulant, that elevates mood and increases a user’s energy levels. I consider it likely and find that the accused did take S’s Ritalin tablets while the family lived in Roma, to enable him to experience the stimulant effect of those drugs, in circumstances where he had limited funds to expend on illicit substances and alcohol and was otherwise using such substances to excess. 728 For reasons I will elaborate upon hereunder, I also accept JF’s evidence that there were times the accused gave JF Ritalin and a time when he gave her Catapres, just as there were times that he gave her alcohol and cannabis. It follows that I reject the accused’s evidence that he never gave JF Ritalin or Catapres. 729 The accused acknowledged he had thrown a Jim Beam bottle at JM. He said he had done this as he was frustrated as JM had been screaming and yelling at him for three hours straight and in circumstances where because of her constant abuse -- 126 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 123 and screaming and yelling, they had been evicted from almost every caravan park in Hervey Bay. He maintained that the fact the bottle hit her was an accident and that he was remorseful for his actions, which he insisted represented the only time he had ever assaulted JM. 730 I have carefully considered the evidence given by the accused as to his relationship with JM and with respect to the Jim Beam incident, in particular. 731 The evidence given by the accused on these topics was confused and internally inconsistent. 732 The accused claimed that notwithstanding what had occurred in Roma (that is, on his version, JM had accrued a drug debt causing their house to be targeted twice in brick throwing incidents, upsetting the children), there was no real strain on their relationship and they were pretty good together. 733 This evidence is at odds with other evidence given by the accused that when they were in Roma, he and JM were yelling and screaming at each other to the point that the police came to their house and intervened.623 I consider it implausible that, if, as the accused claimed, JM’s behaviour had caused such issues in Roma, this would not have caused any real strain on their relationship. 734 The accused maintained that when they first arrived in Hervey Bay their relationship was really good and even after the Jim Beam incident, they continued to get along well with each other, notwithstanding she left him only a few weeks later. He insisted JM left him to go and live with RH in Townsville, rather than because of any domestic violence issues. 735 In describing the Jim Beam incident, and what led up to it and what occurred thereafter, the accused attributed most of the blame on JM and downplayed the incident. It was JM’s yelling and screaming and abuse which had caused him to become frustrated and throw the bottle at her. After the incident they had both simply gone to bed and gone to sleep. Although there was a lump on JM’s head, it had gone by the next day. 736 In cross-examination, the accused described screaming and yelling as JM’s favourite thing to do. He claimed he would deal with this by simply walking away, going to his shed, or taking the kids out fishing. He said:624 Q. So she would do it all the time. A. Yeah, I'd just ignore her, go out and work on my cars. Q. And that was your way of dealing with it. 623 T 422.38-423.32. 624 T 443.16-28. -- 127 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 124 A. Yeah. Q. You wouldn't retaliate. A. No. Q. You wouldn't scream - A. Other than leave the house and go work on my cars, I was always working on cars. Q. You wouldn't scream back at her. A. I'd tell hear to get lost and stop yelling. Q. But you wouldn't scream back at her. A. No, nup. 737 In cross-examination, the accused acknowledged they had been thrown out of the Windmill Caravan Park (and other parks) in Hervey Bay for various reasons (not simply because of JM’s yelling and screaming). Those reasons included their drug use, the fact they were hanging out with other drug users and because they were both constantly fighting with each other, as they were in each other’s company ‘24/7’.625 738 The accused maintained that the incident was an accident, despite throwing the bottle at her head, when in very close proximity to her, inside the caravan, when he was significantly intoxicated. 739 The accused acknowledged he had been served with a restraining order after this incident. However, he described the order’s purpose as to ensure he and JM were civil towards each other and did not fight or argue anymore, rather than preventing him from assaulting or otherwise abusing JM. 740 Similarly, the accused’s evidence as to the circumstances in which he came to be charged with and ultimately convicted of two counts of aggravated threatening to kill, that he simply said something wrong to a DCP officer, is a further example of the way in which the accused’s evidence demonstrated his inability to take full responsibility for his actions. 741 I am satisfied that the accused was trying to downplay not only the seriousness of the Jim Beam incident, but the extent to which his actions were responsible for that incident (and the breakdown in their relationship). I am also satisfied that by his evidence, he was endeavouring to deflect much of the blame for both the bottle incident and the relationship breakdown, onto JM. 742 This was a consistent theme of the accused’s evidence. While on a superficial level, he appeared to be candid about certain aspects of his behaviour, upon closer 625 T 436.17-437.8. -- 128 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 125 scrutiny, he refused to acknowledge the impact his actions may have had on either JF or JM or to take proper accountability for the same. 743 In addition, I consider that aspects of the accused’s evidence were tailored to meet the case made against him. For example, I do not accept the accused’s evidence that he only ever drank Jim Beam or Great Northern Beer, being inconsistent with the evidence of both JF and JM, which I do accept. Another example was the evidence the accused gave about the frequency with which AW stayed overnight at 27 Owl Drive, which in my view was exaggerated with a view to rendering JF’s allegations of abuse in count 2 improbable insofar as, on his version, AW stayed overnight with such frequency, that there was insufficient opportunity for the offending to have occurred. 744 After carefully considering the accused’s evidence, I am satisfied that he was neither a credible nor a reliable witness. I am satisfied that in several important aspects, the accused was simply not telling the truth.626 745 However, it is not for the accused to prove, or disprove, anything. The accused bears no onus. It remains for me to carefully consider all of the evidence, to determine whether, as to each count, considered separately, the prosecution has proved the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable. Implied Admission/Consciousness of Guilt 746 Before turning to my assessment and analysis of the evidence given by JF, I will deal briefly with two inter-related arguments advanced by the prosecution, namely: • That the manner in which the accused replied to JF’s text messages wherein she called him a paedophile and threatened to report him to the police if he did not return her personal belongings, constituted an implied admission of the offending; and/or • That the fact the accused returned JF’s property shortly after receiving these messages was an implied admission of the offending and/or indicative of a consciousness of guilt. 747 The precise submission advanced by the prosecutor was in the following terms:627 When he was confronted in those messages with the proposition that if he didn't return the property, she would go to police for him being a paedophile, he didn't ask 'What are you talking about?', he then, in my submission, by the return of the property implicitly acquiesced to the truth of that assertion 'You're a paedophile', by not questioning the basis of the assertion, which I suggest is consistent with them having a mutual understanding of 626 Noting that insofar as I am satisfied the accused has told lies, I have only used the fact he has told lies in my assessment of his credibility. I have not used the fact he has lied as being demonstrative of any consciousness of guilt. 627 T 543.8-22. -- 129 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 126 exactly why she'd made that assertion about his character, and then complying with her request for the return of property within a prompt period of time presumably, I suggest, out of fear of the consequences that would follow. So, my submission is that that act constitutes, in effect, an admission by the accused's conduct. 748 To properly address the submission, it is important to revisit the evidence given by JF (and the accused) with respect to the messages. 749 JF gave evidence in-chief that about two weeks after she moved out of 34 Owl Drive, she sent the accused an SMS message because he had refused to give her back her important stuff such as baby photos. She said that in the message she threatened him by saying, ‘I want my stuff back or I’ll go to the cops’ and that she called him a paedophile (the paedophile message).628 750 A copy of the paedophile message was not in evidence, nor was the accused’s reply. However, JF gave the following evidence-in-chief about this message and how the accused replied to it:629 Q. So can you just tell, tell, tell her Honour exactly what this, what was said and by whom in this text message conversation with Chris. A. I don't remember what he said specifically but I remember what I said. I said 'I want my photos back'. He said something along the lines of 'Runaway girls don't get their stuff back' and then I was like 'If you don't give me my stuff back, I'll go to the cops, you paedophile' and he was like 'Gypsy's coming with it now' because he was still dating Gypsy at the time. Q. What happened after that conversation with him. A. Gypsy brought my baby photos over and that's the last time I heard from him and I ever contacted him. Q. And when did she bring your baby photos. A. I do not recall what time, but it was the same day I sent the messages. So I think it was half an hour after. I know it was afternoon. 751 During cross-examination, JF gave evidence that this message was sent before 20 March and was on her old phone which got smashed.630 752 The accused was not cross-examined about whether he received the paedophile message, or as to how he replied to any such message or why he had replied to that message in a certain way. 628 T 146.5-20. 629 T 147.1-17. 630 T 180.33-34. -- 130 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 127 753 JF also gave evidence in cross-examination about the series of text messages exchanged between JF and the accused on 20 and 21 March 2023.631 These are the messages reproduced at paragraph 258 herein. 754 While JF was adamant in cross-examination that the paedophile message was separate to these messages, and sent before them, her description of the paedophile message appears to conflate both the paedophile message and what is contained in Exhibit D7. 755 The prosecutor submitted that the accused’s failure to expressly deny JF’s allegation that he was a paedophile and/or to respond in a way which demonstrated he was surprised or shocked by the allegation, was consistent with him acquiescing to that allegation. It was further submitted that the way the accused responded was consistent with him knowing exactly what JF was talking about as he knew he had been raping JF for many years and as such there was no necessity for him to enquire what she meant by the accusation or why she had made such an accusation. 756 Whether an inference by silence can be drawn of the type as urged by the prosecution, depends on a number of factors. These include questions such as whether the accused understood what was being said and whether the facts contained in the relevant statements were within his personal knowledge. Are the circumstances such that as a matter of commonsense and ordinary experience, one would expect the accused to have responded to the messages by way of dissent?632 757 It is, of course, necessary for a finding of fact to be made as to precisely what was communicated as between JF and the accused. In this case, that means it is necessary to determine if the paedophile message as described by JF was sent, and what was the accused’s response to it. Alternatively, when JF gave her evidence- in-chief about the ‘paedophile message’ was she in fact referring to the messages in Exhibit D7? 758 I have carefully considered JF’s evidence on this topic. JF said that in response to the paedophile message, the accused stated that GW was coming over with her belongings now, and that that was the last time she heard from him. This is inconsistent with JF’s evidence that the paedophile message was sent before the text messages in Exhibit D7. It is also inconsistent with other evidence, which I do accept, that JF’s belongings were left out the front of 34 Owl Drive for her to collect. 759 I consider it likely and I find that when JF described the paedophile message during her evidence-in-chief, what she was in fact referring to was the messages in Exhibit D7. Those messages do not include any express statement by JF to the accused was a ‘paedophile’, albeit that is the obvious inference from what is contained therein. JF’s evidence that the paedophile message was a separate earlier message, sent from a different phone, was elicited after she was challenged about 631 Exhibit D7. 632 R v Spencer [2019] SASCFC 70 at [35]-[38]. -- 131 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 128 a potential prior inconsistent statement she had made to the police to the effect that she had called the accused a paedophile in the messages demanding he return her property. 760 Although, it is possible JF is correct and there were other messages, I cannot make that finding. As such, this is one aspect of her evidence that I cannot accept. This does not, however, either alone or in combination with other matters, cause me to doubt the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence as to the offending. 761 I am unable to find that there was a separate ‘paedophile’ message sent by JF to the accused. I consider that the messages JF described in her evidence-in-chief as set out at paragraph 258 herein, were in fact, the messages in Exhibit D7. 762 I have considered the entirety of the text messages as exchanged between JF and the accused in Exhibit D7 to determine whether the accused’s response amounts to either an admission by silence (or acquiescence) and/or his conduct thereafter indicative of a consciousness of guilt. 763 It is of note that the accused’s immediate response to the text message wherein JF accused him of raping her was that he was ‘going to police for you making up false allegations with your boyfriend’. While he did not say, ‘What are you talking about?’, the fact that he immediately referred to her allegations as false, in my view constitutes a denial of the allegations, rather than any implied admission. Further, in the accused’s subsequent messages, he stated that JF was ‘full of crap’ and described her messages as ‘blackmailing messages’. 764 I am not persuaded that the accused’s replies to the various messages sent by JF to him on 20 March 2023 in Exhibit D7 constitute an implied admission of the offending, rather, when viewed collectively, I am satisfied the accused in fact responded by way of dissent to the allegations. 765 I remind myself that JF’s messages to the accused cannot be used as evidence of the truth of the matters stated therein. 766 JF, AW, the accused and GW all gave evidence about the circumstances in which JF’s property was returned. 767 JF gave evidence that the accused left some of her belongings out the front of his house for her to collect, and that others were returned to her by GW. Her primary concern was to get her baby photos back. 768 AW also described going with JF to 34 Owl Drive to collect some of her belongings which had been left out the front of the house in a Coles bag. 769 The accused outlined a long list of items that he left outside his house for JF to collect, including toiletries, a pushbike, clothes, books and other items. GW gave evidence that she assisted the accused to pack up JF’s personal items, which were then left out the front of 34 Owl Drive for JF to collect. -- 132 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 129 770 The accused sent a message to JF at 8:21am on 21 March 2023, which stated ‘Your stuff is at the front’. 771 Having regard to all of the evidence, I am satisfied that the accused left JF’s personal items out the front of 34 Owl Drive, for her to collect, on the morning of 21 March 2023 and therefore ‘before tomorrow afternoon’ being the timeframe as demanded in JF’s first message in Exhibit D7. 772 The accused gave evidence that he and GW agreed to return JF’s property to her, as JF needed her clothes and wanted her things back. He agreed with a proposition that he did this to help JF out, and not because he was concerned that she would make good on her threat to report him to the police for raping her, if he did not do so. GW gave evidence that she helped the accused pack up the items simply because JF had asked for her stuff back. 773 The evidence was insufficient to support a finding that JF had made repeated requests of the accused for her belongings to be returned to her, that he had either refused to do so (or ignored those requests) and that he had only then acceded to those requests when confronted with JF’s threat to report him to the police for raping her. 774 I find that within a day of being asked to facilitate the return of JF’s belongings, albeit with that request being accompanied by a threat to report him to the police for raping her if he did not comply, the accused took steps to pack up JF’s belongings and leave them outside his house for her to collect. 775 I have carefully considered whether there is a satisfactory innocent explanation for the accused’s conduct. 776 The items requested by JF were items of sentimental value to her, but not of any significant monetary value. The items included JF’s toothbrush, toothpaste and hairbrush, which may be considered items of necessity. These were items JF not only wanted but needed. They were not items that served any purpose to the accused. 777 Notwithstanding my concerns about the accused’s reliability and credibility, I accept his explanation that he facilitated the return of these items to JF as she wanted and needed them, not by way of any implicit acceptance of the accusations she had made in the text messages, or out of fear of the consequences that would follow if he did not do so. 778 As such, I have not used the accused’s responses as outlined in the text messages, or his conduct in returning JF’s property after receiving these messages, as an implied admission and/or as indicative of a consciousness of guilt. -- 133 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 130 JF’s Evidence General Observations 779 JF’s evidence is critical to the prosecution case and as such, I must scrutinise her evidence with care.633 I must be satisfied that JF is both a credible and reliable witness, and I must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she is telling the truth about the alleged offending. 780 My assessment of JF’s evidence has necessarily been informed by both her age and personal circumstances at the time of the alleged offending in each count and when she gave her evidence.634 781 JF’s childhood was characterised by poverty, homelessness and neglect. She moved schools frequently and missed lengthy periods of schooling. She did not stay in one place long enough to make any real or lasting friendships. She had no adult in her life who was a positive role model and her primary carers were drug addicts who did not prioritise her care and wellbeing. 782 Generally speaking, JF’s ability to recall where she lived, the house or caravan she lived in at various locations and the approximate period when she lived at each location was remarkable. JF acknowledged she had spoken to JM about this before she prepared the schedule in Exhibit P2. However, she gave what was, for the most part, a consistent account of the family’s multiple moves, whether JM or the accused were working at various stages and what school she attended from time to time. 783 After listening carefully to JF’s evidence, and observing her demeanour while giving such evidence, I am satisfied that she has an independent recollection of these matters. 784 This was not a case where JF was consistently being challenged about multiple inconsistencies in her evidence as compared to what she may have told police in earlier statements, notwithstanding the detailed and ‘fact heavy’ timeline of events as narrated by her. Indeed, there were, comparatively speaking, few apparent prior inconsistencies raised with JF during cross-examination. Those which were raised will be discussed in more detail below. 785 The very fact JF and the family moved so many times and lived in so many different locations served as an anchor for JF to retrieve various memories, including memories of the alleged offending and of the alleged uncharged acts of sexual abuse which occurred interstate. Her description of the circumstances which were ancillary to the alleged sexual abuse she claimed had been perpetuated by the accused against her, not only in counts 1 and 2 but at multiple different locations across Australia, was also, for the most part, consistent. 633 Murray v R (2002) 211 CLR 193. 634 JF was aged 17 when she gave her evidence. -- 134 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 131 786 That is not to say there were no such inconsistencies (or anomalies) in JF’s evidence. However, when regard is had to the sheer volume of material which JF was being asked to recall, in significant detail, covering virtually the entirety of her childhood, one would expect there to be some such inconsistencies or anomalies. No one has a perfect memory. 787 This is not a case where JF could be said to be mistaken in any way about the alleged offending, given the sheer number of different acts and occasions of abuse described by JF. 788 Similarly, this is not a case where it was suggested that JF had dreamt or imagined the offending, in circumstances associated with her consumption of alcohol or any other drug. 789 I am mindful of Professor White’s evidence that there is some research which indicates psychotic symptoms such as paranoia, delusions and hallucinations can occur as a rare side effect of the consumption of Ritalin. However, JF described the accused administering Ritalin to her on only three separate occasions and recalled being sexually abused by the accused on only one such occasion. 790 I am satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that JF’s description of years of sexual abuse perpetuated against her by the accused is the product of a rare side effect of her modest prior consumption of Ritalin in Roma and Rockhampton. 791 Although JF gave evidence of occasions when she claimed the accused had abused her after she had consumed alcohol and one occasion when he abused her after consuming cannabis, I am satisfied that her consumption of these substances has not led her to have false memories about the abuse. 792 As such, I am satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that JF’s recollection of being the victim over many years of multiple acts of sexual abuse committed by the accused is the result of a dream or dreams or the product of her imagination, whether caused by her consumption of alcohol, cannabis or otherwise. 793 Defence counsel criticised JF’s demeanour and affect when giving her evidence. It was submitted that JF showed no emotion when describing the various acts of abuse and was confident and matter of fact, being indicative of her simply telling a practised or rehearsed story. 794 I agree with defence counsel’s observation that JF showed little, if any, emotion when describing the various acts of abuse. The language she used and the way she recounted these traumatic events was very matter of fact. 795 However, on JF’s account, what she was describing was simply a routine part of her life. On JF’s account, the abuse had occurred so many times throughout the course of her short life, that it was not unusual or, except in certain circumstances, -- 135 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 132 memorable or remarkable in any way. It was simply ‘normal’ to her – as was the fact she grew up living in various caravan parks, never having a proper place to call home, never having time to settle into a school and make friends before the family moved on to the next location. This was the only life that JF knew. 796 In addition, the alleged abuse was perpetuated against JF by her step-father, someone who she also calmly and candidly described giving a hug goodnight to, every night before she went to bed. The accused was the person JF was wholly dependent upon, from when JM left the family in Hervey Bay until JF finally left 34 Owl Drive in February 2023. 797 In such circumstances, the fact that JF delivered her evidence, mostly without emotion and in a generally calm and pragmatic way, in my view lent further credibility and rawness to her account, rather than detracting from it. 798 Defence counsel was also critical of JF insofar as she described many of the various occasions of sexual abuse as occurring in a similar way, in terms of how the accused touched her and/or the type of sexual act or acts that were undertaken. 799 However, JF described being abused multiple times in multiple locations over multiple years. While the circumstances ancillary to various occasions of abuse may have been different (ie did it occur in Tailem Bend or Southport, did it happen in her bedroom or in a caravan or a shower block), where the alleged abuse occurred in similar circumstances in a similar place, it is unsurprising that JF may not now accurately recall whether on a specific occasion she was wearing a sports bra, or if oral sex occurred or some other detail. On JF’s version, the abuse occurred so many times over such an extended period, that it is understandable that she may now not be able to accurately delineate one occasion from another or may have confused the circumstances or details of an occasion of abuse with another, when giving evidence about such traumatic events from her childhood. 800 Of course, the whole of JF’s evidence needs to be critically assessed to ascertain whether the nature or number of any inconsistencies or anomalies are such that, considered together and in the context of all of the evidence, they cause me to have a reasonable doubt as to the reliability and credibility of her account as to the alleged offending. 801 After carefully undertaking this task, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that notwithstanding there were some inconsistencies and potential anomalies in JF’s account, the evidence she gave about the alleged offending in counts 1 and 2 was both credible and reliable. Credibility/Truthfulness of JF’s Account Motive to Lie 802 There was evidence led which suggested that there was a specific motive (or motives) for JF to lie about the offending. -- 136 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 133 803 The first motive was said to relate to JF’s desire to facilitate the return of various items of her personal property, and/or her dissatisfaction with the outcome of her requests for the return of such property, after she left 34 Owl Drive. The alleged motive was said to be apparent from the text messages exchanged between JF and the accused which included a threat by JF to report the accused to the police for raping her if he did not arrange for the return to her of her personal items.635 804 However, notwithstanding there were some differences in the evidence given by JF, AW, GW and the accused as to how JF’s property was returned to her, there was a consensus of opinion that the property was, in fact, returned. I am satisfied that most of JF’s property was left out the front of 34 Owl Drive for her to collect at about 8:20am on 21 March 2023. JF gave evidence that she did, indeed, eventually get all of her belongings back. She disagreed with a proposition put to her that the only reason she reported the alleged offending to police, was because she was unhappy with the outcome of her requests for the return of her property.636 805 It was an agreed fact that JF attended at the Murray Bridge Police Station to report the alleged offending at about 3:30pm on 21 March 2023, that is, after the accused and GW had packed up the various items and left them outside for JF to collect. 806 Even if there was a delay in some of the items being returned, the fact is, they were returned. If JF was lying about the offending to get her belongings back, there was simply no need for her to continue that lie. 807 Further, as outlined below, I find that JF told AW about the alleged offending before she sent the text messages in Exhibit D7. 808 A second potential motive to lie was said to arise from the accused prohibiting AW from continuing to attend at 34 Owl Drive, after he allegedly stole a pushbike.637 809 I accept that this may have played a role in JF’s decision to run away from 34 Owl Drive at the time that she did. However, it simply makes no sense for it to then cause her to make up an elaborate lie about the offending. 810 Once JF left 34 Owl Drive, she was free to see AW as and when she pleased. JF did not complain about the alleged offending or report it until after she left 34 Owl Drive. 811 I am not satisfied that either of these matters provided JF with a motive to lie about the offending. 635 Exhibit D7. 636 T 157.4-21. 637 Noting JF was never questioned as to whether she was lying about the offending because of this. -- 137 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 134 812 However, the fact that I have rejected there being a motive for JF to lie does not strengthen the prosecution case, nor does it mean JF must necessarily be telling the truth. People can lie for many and varied reasons, none of which may be readily apparent from all of the circumstances. 813 I must carefully consider whether I can be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that JF is telling the truth. JF’s Poor Character 814 In this case, my assessment of JF’s evidence must be undertaken in the context of evidence which either established, or suggested, that JF had the capacity to act dishonestly. 815 GW accused JF of being present when KF and AW damaged her Hyundai Trajet. According to GW, this occurred after she was followed home from the accused’s house. GW lived in Lorikeet Ave, not at 34 Owl Drive. 816 JF was never cross-examined as to whether she had any knowledge of a vehicle (or vehicles) being damaged in Lorikeet Ave or specifically whether she was present when others damaged a Hyundai Trajet belonging to GW. Rather she was cross-examined on this topic as follows:638 Q. Do you know of an incident where [AW] is facing the charge of property damage. A. No, I did not. Q. Do you know of an incident where your father attended 34 Owl Drive. A. No, I did not. Q. So what you're saying is you know nothing of any incidents of property damage outside 34 Owl Drive. A. Yes. I do not know anything about them. Q. If I suggested to you that you were present when two cars were damaged outside 34 Owl Drive, would you agree with that proposition. A. No. 817 For reasons previously outlined, I do not accept GW’s evidence that JF was present when this vehicle was damaged. Even if she was present, that does not cause me to doubt the credibility of JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending. 818 However, in the text messages exchanged between JF and the accused on 20 March 2023, the accused stated:639 638 T 159.1-13, noting there was no evidence that AW had ever been investigated by police for any such property damage. 639 Exhibit D7 at p 1. -- 138 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 135 … I’ve had the police come to my house over your shoplifting…go find somewhere to get your life back on track you’ll be in jail before you know it. 819 JF replied:640 Wow one mistake and you do this remember u done worse … 820 Although JF was not questioned about any allegation that she had engaged in shoplifting, I am satisfied that by JF’s response, she implicitly acknowledged that she had engaged in shoplifting (and therefore, that she had acted dishonestly). 821 There was no evidence as to what items were taken by JF, nor whether they were recovered, not whether she was ever charged by police for any such offending, and if so, what she told them about it. Her response to the accused was, in my view, a frank admission of her conduct. She did not deny it nor offer an excuse for it. 822 JF gave candid evidence about the fact that she had consumed alcohol while underage and had smoked (and therefore been in possession of) cannabis. 823 I have carefully considered this evidence, namely that JF has, in the past, acted dishonestly, and illegally, when assessing her evidence. Improbability of Account 824 Defence counsel highlighted various aspects of JF’s version of events which he submitted were either implausible or highly improbable, thus telling against the credibility of JF’s evidence. I will deal with those and other aspects of JF’s evidence which could arguably fall into this category. JF stayed with the accused when JM left the family unit 825 Defence counsel submitted that the fact JF stayed with the accused and did not leave with JM, should cause the Court to doubt the veracity of her account. Put simply, why would JF choose to stay with her abuser? 826 JM left the family unit in Hervey Bay when JF was aged 14 shortly after the Jim Beam bottle incident. As previously stated, JM gave evidence, which I accept, that when she left the accused, she tried to take the children with her, but the accused stopped her from doing so. The accused gave evidence to the same effect. As such, I am satisfied that JF simply did not have the opportunity to go with JM when JM left the accused. 827 JM said she had no contact with JF until after JF fled 34 Owl Drive. The text messages in Exhibit D7 demonstrate that, at least at that time, JF did not know how to contact JM. 640 Ibid at p 2. -- 139 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 136 828 I find that at the time JM left, JF was wholly dependent and reliant on the accused. 829 JF was not questioned specifically about why she stayed living with the accused after JM left the family unit. The accused gave evidence about a discussion with police at the Marlborough police station, during which JF was present, whereby two choices were presented, either she be placed in police custody and taken into child welfare, or the accused could continue to take responsibility for her. He said, ‘I took responsibility’.641 There was no evidence that JF was the one who made the decision to remain in the accused’s care nor any evidence that there was any discussion about JF’s options other than in the accused’s presence. 830 It must be remembered that JF knew no other life than the one she was living. Only JM and the accused had been constant adult presences in her life – and JM had left her. 831 If the accused’s evidence on this issue is accurate, then it is perfectly understandable that JF would choose to stay with the accused. She knew she would be fed and have a bed to sleep in. If she left, then she would be leaving both S and C with the accused and she would be entirely on her own. 832 While to an outsider this may seem an unusual choice to make, it is certainly explicable having regard to all of these circumstances. It does not, either of itself or in combination with other matters, cause me to doubt the veracity of JF’s account as to the offending. Failure of authorities (and/or JM) to identify any sexual abuse 833 Counsel for the accused submitted that if the abuse had occurred, it was simply implausible and/or improbable that this would not have been ‘picked up’ by either JM, who lived in very close proximity with the accused and spent so much time with him (and JF) and/or the various authorities with whom the family came into contact. 834 I am satisfied, from all of the evidence, that there were occasions when police attended at either the home or caravan, at which time JF was present, to investigate noise complaints and/or potential drug or domestic violence issues. 835 In addition, JF agreed with a proposition put to her in cross-examination that she attended the Maryborough police station on 27 June 2021 with the accused, after JM had left the family unit. 836 There were therefore potential opportunities for the police to make observations of the circumstances in which JF (and S and C) were living. It is 641 T 380.9-17. -- 140 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 137 possible that JF also spoke to the police at Maryborough,642 but, having regard to the accused’s evidence, and that of JF, it seems likely and I find that any such discussions were in the accused’s presence. It is most unlikely the police would have been in a position to ascertain that any alleged sexual abuse had occurred, unless, of course, JF had told them about it. The fact she did not do so can be readily understood, given the accused was present. 837 JF also agreed with a proposition put to her in cross-examination that she attended at the offices of Act for Kids in Rockhampton. JF said she attended there with the accused, S and C but that she did not recall ever speaking individually (that is, alone) with one of the people there. She described there being group meetings involving her, the accused, S and C. 838 Although the accused gave evidence that the children spoke to a woman at Act for Kids about their living arrangements, there was no evidence that JF ever spoke to anyone at Act for Kids by herself. Further, the accused gave evidence that despite Act for Kids seeking to confirm from those meetings that the children were in school and he was not doing drugs, he did, in fact, continue to use cannabis. While this organisation was obviously concerned to act in the best welfare of the children, it is difficult to see how they could have identified the fact of the abuse from their interactions with JF, unless, of course, JF told them about it. 839 Even if JF did speak individually with a counsellor there, this was shortly after her mother had left the family. As previously outlined, at this time, JF was solely dependent on the accused and no longer in contact with her mother. Had she disclosed the abuse then, she would have been removed from the family unit, taken in by the authorities and placed in care. 840 As previously outlined, the alleged offending in count 1 was said to have occurred when JM was in another room at the Webb St, Tailem Bend house and when she had left to go to the shop in Lucindale. The alleged offending in count 2 occurred after JM had left the family unit. Many of the alleged uncharged sexual acts were described as occurring when JM was at work or had temporarily left the caravan or house for a particular reason. 841 It is perhaps trite to say that sexual abuse of children occurs regularly, without detection. The fact that the police, or a counsellor or social worker at Act for Kids, who may have had momentary interactions with JF did not identify that she was a potential victim of sexual abuse, does not, in my view, render her account either improbable or implausible. 842 Similarly, the fact JM did not identify anything of concern between the accused and JF or suspect that JF may have been a victim of any such abuse is 642 JF did not recall speaking to the police at the station. This was shortly after her mother had left them. This must have been a very unsettling and difficult time for JF. This may explain any inability on her part to recall speaking to the police at that time. -- 141 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 138 readily explicable, given her issues with substance abuse, domestic abuse and other responsibilities such as work and caring for a newborn baby. 843 The sad reality is that this type of abuse can go unnoticed for many years, even by those living with a victim and perpetrator. Opportunistic/Risky offending 844 JF gave evidence that when they were living at Upper Coomera, in a caravan park, the accused sexually abused her on two separate occasions after he followed her into the female shower block at the park. One occasion was said to have occurred at about 7:30am on a school day. Another occurred at around 8:30am. 845 It was submitted that it was simply implausible that this abuse could have occurred, given the likelihood that others would be using these facilities at this time of the morning. There was therefore the very real likelihood of the alleged abuse being detected (or at least, the accused being seen in that facility, and questions asked). 846 However, there was no evidence as to how many people were resident (or staying) at the caravan park at the relevant time or the demographic of those users. If they were holiday makers, then there is every possibility they may choose to start their day later and at a more leisurely pace. Some residents would have had shower and toilet facilities in their caravans. 847 Of course, it is unlikely the accused would follow JF into the shower block if others were present there. However, if the shower block was otherwise empty, it would have been relatively simple for the accused to follow JF and then enter a cubicle with her, shut the door, turn on the shower and abuse her. Had anyone else entered the shower block, the accused could simply have waited for them to leave, or be preoccupied showering, before he left the cubicle. 848 The alleged offending in Lucindale (which JF said occurred when JM left the unit to walk to the nearby shops) and the uncharged abuse in both Mataranka and Helensvale (which JF said occurred when JM had left the caravan to have a shower) also fall into this category. It was submitted that it was implausible that the accused would have undertaken such risky behaviour, given that JM could have returned at any time. 849 While there was a risk of detection, particularly on these alleged occasions of abuse, I note what was said by Doyle CJ in R v Corrigan, namely:643 … it is an unfortunate fact that it is not uncommon for sexual offences involving children and young people to be committed in circumstances in which a dispassionate observer would think an attempt to commit the offence would be unlikely because of the risk of detection. 643 (1998) 74 SASR 454 at 468. -- 142 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 139 This does not mean that the jury, or the Court on appeal, is to suspend judgment and to consider the facts on the basis that anything is possible or plausible. But, on the other hand, the Court should be careful before it treats evidence of a sexual offence as inherently implausible because the Court would not have expected the offender to commit the offence in the circumstances described. 850 JM did not work when the family lived in Lucindale. They lived in a caravan in Mataranka and at Helensvale. Both JM and the accused worked in Mataranka. JM did not work in Helensvale. There was, in fact, limited opportunity at these locations for the accused to offend against JF, given the family lived in such close quarters. However, the opportunity did arise when JM left the unit (or caravan) and/or if the accused was alone with JF away from the unit or caravan. When viewed in this context, the circumstances of abuse as described by JF at Lucindale, Mataranka and Helensvale are not implausible. 851 However, counsel for the accused raised other aspects of JF’s account with respect to these occasions of abuse, as rendering that account unlikely (or, at the very least, cast doubt on the truthfulness and accuracy of JF’s account). 852 The alleged offending at Lucindale relates to count 1. JF gave evidence that the abuse ended when the accused received a text message from JM advising she was on her way home from the shops. It was submitted that as the shops were only a short distance away, it was unlikely JM would need to inform the accused she was returning. JM was not questioned on her usual practice in this respect. However, it is, in my view, not unlikely that such a communication would be made, particularly if JM had been delayed and was returning later than expected, or if she was simply checking if he wanted anything else from the shop before she left. There are many reasons why JM may have seen fit to let the accused know she was on her way home. This is also potentially consistent with other evidence that the accused controlled aspects of JM’s behaviour. 853 A more difficult aspect of this evidence was JF’s explanation as to how she knew the message had been sent by her mother. The explanation she gave was that that she had seen the accused look at his phone and say ‘oh shit’. She said she knew the message was from her mother because she saw the notification on the accused’s phone and although she did not see what was written, she knew JM’s writing. JM had then appeared at the door about five minutes later. 854 I have carefully considered this evidence. I consider it unlikely that JF saw the message in question. I consider it likely and I find that after she saw the accused respond to the message in this way, and her mother’s arrival home shortly thereafter, JF simply assumed the message was from her mother. I consider it likely that she is now mistaken in her recollection that she in fact saw the message. However, that does not cause me to otherwise doubt the credibility and reliability of JF’s account of this incident. 855 JM gave evidence that a man called Johnno stayed with the family for a couple of weeks when they were living in Lucindale. JF did not recall this. There -- 143 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 140 was no evidence that Johnno lived with the family in Lucindale for the entirety of their time there. As such, if JM’s evidence to this effect is accurate, that does not mean there was no opportunity for the offending to have occurred in the way described by JF. 856 Further, insofar as it may be suggested that JF’s failure to recall that Johnno stayed with the family for some time in Lucindale, casts doubt on the reliability of her evidence, it must be remembered that JF was only aged six when the family lived in Lucindale. The accused gave evidence that his homeless mates often stayed with the family. It was therefore not unusual for there to be a visitor staying. JF’s inability to recall this minor ancillary detail does not cause me to doubt the reliability of her evidence as to the offending. 857 JF gave evidence of occasions of alleged penile vaginal intercourse in the caravan at both Mataranka and Helensvale when her mother had left to go for a shower. 858 The family were living in the Millard caravan at Mataranka. JF gave evidence that at about 9:00pm one night, when her mother was having a shower at facilities external to the van, the accused pulled her ‘butt’ off the top bunk (where she had been lying), slid her underwear across and put his penis in her vagina. He did not take her underwear off. She said this happened for about ten minutes. 859 JF said, at first, that the abuse stopped because the accused heard JM starting to open the caravan door. He then slid her underwear back and pushed her back onto the bed as if nothing had happened. In cross examination, JF confirmed the caravan door was only 50 cm away from the bunk bed where the alleged abuse was occurring. As per the plan in Exhibit P5, the door was immediately adjacent to the bunk beds. JF said she heard her mum outside the caravan, hanging up her towel. 860 It was submitted that given the very close proximity of the door to the bunk bed, there was simply no possibility that this offending could have gone undetected in the circumstances as described by JF. 861 JF’s response as outlined above, that is, that she heard her mum outside hanging up her towel, was delivered spontaneously. It was not the case that JF paused and had to search for an answer as to why it was that her mother did not immediately open the door and see them. JM’s explanation also makes sense. If JM had gone to take a shower, it is likely she took her towel with her, which she would have needed to hang upon her return to the caravan. 862 JF’s initial evidence was simply that the abuse stopped because the accused heard her mum open the door. If that evidence is interpreted literally, it is arguably inconsistent with JF’s later explanation, that she heard her mum hanging her towel outside (the natural inference then being, that what she meant was, the abuse stopped because the accused also heard JM outside the door, rather than hearing her open the door). -- 144 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 141 863 Given JF’s age, disrupted education and unusual personal circumstances, it is not unexpected that at times during her evidence, the language she used to convey her thoughts, was imperfect. I consider it likely that JF simply remembered the abuse stopped because her mum had come back to the caravan from the shower, and that the words she used in her evidence simply expressed that memory imprecisely. 864 JF’s underwear was not removed, meaning it was relatively simple for the accused to push her back on her bed and then ‘fix’ his underwear, something which could be done in a matter of seconds. 865 JF also gave evidence of an occasion when they were living in the Roadmaster caravan at Helensvale, and the accused sexually abused her when JM went to take a shower in the shower block. She described the accused forcing her to have penile vaginal intercourse on his bed in the caravan for about 20 minutes, with her mum returning about ten minutes thereafter. 866 Again, while there was a risk of the accused’s conduct being detected, he and JM had lived in a caravan together for several years. The accused would have been familiar with JM’s daily routine, and aware of how long she usually took, when she went to the shower. JF’s estimate of how long the intercourse lasted must only be an estimate – she would not have timed it – and as this was an unpleasant and traumatic experience for her, her perception of time may be incorrect. It may have felt like it took longer than it actually did. 867 Although the accused’s behaviour was risky in each of these instances, it was not, in my view, inherently implausible, as submitted. JF’s account exaggerated and/or simply impossible 868 Counsel for the accused submitted that there were aspects of JF’s account that were simply unbelievable insofar as what she described could not have happened. 869 An important example of such evidence was JF’s assertion that the accused had sexually abused her on the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan. It was submitted that there was simply insufficient space in that middle bunk for the accused to have engaged in sexual intercourse with JF. 870 Exhibit D8 is a photograph of a triple bunk in a caravan. However, JF said that this was a different triple bunk to the one in which this abuse had occurred. She said the accused built the triple bunk depicted in Exhibit D8 after the alleged offending. JF said the triple bunks had been located in a different position inside the caravan when that abuse had occurred. She said at that time, the bottom bunk was lower to the ground and that all three bunks were lower. However, she agreed that the available space in the middle bunk at that time was similar to that depicted in Exhibit D8 and agreed with an estimate of about 600 mm. -- 145 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 142 871 As outlined previously, JF did not give an account of any offending having occurred in the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan during her evidence-in- chief. However, during cross-examination, when questioned with a view to establishing a potential prior inconsistent statement, that is, that she had told the police about alleged sexual abuse on that middle bunk, but had omitted to say this in her evidence, JF agreed that the accused had had ‘sex’ with her, in some form, on the middle bunk of that caravan.644 872 However, the evidence she gave of what precisely occurred on that middle bunk was limited having regard to how it was elicited. After confirming she slept on the middle bunk as depicted in Exhibit D8, JF gave the following evidence:645 Q. And you - did you ever tell the police that. And you've said that you had - that Mr Bleyenberg was in there and had sex with you on at least one occasion, didn't you. A. Yes. 873 JF agreed with the proposition that, ‘[the accused] got in that bunk with you and acted against you in a sexual way’.646 874 Although the accused is not a large man, I agree that it is unlikely to be physically possible for him to engage in either anal intercourse or penile vaginal intercourse, with JF, in the space available as depicted in the middle bunk on Exhibit D8. However, there is, in my view, enough space for the accused to lie in that space, next to a young child, and indecently touch them, or engage in digital penetration. 875 JF never described the alleged sexual activity undertaken on the middle bunk of the Roadmaster caravan, nor did she say where this occurred. However, I am satisfied from all the evidence that the Roadmaster caravan was acquired by the accused and JM in or about 2018. JF was about 11 at this time and therefore not a very young child. Further, the type of abuse JF described as occurring from when they lived in Southport (that is, from when she was about seven) all involved either penile vaginal intercourse, fellatio or anal intercourse. I agree with the submission that such activity could not have occurred in the limited space available in that middle bunk. 876 JM also gave evidence about that the configuration of the bunk beds in the Roadmaster caravan. Importantly, she said that when the caravan was first acquired in 2018, it had ‘double bunk beds’ opposite the door.647 She said that when they bought the caravan, the bunk beds were not there at all and that immediately after they bought the caravan, ‘we had bunk beds built for the girls’.648 Those bunk beds were originally ‘across the front of the caravan, across the lounge section, 644 T 190.26-29. 645 T 192.12-15. 646 T 195.7-10. 647 T 239.23-27. 648 T 240.25. -- 146 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 143 with the lounge still left underneath and then moved to where they are sitting now so they could be made into a triple.’649 877 The accused gave evidence that when the family decided to leave Roma, that is, well after the family left Helensvale, he ‘put the caravan back together because I was rebuilding it’.650 I am satisfied this was a reference to the Roadmaster caravan. 878 JM said the triple bunk was never in the position as depicted in Exhibit D8 at any time when she lived in the Roadmaster caravan. JM lived in that caravan in Hervey Bay, after the family left Roma. The triple bunk in Exhibit D8 is quite clearly a custom-built bunk bed, made to specifically sleep three children. A third bunk was only needed once C was old enough to need a bed to sleep in. C was born in March 2018. 879 I have carefully considered all of the evidence on this topic. I accept the evidence of JM (supported by that of JF) and find that there was a time when there was only a double bunk, not a triple bunk, in the Roadmaster caravan, and that the triple bunk was built after the family had lived in the caravan for a period. 880 The family lived in the Roadmaster caravan in Helensvale and Upper Coomera, before they moved to Roma. C was still an infant at that time. Notwithstanding JF maintained she had been abused on the middle triple bunk, it is certainly possible that as she recalls being abused in her bed in that caravan, and she also now recalls her bed in that caravan as being the middle triple bunk, that she is mistaken in her recollection that the abuse occurred in that middle bunk. It is possible that the abuse she now recalls in fact occurred in her bed in that caravan at a time before the double bunk was made into a triple. 881 Of course, this is only a potential explanation for what is otherwise an anomaly in JF’s evidence. Another is that she is simply not telling the truth about this alleged occasion of abuse. However, my overall impression, from carefully listening and watching JF give evidence, and carefully scrutinising her evidence, was that she was telling the truth about the alleged abuse. I believe her evidence that she was sexually abused, in some way, by the accused in her bunk bed in the Roadmaster caravan. However, for the reasons as outlined, I consider she is now mistaken in her recollection that the abuse occurred on the middle triple bunk. 882 Counsel for the accused also submitted that JF’s description of alleged sexual abuse on New Years Eve at Rockhampton was simply incredible and/or an example of gross exaggeration. 883 JF described the accused as being highly intoxicated after drinking since around 1pm that day. She estimated he had about 12 apple ciders and six Jim Beams. She had also been drinking. She claimed that when they got back to the caravan, after about 11:00pm, the accused was so drunk he could barely walk or 649 T 240.33-35. 650 T 377.27-28. -- 147 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 144 talk. However, she claimed he duct-taped her hands together, then they engaged in oral and digital sex for two hours and penile intercourse for an hour.651 It was submitted that the activity she described was simply inconsistent with her description of the accused’s level of intoxication and could not have happened. 884 JF was candid in her recollection that when this occurred, she herself was very drunk. She described herself as starting to black out during the abuse and said the accused also passed out. However, she could see and feel what was happening, and the next day she remembered what had happened. 885 JF’s description of the abuse occurring over a period of some three hours needs to be considered in that context. I accept that it felt to JF, in her own intoxicated state, that this abuse went on for hours. This is unlikely to be precisely accurate in terms of the actual time involved. It may be an over-estimation. 886 Whilst the task of tying someone’s hands with tape requires some dexterity, on JF’s evidence, this was something the accused had done to her on other occasions. The accused was someone capable of fixing cars and rebuilding a caravan. The accused was also someone who drank regularly to excess. Notwithstanding how drunk JF claimed the accused was at this time, I consider this was as task he would be capable of undertaking. 887 JF could not remember how she removed the tape on this occasion, although she said that on other occasions when the accused had also taped her hands, she had been able to break it off. 888 JF also remembered that during this incident the told the accused to stop as it was hurting her. He was being really aggressive and forceful. She recalled it was stinging and hurting, being something that did not ordinarily happen as at that time, as she was so used to the abuse. I consider this was a feature of this incident which made it different from others that were similar such that it was an incident she remembered. 889 I am mindful that JF said S and C were also in the caravan at the time of this alleged abuse. JF said they were asleep, consistent with it being after 11:00pm at night. C was only aged 2 and S was aged about 9 or 10. While there was a possibility that S may have heard or even seen what was happening, by this stage, on JF’s account, the accused had been abusing her for years without detection. The accused was S’s full biological daughter. She, like JF, must have known no other life than the one they were leading. Given her age, even if she saw or heard this, she may not have even appreciated that what was happening was wrong. Insofar as it may be suggested that the fact S was present in the caravan renders this offending implausible, I reject that suggestion. 890 JF gave a detailed description of what happened to her on that specific occasion, including the period immediately prior to the abuse, on that occasion. 651 T 112.2-29; T 109.21-34. -- 148 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 145 She was tested in cross-examination and steadfastly maintained her version of events. I accept her evidence that this incident occurred. 891 I note that both the accused and JF gave evidence that for a period when the family lived in Rockhampton, the accused was seeing a woman called Cassie. JF said they were living in the villa (not the caravan) for some of that time. It was not suggested to JF that the offending on New Years Eve could not have occurred because Cassie was present, nor did the accused give any evidence to that effect. 892 I am satisfied that there was the opportunity for the offending in Rockhampton to have occurred, notwithstanding the accused was in a relationship with Cassie for part of the time the family lived in Rockhampton. 893 Counsel for the accused submitted that JF’s evidence that the government had allowed her to take a year off school because she had been picked on by her grade 2 teacher was simply fanciful. 894 In cross-examination, JF was asked what more she could tell the Court about this. She said that when she was in grade 2, she said something in front of the class. Her teacher responded by saying something cruel about her teeth and thereafter, she did not go back to school for a year. 895 It was never suggested to JF that this incident with the grade 2 teacher did not occur. Neither the accused nor JM were specifically questioned about any incident involving JF’s grade 2 teacher. 896 I accept defence counsel’s submission that JF’s evidence that the government let her take a year off school because of any such incident, is unlikely to be true. The reality is that the accused and JM made the decision to spend a year travelling up and down the east coast of Australia after leaving Merrimac and as such they simply took JF out of school for a year. 897 However, JF presents with prominent large front teeth. JF was aged about seven when she was in grade 2, being about the age a child loses their baby teeth and adult front teeth appear. This lends weight to JF’s unchallenged evidence that when she was in grade 2, her teacher made a derogatory comment about her teeth in front of the class. I accept that evidence. 898 I am also satisfied on all of the evidence that JF was in grade 2 when the family left Lucindale and travelled for a year, during which JF did not attend school. I accept that JF has linked that and the incident involving her teacher, as being related. The Court also has no way of knowing what, if anything, JM and/or the accused told JF at that time as to why it was that she did not have to go to school for that year. 899 Although JF’s evidence that the government allowed her to have a year off school because of this incident is likely to be inaccurate, I accept that JF genuinely believes this occurred. -- 149 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 146 900 As such, this evidence does not impact on my overall assessment of either the credibility or reliability of JF’s evidence. 901 Defence counsel also highlighted JF’s evidence about being punched by the accused in Upper Coomera as including detail which was simply unbelievable – namely that the accused had told a neighbour, who was an off-duty police officer, what he had done, and had responded by simply saying she would have done the same thing. This was a detail that had not been included by JF in her police statement and was said to be an elaboration and demonstrative of the fact that JF was simply making things up. 902 I disagree with that submission. JF agreed that she did not include this detail in her police statement made on 26 March 2023. However, this incident was not accompanied by any allegation of sexual abuse. It is quite understandable given JF’s age that she would not have appreciated the necessity to tell the police officer every detail of every incident she described. The absence of this detail in her prior out of court statement does not cause me to doubt the reliability or credibility of her evidence on this topic. 903 JF gave detailed evidence about what led to this incident, namely she neglected to turn the tap off properly and it ‘flooded’ the wall of the caravan. The accused gave evidence that the van could not flood as they lived off water tanks and a 12-watt pump. However, JF did not say the entire van had flooded, rather she said the wall of the caravan had flooded. The accused acknowledged he was using methamphetamine when they lived in Upper Coomera. The fact the accused might react this way, in these circumstances, is therefore entirely feasible. 904 Further, JF was quite clear that she was simply telling the Court what the accused told her after this incident about the neighbour’s comment. That is, she did not observe and/or hear this purported discussion between the neighbour and the accused. One can readily envisage circumstances where a parent or guardian has disciplined a child and then sought to justify their conduct in some way. My impression was that JF was telling the truth about what the accused told her and that she believed what he said to her, notwithstanding that to an adult observer this seems fanciful. Reliability of JF’s Account 905 Counsel for the accused highlighted apparent inconsistencies in the evidence given by JF and what she told the police in earlier out of court statements, together with internal inconsistencies in her evidence and inconsistencies with other evidence. He submitted that these inconsistencies should cause the Court to have doubts as to both the reliability (and credibility) of JF’s evidence. 906 Some of those apparent inconsistencies related to JF’s account about the alleged offending, whereas others related to more peripheral issues. -- 150 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 147 907 When JF gave evidence about the offending in Tailem Bend, she recalled only two incidents of abuse. 908 She gave detailed evidence of the first time she said she was abused, including that she was wearing a blue ‘Chuggington’ top and purple trackpants. After being shown a video recording taken when she made her police statement made on 26 March 2023, JF agreed that during that interview she told the police she was wearing a ‘Thomas the Tank Engine’ top and shorts at the time of the first incident of abuse. JF’s explanation for this inconsistency was that when she subsequently spoke to the police on 19 June 2024, she told them she had made a mistake in that first interview. 909 JF acknowledged this incident was memorable because it was the first time the accused had sexually abused her. As such, she was quite certain in her evidence as to the accuracy of her memory of what she was wearing at the time, notwithstanding the mistake she had made just over a year earlier when recounting that incident to police. 910 I accept JF’s evidence that ‘Chuggington’ was a children’s television show about a train. Thomas the Tank Engine is also a children’s television show about a train. As such, this minor difference in detail as to what type of top JF said she wearing on this first occasion of abuse is, in my view, of little moment. I note JM also gave unchallenged evidence that JF had a Chuggington top when she was about aged five and living in Tailem Bend. 911 However, JF was also mistaken when she told the police she was wearing shorts, rather than purple tracksuit pants, at that time. 912 JF was aged only five when this alleged incident occurred. Although it was the first incident, and memorable because of that, it was allegedly followed by another similar incident a few months later. JF described wearing shorts at the time of the second incident in Tailem Bend. It is possible that she confused the ancillary circumstances of those two incidents when she first spoke to the police about the offending. 913 The fact JF made that mistake does not cause me to have a reasonable doubt about the reliability of her vivid memory of the accused sexually abusing her in Tailem Bend when she was aged five. 914 It was submitted that there was another apparent inconsistency in JF’s evidence about the offending in count 1, compared to what she told the police when she gave her detailed statement on 26 March 2023. 915 JF gave evidence-in-chief that she recalled only two specific instances of abuse in Tailem Bend, separated in time by about four months.652 She said the next 652 Noting that in cross-examination she said the second incident occurred about three months after the first; T 168.4. -- 151 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 148 occasion of abuse she remembered occurred about three months after they had moved to Lucindale.653 916 In her police statement made 26 March 2023, JF said to police that the offending started six months after she was five, which as in 2012. The officer then replied, ‘So six months after you turned five.’ In response, JF said, ‘Yep. After that it just happened all the time’.654JF said the accused had abused her ‘every second day or daily, or it happened weekly or fortnightly’.655 917 It was suggested to JF that when she said that, what she meant was that from when she was aged five, the abuse happened all the time, being inconsistent with her evidence that there were two occasions of abuse in Tailem Bend when she was about five, separated by around three to four months, with a similar period thereafter until the next occasion of abuse in Lucindale. 918 JF disagreed She explained that what she meant by this response was not that the abuse (literally) happened all the time, but that it happened all the time in the sense of it occurring at random different times.656 She said she had been talking about the entirety of the abuse, not just what had happened to her when she was five and living in Tailem Bend.657 919 JF’s response needs to be understood in context, namely that she was a teenager, at a police station, trying to explain years of sexual abuse. This abuse was a regular and constant feature of JF’s life. I accept that from JF’s perspective it must have felt as if the abuse was happening all of the time. 920 I accept JF’s explanation as to what she was intending to convey to police (that is, that the abuse had occurred at random times throughout its duration). 921 JF gave evidence of an occasion in Mataranka when she claimed the accused sexually abused her in the caravan before she went to school. She said on that day her mother had gone to feed the cows at around 6 am. JF got up to go to the toilet and when she came back, the accused pulled her onto his bed and had penile vaginal intercourse with her. 922 Both JM and the accused gave evidence that the accused worked at the station in Mataranka and that he started early, at around 5:00am. Both JM and the accused gave evidence that the accused worked Monday to Friday and that he never took a day off during this period. If that evidence is accurate then the accused could not have abused JF in the caravan in Mataranka on a school day morning just after 6:00am. 653 Noting in cross-examination, JF said this occurred about four months after they moved to Lucindale; T 168.10. 654 T 212.12-18. 655 T 164.34-36. 656 T 212.29-32. 657 T 164.38-165.2. -- 152 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 149 923 I have previously outlined my concerns as to the impact of extended drug use of the reliability of the evidence given by both JM and the accused. The family lived in Mataranka in 2016 – some eight years ago. I consider it most unlikely that either the accused or JM have a perfect recollection of that period. It may well be the case that there were occasional days when the accused did not work, or started work slightly later, for example, when the cattle season was coming to an end or if he had a ‘sick day’. 924 As such, this evidence, either of itself, or having regard to all of the evidence, does not cause me to doubt the credibility and reliability of JF’s evidence that the accused sexually abused her in the caravan at Mataranka one morning as described by her. 925 JF gave evidence that she had never seen a doctor during the period she lived with the accused. This evidence is inconsistent with the evidence relevant to the circumstances in which JF was fitted with a contraceptive device when she was aged 14 and living in Rockhampton. I accept that she must have seen a doctor at that time. 926 However, JM gave evidence that JF did not go to a doctor from when she was aged six, until JM left the family in Hervey Bay and recalled her being a healthy child. JM also gave evidence that as far as she was aware, JF had never been to see a dentist. 927 Insofar as it was suggested that it was implausible that JF would not have seen a doctor if her periods were of such frequency and irregularity as she described, I reject that evidence. JM gave evidence that she was not concerned about this and put it down to the fact that JF was stressed at school and a young teenager. JF did not think there to be anything unusual about her menstrual cycle. Many teenage girls struggle with frequent and irregular periods. 928 I am therefore satisfied that JF did not see a doctor when she lived with accused, other than in Rockhampton for contraceptive purposes, save for an occasion when she was aged about five and having nightmares. 929 While JF appears to have forgotten the attendance in Rockhampton, of note is the fact that this did not relate to her being unwell or injured in anyway. As such, JF’s inability to recall that attendance is of limited importance in my overall assessment of her evidence. 930 I find that JF very rarely went a doctor when she lived with the accused and that she never went because she was unwell or injured. 931 JF was adamant that the accused struck JM with the Jim Beam bottle at Hervey Bay, whereas both JM and the accused gave evidence that the accused threw the bottle towards JM and it had hit her. I accept the evidence of the accused and JM to that effect. -- 153 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 150 932 As such, JF’s memory of precisely what occurred is inaccurate. Although JF now recalls that incident slightly differently, the fact is, JM was hit in the head with a Jim Beam bottle and the accused was responsible for this. Notwithstanding JF’s memory of the details of this traumatic event was imperfect, her memory of the fact it occurred was correct. 933 JF recalled the police attending after this incident. Neither the accused nor JM gave such evidence. JF’s memory of this may is likely to be inaccurate. However, there were occasions when the police did attend in response to domestic disturbances involving JM and the accused, which explains why JF now erroneously recalls them doing so on that occasion. 934 JF’s description of the alleged metal pole incident differed in several aspects to the version given by JM. As previously discussed, it may well be that JF’s recollection of the particular details of this incident is accurate, whereas JM’s is not, given JM’s drug use at that time. 935 As previously stated, JF’s evidence of having suffered bruises from being beaten by the accused or of being beaten with objects in Merrimac and Katherine was not corroborated by JM. Similarly, JF’s evidence as to the nature of the satellite cords in the caravans, was inconsistent with that of JM. 936 I have previously explained why I have doubts as to the accuracy of JM’s memory, having regard to her significant prior drug use. 937 JF described the occasion when she was hit with the satellite cord in some detail. She said this occurred in the Millard caravan at Katherine and she was adamant the cord was black and of a certain length. She said JM was there at the time and tried to stop the accused from hitting her. 938 Having carefully considered this evidence, I am satisfied that JF is not making this incident up. This is a most unusual incident to concoct. If she was making it up, she could have said it occurred when JM was at work. I consider JF is genuine in her recollection of being whipped with a black cord by the accused in the Millard caravan, notwithstanding JM gave no evidence of any such incident. However, I accept that some aspects of JF’s account of that incident may be inaccurate. For example, it may be that what JF called a ‘satellite cord’ was another cord associated with the television in that caravan. She may have simply misdescribed it. 939 Relevantly, when JF described the occasions when she said the accused hit her, she described only three specific incidents in detail – once when he hit her with a hairbrush,658 once when he punched her in the chest and once when he hit her with the satellite cord. She said that he did not otherwise hit her often, and estimated it occurred only about four or five times a year (except in Merrimac). 658 Noting JF said JM was in the lounge room and did not see this incident. -- 154 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 151 940 Her recollection of being hit with a metal spoon, spatula or ladle related to a specific period of time in Merrimac associated with her having problems sleeping. 941 The accused said that when they were in Merrimac, he and JM were taking methylamphetamine for days on end and not sleeping. This must have had an impact on the accused’s behaviour and on JM’s memory of what occurred during that period. It is not difficult to envisage the accused becoming frustrated by his young step-daughter not sleeping, at a time when he and JM were so focussed on their next ‘hit’. 942 Notwithstanding the differences in JM’s evidence and JF’s evidence on this topic, I accept JF’s evidence that there were occasions when the accused was physically violent towards her, in the manner as she described. 943 Counsel for the accused identified what he described as internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence as to the nature and frequency of the sexual abuse. 944 JF gave evidence of an occasion of abuse at the Knotts Crossing Resort in Katherine when JM was at work and the accused ‘stuck his penis into my butthole’.659 She was then asked how many times the accused had anal intercourse with her and estimated it was between ten to 20 times.660 She could not recall the specific details of any other incidents when this had happened. 945 It was submitted that if the accused had engaged in anal intercourse with JF so frequently, it was unusual that it did not feature in her evidence of any of the other occasions of abuse which she recalled in detail. It was submitted that JF’s evidence was fanciful and given to simply enhance her story. 946 However, JF said the incident she had described as occurring in Katherine was the first time the accused had anal intercourse with her. She said he had done that multiple times thereafter and that the last time was when she was aged around 14. She said this happened often when they were living at the Knotts Crossing Resort because JM would be at work, C was just a baby and S would either be asleep or playing outside the caravan. 947 The fact that JF was unable to provide detailed evidence of any other occasion when the accused forced her to have anal intercourse does not, in my view, impact unfavourably on JF’s evidence, given the frequency with which JF claimed to be abused in this way (and abused generally). It is simply unrealistic to expect someone to recall the details of individual incidents with accuracy when the same thing happened on a very frequent basis, in similar circumstances. 948 It was submitted that another feature of JF’s evidence which should cause her account to be doubted was the fact that notwithstanding the claimed regularity of 659 T 81.4. 660 T 81.11. -- 155 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 152 the abuse, JF said she was not abused during the year the family travelled up and down the east coast after leaving Merrimac. 949 However, during these travels, JM was not working. The family was living in the Millard caravan. While there may have been the opportunity for abuse to occur, for example, when JM left the caravan to take a shower, the most likely reason for why JF did not describe abuse during this time is because there was no abuse in that period. This does not render her account of the abuse that did occur, incredible or unreliable. 950 JF gave evidence that once JM left, the abuse occurred more frequently. She said that in Rockhampton:661 It was happening- it could have happened once, once a week to every three to four weeks. Sometimes it would happen three days in a row. 951 It was submitted that his evidence was internally inconsistent. 952 I disagree with that submission. I consider that by this evidence, JF was simply referring to the fact that there was no pattern in the abuse in the sense that it was irregular. Put another way, it was not the case that the accused abused her every Saturday night or every weekend or every morning before she went to school. Rather it could happen often over a short period, and then sometimes not again for three to four weeks. 953 While JF’s recollection of where and when she lived in certain places was generally very good, the evidence she gave as to when the family first returned to South Australia to live in Murray Bridge and how long they lived at the caravan park, 27 Owl Drive and then 34 Owl Drive was confused and inconsistent. 954 JF gave evidence that they moved to Murray Bridge about two months before Christmas 2022.662 She gave evidence the family lived at the caravan park for three months and then at 27 Owl Drive for six months,663 before moving to 34 Owl Drive after Christmas. Later in her evidence she said they moved into 27 Owl Drive about two months before Christmas 2022.664 955 JF described an incident which occurred at the Murray Bridge caravan park when the accused raped her so badly she had difficulty walking. She said she was 14 at that time. JF turned 15 on 27 March 2022. She also later gave evidence that the first incident of sexual abuse at 27 Owl Drive occurred about four months before Christmas 2022.665 661 T 106.37-107.1. 662 T 114.3-4; albeit she later qualified this in cross-examination to say it was at least two months before Christmas 2022; T 215.1-5. 663 T 114.10-13; T 117.38-118.1. 664 T 114.30-32. 665 T 118.29-30. -- 156 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 153 956 This evidence was given shortly before lunch during examination-in-chief. My impression was that JF was tiring when she gave this evidence and that some of her answers to questions about the timeline were estimates or guesses. I have been mindful of this in my overall assessment of her evidence and, in particular, in determining the extent to which I can rely on the evidence she gave about the alleged offending. 957 Another (potential) example of evidence which falls into a similar category is JF’s evidence about the Catapres. 958 JF gave evidence-in-chief that the accused gave her Catapres to help her sleep when she was aged 11, however in cross-examination she said she was aged eight at that time. There is an obvious unexplained inconsistency in that evidence. 959 Further both the accused and JM agreed that S was prescribed Ritalin and Catapres, albeit they both said these were prescribed to S from when was aged about four and a half (whereas JF recalled S was about six). Prof White confirmed Catapres was a sedative. 960 Importantly, JF said she was not abused on the occasion the accused gave her Catapres. It simply makes no sense for JF to make this detail up, if it is untrue (or, indeed, the evidence she gave about the Ritalin). 961 Notwithstanding there were aspects of JF’s account about the Catapres which may have been inaccurate, I accept that her evidence that there was an occasion when she was given Catapres by the accused to help her to sleep. 962 Similarly, I accept JF’s evidence that the accused gave her Ritalin on three separate occasions. JM’s evidence about the fact S was prescribed Ritalin and the unnecessary increase in her dosage lent support to this evidence, as did Prof White’s evidence as to the likely effects of Ritalin. 963 Further, JF gave evidence that the accused abused her on only one occasion after giving her Ritalin. She anchored that incident to when they were packing up the caravan to leave Rockhampton to return to South Australia. She described the Ritalin as making her to want keep cleaning. These details made that evidence compelling. I am satisfied JF was not making this up, nor could she possibly be mistaken about this. 964 There were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending in count 2. 965 JF gave very detailed evidence about the last time the accused sexually abused her. She said this was at 34 Owl Drive, one night after GW and her family had visited for dinner. The circumstances of that occasion are described at paragraphs 196 to 204 herein. -- 157 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 154 966 When initially describing what occurred, JF said the accused pulled her shirt off and that she was not wearing a bra at this time.666 Later in her evidence, when asked what she had been wearing on that occasion, JF described wearing a sports bra underneath her shirt.667 967 JF said that this last occasion was in fact the last of a series of occasions when the accused sexually abused her, in a similar way, three days in a row. When she was initially asked if she had any specific memories of those other two occasions, JF said, ‘No, I do not’.668 However she was able to recall that she had not been drinking nor had she consumed cannabis on either of those two occasions and that what occurred, in terms of the sexual activity, was similar to the last occasion. 968 It was submitted that this evidence was internally inconsistent insofar as it did demonstrate that JF had a recollection of the detail of those occasions, albeit she had prefaced her evidence by saying she did not. 969 I disagree with that submission. JF had given a very detailed account of what led up to the last occasion of abuse and what occurred. When she said she did not have any specific memories of the other two incidents, she may well have meant that she could not recall what led up to them, or what she was wearing. She was quite clear that they were similar to the last occasion in terms of the sexual activity which occurred. This may well explain why she no longer has other specific memories of those occasions. 970 Further, the very fact that there were these three similar incidents in a row, may provide a reasonable explanation as to why JF gave inconsistent evidence of whether she was wearing a bra on the last occasion of abuse. 971 JF also gave detailed evidence of another occasion of sexual abuse at 34 Owl Drive which had occurred after the accused had some mates over. The circumstances of that occasion are described at paragraphs 207 to 208 herein. 972 When initially describing that incident JF did not refer to sucking the accused’s penis. However, she was later asked by the prosecutor, how long she had sucked the accused’s penis on that occasion. She said she did this for about five to ten minutes and described the accused aggressively pulling her around and shoving her mouth on his penis.669 973 Given the frequency with which JF claimed to be abused, over such a long period of time, it is not unexpected that JF’s memory of an incident of abuse may incorporate some details which in fact relate to other similar occasions. 974 It is therefore not surprising that there were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s account of the details of various occasions of abuse. Simply put, it would be 666 T 39.20-22. 667 T 45.36. 668 T 129.38. 669 T 132.15-24. -- 158 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 155 extraordinary if JF now had a perfect recollection of any alleged occasion of abuse, such that she could accurately say precisely what she was wearing, or the order of the sexual acts which occurred, or even which sexual acts may have occurred on a particular occasion. 975 Of the incidents of abuse she described in detail, JF was able to recall where she was living at the time and the context in which they occurred, as being features which had stuck in her memory. Her inability to recall precisely every detail of these occasions of abuse, or the fact that her account did, at times, contain inconsistencies, was in my view, consistent with her endeavouring to accurately describe real events, rather than reeling off a practiced, complex story. Other Relevant Matters 976 Although it was submitted that JF’s account was exaggerated, when her evidence is considered at a whole, that submission is not made out. 977 For example, JF was clear that she was not sexually abused during the time the family travelled after leaving Merrimac and settling in Mataranka, despite there being the opportunity for such offending to have occurred. 978 She described the accused providing her with Ritalin tablets on three occasions, but only described him sexually abusing her on one such occasion. She said he did not abuse her on the occasion he gave her Catapres. Although she gave evidence about the accused giving her cannabis, she described him doing so only three times, and only one such occasion did she recall that he had abused her. 979 Another example is JF’s evidence about her periods. JF gave very candid evidence about experiencing lengthy and irregular periods. I accept that evidence. She also gave evidence that the accused did not sexually abuse her when she was on her period, meaning that there was, in fact, fewer opportunities (rather than more) for him to offend against her. 980 My impression was that JF was not exaggerating or embellishing her evidence. 981 There were some occasions, as outlined above, during JF’s evidence when her answers may not have been properly thought out and could potentially be described as ‘guesses’. However, many of these related to facts which were only ancillary to the offending, such as when the family arrived in Murray Bridge and precisely when they moved from the caravan park to 27 Owl Drive. 982 There were many features of JF’s account which were compelling and consistent with her recalling real life events which had happened to her, albeit viewed through her now perspective as a 17-year-old who has endured years of sexual abuse. -- 159 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 156 983 JF described the abuse as progressing over time, in terms of its seriousness (or invasiveness) and its frequency, consistent with the accused becoming more emboldened to offend, as he knew that JF would not complain about it. 984 JF described feeling confused and too frightened to say or do anything when the accused first touched her inappropriately in Tailem Bend. However, she tried to push him away when he touched her again in Lucindale, consistent with her then having an understanding of what he was about to do to her. 985 She remembered in detail the first occasion the accused inserted his penis in her vagina at Southport and said it hurt afterwards and stung really badly. Similarly, when he inserted two fingers in her vagina at Merrimac, it had also stung. However, over time as the accused sexually abused her more frequently, she no longer experienced pain during intercourse, as she became used to it. She stopped telling him to stop or trying to wriggle away from him as she knew there was no point in doing so. She simply succumbed to his advances. 986 JF’s evidence that the offending occurred more during the school holidays because the accused could drink and not have to drive anywhere, had a very real ring of truth about it, as did her evidence that when the accused was drunk, he was more aggressive when abusing her. 987 JF’s evidence that she continued to give the accused a hug goodnight before he went to bed, notwithstanding what he did to her, was also compelling, as was her explanation as to why she recalled the offending in Rockhampton on New Years Eve 2021, namely, ‘I could see what was happening to me. I felt it.’670 988 In addition, many of the circumstances as described by JF as being ancillary to the alleged offending were either supported by other evidence which I do accept, or not in dispute. 989 For example, there was no dispute that family did live in a one-bedroom unit in Southport. This was one of the features of JF’s account of the offending there, namely that there was a curtain separating the room into two and she had gone to speak to the accused, who was still in bed, as she was hungry. 990 The family did live in the Millard caravan from when they left Merrimac to the time they lived in Katherine. That caravan did not have a shower or toilet meaning there were times when JM left the van to have a shower, providing the opportunity for the accused to abuse JF. Similarly, although the Roadmaster caravan had a shower and toilet, JM’s evidence supported that of JF to the effect that they did not use the shower in the van. 991 The evidence JF gave about where and when the accused and/or JM worked at various times were also consistent with the evidence given by JM and the accused and was unchallenged. This was important as the fact JM worked when 670 T 187.38-188.1. -- 160 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 157 they lived at the Knotts Crossing Resort provided more opportunity for the accused to abuse JF, consistent with her evidence. 992 The accused did smoke cannabis and use methamphetamine as described by JF. He also drank alcohol to excess at times, particularly in Roma and Hervey Bay. 993 As such, important features of JF’s account were correct and not in dispute. 994 Further, JF recalled the abuse becoming more frequent from when they were Rockhampton. Not only was JF no longer living with the family, but JF was fitted with the contraceptive device in Rockhampton. JF said that it was only after she was fitted with that bar, that the accused ejaculated inside her. 995 Apart from an occasion when she was five and having nightmares, JF was never taken to see a doctor, except when the accused took JF to see a doctor to arrange contraception. The accused knew JF had started to have periods. JF readily acknowledged that at the time she was fitted with this device she had a boyfriend, but she was adamant they were not having sex. I accept JF’s evidence on this topic and reject the accused’s contrary evidence. This evidence lends further weight to JF’s account. Complaint Evidence 996 I accept JF’s evidence that the first person she told about the offending was AW and that she told him about it in early March, shortly after she ran away from 34 Owl Drive. 997 The fact that JF chose to first disclose the offending to AW at this time is readily explicable. I accept JF’s evidence that when she was young, and first abused, the accused threatened to kill her if she told anyone what he had done. She was scared of him, because of that. 998 By the time of the initial complaint, JF had formed a close and trusted relationship with AW, in circumstances where because of the family’s frequent moves, she had previously had very little opportunity to develop close friendships. She had left 34 Owl Drive and was physically separated from the accused. 999 She was in a sexual relationship with AW and old enough to fully appreciate the extent of the abuse and its wrongfulness. 1000 JF recalled telling AW that the accused had been sexually abusing her for 11 years and that she also told him that the accused had raped her, as AW did not understand what she meant. She said she had not told him any other details. 1001 AW recalled JF telling him that the accused had raped her from about the age of six or seven until recently and that when she was aged about eight, her had drugged her. -- 161 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 158 1002 I have already made observations as to AW’s evidence. He was not a particularly impressive witness and he may have inaccurately described some of the features of this conversation.671 1003 However, I am satisfied he was telling the truth about being told by JF that the accused had been abusing her from after her dad had left, until recently, being consistent with her account of the offending. 1004 I am also satisfied that AW was telling the truth when he described JF as being really scared, and as shaking and breaking down throughout the course of this conversation. 1005 I find that this conversation occurred several weeks after the last alleged act of sexual abuse at 34 Owl Drive. In such circumstances, I cannot be satisfied that there was a sufficiently close temporal connection between JF’s distress during this conversation and the alleged sexual offending. As such, I cannot use the evidence of JF’s distress, of itself, as evidence of consistency of conduct relevant to bolster her credit as to the offending. 672 1006 However, JF’s demeanour is relevant to my overall assessment of the complaint evidence. The fact that she presented this way may explain why there is some difference in the witnesses’ recollection as to precisely what was said during this conversation and why JF did not go into further detail at that time. 1007 I am satisfied that the circumstances in which JF made the initial complaint to AW and what she told him demonstrate a degree of consistency of conduct on her part. Summary 1008 I have carefully scrutinised JF’s evidence. 1009 Having done so, I am satisfied that JF was an honest witness, giving a genuine account of her experience of being repeatedly sexually abused by the accused from when she was aged about five, until shortly before she fled his home in February 2023, when she was aged 15. 1010 There were some internal inconsistencies in JF’s evidence and some aspects of her account which may have been inconsistent with other evidence. I consider it likely and find there were aspects of JF’s account where she has confused (or merged) certain memories of one occasion of abuse with another, when recalling specific details of the offending. I am satisfied that this is simply the product of the limitation of memory and indicative of how memory works, rather than indicative of her lying about the offending, or her memory of the abuse itself being unreliable. 671 See discussion at [607]-[616] herein. 672 Fergusson v The King [2024] SASCA 63 at [42]-[45]. -- 162 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 159 1011 Given the frequency of the abuse, and the extended period of time over which it occurred, it is to be expected that JF now has difficulty accurately differentiating an occasion, with another similar occasion of such offending. 1012 Insofar as there were inconsistencies and potential anomalies in JF’s account, those inconsistencies and anomalies are not such as to cause me to entertain a doubt as to the reliability and credibility of JF’s evidence as to the alleged offending. 1013 I am satisfied that JF is not mistaken in her recollection of the fact of the abuse, its frequency or its nature. I am satisfied both that she is telling the truth and that her memory of the abuse is not a product of a dream, or her imagination, nor is she mistaken about the fact the abuse occurred. 1014 JF’s detailed and nuanced account as to how the abuse started, how the accused gained her silence, and how the abuse then progressed over time was very persuasive. Her account was cogent and compelling. I believed her. 1015 I am satisfied there is no reasonable possibility that JF’s account is a carefully constructed, well thought out, detailed and structured fallacy. Findings 1016 I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that when she was aged about five and living in a house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused came into the bedroom she shared with S and lay in the bed next to her. He pulled down her pants and underwear and touched her, in a circular motion, at the opening of her vagina, on and near her clitoris for a period of about ten minutes. Afterwards, the accused told her that he would kill her if she told anyone what had happened. 1017 I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that about three to four months later, when the family was still living in the house in Webb Street, Tailem Bend, the accused again came into JF’s bedroom and did the same thing to her. 1018 I accept JF’s evidence that after they moved to Lucindale, and JF was aged approximately six, the accused touched JF in a similar way when JM had left the house to go to the nearby shops. 1019 I am satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that the accused is telling the truth when he denied this offending. 1020 Although it is possible that the accused penetrated JF’s vagina or labia majora with his finger or fingers on one or more of these three occasions, I cannot be satisfied of this beyond reasonable doubt. 1021 However, I am satisfied that on each of these three occasions, the accused intentionally applied force to JF, in circumstances which were unlawful, and in circumstances which were indecent insofar as they had a sexual connotation. I am -- 163 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 160 satisfied that on each of these three occasions, the accused committed an unlawful sexual act, namely the offence of indecent assault. As JF was aged only five or six at this time, the offence in each instance was aggravated. 1022 JF gave detailed evidence about the various uncharged acts of sexual abuse which occurred interstate. I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt,673 that the accused continued to abuse JF, sexually, when they lived interstate and that over time the abuse got worse and more invasive. I accept JF’s evidence that when the family lived interstate, the abuse expanded to including penile vaginal intercourse, digital intercourse, fellatio and anal intercourse. 1023 I accept JF’s evidence and find that the abuse was more frequent during school holidays (and after JM left the accused) and was more aggressive and forceful when the accused was drunk. I accept JF’s evidence that there were occasions when the accused abused JF when they were living interstate, after giving her alcohol and an occasion when he abused her after giving her Ritalin (and alcohol). 1024 I accept JF’s evidence that there were occasions when the accused smacked her by hand, or with objects. 1025 The accused’s conduct both in Tailem Bend and Lucindale, and then interstate, establishes that he had a sexual interest in JF and a tendency to act upon that interest. When JF did not complain about the abuse, and it remained undetected, the accused was emboldened to continue to act on that sexual interest and to engage in more serious, invasive, brazen and aggressive acts of sexual abuse against JF. He had effectively normalised that behaviour after years of repeatedly abusing her. 1026 I accept JF’s evidence that when the family returned to South Australia, the accused continued to sexually abuse her. JF was aged 15 at this time. 1027 I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that there was an occasion at the Murray Bridge caravan park that the accused vaginally raped JF so badly that she had difficulty walking the next day. 1028 I accept JF’s evidence and am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, that when the family moved to 27 Owl Drive, notwithstanding there were occasions when AW visited the house or stayed overnight, there was the opportunity for the accused to sexually abuse JF and that he continued to do so. 673 As per DPP v Roder [2024] HCA 15, if this finding is an indispensable link in terms of my reasoning as to the accused’s guilt on either count, I must be satisfied of this evidence beyond reasonable doubt. I do not consider the evidence to be such, but I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did sexually abuse JF multiple times, as claimed by her, during the periods they lived in Queensland and the Northern Territory. -- 164 of 165 -- [2024] SADC 148 161 1029 I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt that when the family lived at 27 Owl Drive, there were at least six occasions when the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with JF, as described by her, during which the accused also, at times, forced JF to engage in fellatio with him and/or digitally penetrated her vagina. 1030 I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt that when the family lived at 34 Owl Drive, notwithstanding the accused had commenced a relationship with GW, he continued to sexually abuse JF. I accept JF’s evidence and find beyond reasonable doubt there were at least three occasions when the accused engaged in penile vaginal intercourse with JF, as described by her, at 34 Owl Drive, during which the accused also forced JF to engage in fellatio with him. 1031 I am satisfied and find that the abuse only stopped when JF fled 34 Owl Drive in about late February 2023. 1032 On each occasion that the accused inserted his finger (or fingers) or penis into JF’s vagina, and on each occasion he forced JF to perform fellatio upon him, the accused committed an unlawful sexual act, being unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 17. 1033 As to count 1, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and find that during the first relevant period: 1. The accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF. 2. During the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF. 3. At the time, LGF was a child aged under 14. 4. At the time, the accused was an adult. 1034 As to count 2, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and find that during the second relevant period: 1. The accused knowingly maintained a relationship with JF. 2. During the course of that relationship, the accused engaged in two or more unlawful sexual acts with JF. 3. At the time, JF was a child aged under 17. 4. At the time, the accused was an adult. Conclusion 1035 I find the accused guilty of count 1 and count 2. -- 165 of 165 --