She recalled being asleep and once woken by him she would lie frozen as he did “whatever you wanted to do”.
“Once it was over I struggled to breathe. You made me feel like I was suffocating,” she told him.
“Michael Hallinan, you took away my innocence.”
She felt guilty speaking up, worried about causing a rift in the family but then realised she had to end the continuing cycle of abuse.
“You took everything away from me and now I stand here … knowing you will never have that power or control over me or anything again.”
Hallinan, 54, earlier pleaded guilty to multiple charges of unlawful sexual connection, attempted rape and sexual conduct with a child for the offending, which spanned 2005 to 2012.
The victims’ relationship to Hallinan would normally be protected under automatic name suppression laws for victims of sexual assault, however, they asked to have that lifted.
Judge Philip Crayton granted the victims’ request.
The second victim, who was 12 when repeatedly sexually assaulted, told him the impending prison term would help her move forward.
“You not being able to do it again means much more and that is what I am grateful for.”
Hallinan’s lawyer Glenn Dixon said his client wasn’t skirting responsibility for his offending and wasn’t stepping away from the consequences and harm he had caused.
However, he had struggled to remember his offending.
“There are general medical reasons why he is struggling to remember and they are in part explainable through his own childhood trauma but also the brain injury that he has received.”
Hallinan knew he had to engage in a child sex offender programme in prison, and knew the strong family support he currently had was contingent on fulfilling that treatment.
“If he were to step back from undertaking rehabilitation and continuing to acknowledge the harm that he has caused, he will lose the support of people in his family.”
A cultural report outlined Hallinan’s upbringing and the abuse he suffered as a child.
The judge was satisfied there was a causative link between his upbringing and the abuse he carried out on the two girls.
However, he told Hallinan he still knew right from wrong and his background “doesn’t provide an excuse”.
The judge was also dubious about whether he understood the impact of what he’d done.
“I do ask myself, having read the pre-sentence report, whether you are fully engaged with this offending, both in regards to what you did and the harm you caused.
“The pre-sentence report writer didn’t feel that you were.
“She felt that your attitude was flippant, particularly when reporting you have no memory of what you did.
“Mr Dixon has tackled that … but I must admit, having seen you, I do have some reservations.”
Judge Crayton said he didn’t have the information to identify what it was in particular, but after observing him in court he told him “as I see you today, I do have suspicions that you don’t fully own your acts and offending but are potentially somewhat ambivalent”.
“I make that observation because you are going to be quickly given an opportunity with experts who will analyse and scrutinise the available materials to assess whether there’s an explanation.
“I can tell you from the bench, that unless you are fully engaged, you will struggle before any parole board to gain release.”
Noting Hallinan, who stared straight ahead throughout the hearing, was now leaning on the railing of the defendant’s box in court, the judge appeared to chide him for his blank response to the victim’s statements and to the judgment.
“As an unmitigated risk, I anticipate that it will be a very long time before you see the light of day in the community again.”
