He "pulled the back of his pants and underwear up, resulting in the underwear being pulled tight between the victim's buttocks in an action referred to as a 'wedgie'", the summary said.
"The victim could feel what he thought was a bottle pressing against his back."
He went straight home and told his mother.
Then again in June 2021 the same victim was walking to school when he noticed the defendant behind him again.
Nervous, he crossed the road to get away, but the defendant followed him and gave him another wedgie.
The victim yelled "hey can you stop", and the defendant stopped and went to talk to another child.
The next day the defendant came across the 9-year-old victim, who was walking home from the local shops with his brother.
The brothers tried to walk faster to get away from the defendant, but he caught up to them and grabbed the victim by the shirt, pulling it up.
The victim yelled to his brother to run.
The defendant grabbed the boy's pants and underwear, but instead of giving him a wedgie he touched the victim on his buttock underneath his underwear.
"The victim's brother ran back to help the victim, attempting to kick the defendant," the summary said.
The defendant tried to grab the brother but missed. The brother grabbed the victim's arm and pulled until the defendant released him.
Both children ran home and told their mother.
The third charge relates to an incident in February 2021 when the defendant came across a group of children at a playground.
He began playing "dares" with the kids, daring them to run to a nearby pole and back.
He then dared them to go into the bushes with him, but they refused.
The defendant then grabbed the victim and unsuccessfully tried to pull him into the bushes, Judge Jan Kelly said at the earlier hearing.
He then dared the victim's friends to give the boy a wedgie, and when they did not do it, he performed the wedgie himself.
The defendant then dared the victim to kick him in the genitals. The boy did so "gently" before the children ran home to tell their mother what had happened.
In court today, Judge Patrick Grace accepted recommendations that it would inappropriate to place the man in a care facility. He discharged him back into the community with a strict management plan and the help of his parents and community agencies.
The court heard the man had issues in understanding appropriate behaviour and that actions he might consider to be humorous were instead inappropriate.
Because of his intellectual disability, the man enjoyed the company of younger people, and "was effectively like a child in an adult's body", Thistoll said.
Judge Grace addressed the man's parents at today's hearing.
"I realise you are doing your best and I commend you for that as it's not easy for the both of you," Judge Grace said. "We are reliant upon you to make sure it works."
He gave the man a stern warning for his "inappropriate" behaviour.
"You can't do this again, do you understand me? You just can't," he said. "Don't let yourself down and don't let your parents down."
Permanent name suppression was not opposed by Crown Prosecutor Fiona Cleary on the condition significant wrap-around support was offered to the man and his family.
Judge Grace granted the application, but said "you need to be aware you won't get that again".
