Later that year, he received unsolicited files on the account with images and videos depicting child sexual abuse and exploitation. The summary does not say he downloaded or viewed the material.
The files remained on Gordon-Stables’ iCloud until police seized and searched his phones in April 2021.
His lawyer, Paul Keegan, said the files came to his client “unbidden” from “persons unknown”.
“He did not seek them out or solicit them in any way.”
Gordon-Stables was originally charged with a more serious version of the offence which relied on possessing the material with knowledge and intention, and that charge carried a maximum penalty of ten years in prison. But his downgraded charges only carried a maximum penalty of a $2000 fine.
He had asked for a discharge without conviction so he could pursue his dream to get a job and become self-sufficient. Gordon-Stables lives with his invalid mother and spends most of his time caring for her and pushing her around town in her wheelchair, Justice van Bohemen said.
With multiple physical health conditions also working against him and the constraints his mother placed on him, the added hurdle of a conviction would make it particularly difficult for him to get a job.
Report writers described his lifestyle as “suppressively quiet” and “slavishly demeaning”, saying he never had the opportunity to develop the confidence needed for an independent life.
They noted despite his cognitive ability being “very limited” he understood what he did was wrong and felt sad and sorry for the victims of the child exploitation.
He was assessed for “offence-related sexual arousal” and was not considered to need rehabilitation. Nevertheless he has engaged with WellStop, a community-based organisation that aims to prevent sexual abuse.
He has no previous convictions and would like to get a driver’s licence and a job as a night shelf filler at a supermarket.
The sentencing judge had agreed the conviction would make it hard for Gordon-Stables to get a job, but told him “we used to brand people’s faces and cut their noses and ears off and this is the modern equivalent”.
But Justice van Bohemen said the judge’s comments showed he was trying to place “moral opprobrium” on Gordon-Stables rather than properly assess the gravity of his specific offending.
He said for someone whose life was so constrained it was not surprising Gordon-Stables had explored the internet and been sent unsolicited material. He said the circumstances did not warrant cutting him off from all the measures he might use to become self-sufficient.
He quashed the conviction and discharged Gordon-Stables.
