A school teacher's notes about sexual fantasies involving his students did not constitute a breach of child pornography laws, a Victorian Supreme Court judge found yesterday.
The ruling, by Justice Robert Redlich, throws into doubt a County Court case in which Daryl Walter Quick, 59, of Altona North, faces charges of possessing and producing child pornography.
The court was told that over 30 years, Quick wrote down his sexual fantasies involving some of his students, accompanied in some cases by non-sexual photographs. In July last year, the materials were seized from his house, car and a storage unit.
Justice Redlich had been asked to rule on whether possession of the materials constituted publication of child pornography under the Crimes Act, even though they had never been made public.
Daniel Muling, then deputy chief magistrate, ruled last August at Quick's committal hearing that the material did constitute publication.
But Justice Redlich said there was no evidence that Quick had passed on any of the material.
"To construe the accused's private writings as a publication would fall outside Parliament's purpose, producing unintended consequences," he said.
"It would involve a curtailment of the freedom of each individual to record their thoughts.
"The keeping of a diary or other record of a person's fantasies or the writings of a teenage child concerning themselves, where they describe or depict pornographic conduct would be criminalised."
The matter was adjourned indefinitely and Quick remains on bail.
www.theage.com.au
The ruling, by Justice Robert Redlich, throws into doubt a County Court case in which Daryl Walter Quick, 59, of Altona North, faces charges of possessing and producing child pornography.
The court was told that over 30 years, Quick wrote down his sexual fantasies involving some of his students, accompanied in some cases by non-sexual photographs. In July last year, the materials were seized from his house, car and a storage unit.
Justice Redlich had been asked to rule on whether possession of the materials constituted publication of child pornography under the Crimes Act, even though they had never been made public.
Daniel Muling, then deputy chief magistrate, ruled last August at Quick's committal hearing that the material did constitute publication.
But Justice Redlich said there was no evidence that Quick had passed on any of the material.
"To construe the accused's private writings as a publication would fall outside Parliament's purpose, producing unintended consequences," he said.
"It would involve a curtailment of the freedom of each individual to record their thoughts.
"The keeping of a diary or other record of a person's fantasies or the writings of a teenage child concerning themselves, where they describe or depict pornographic conduct would be criminalised."
The matter was adjourned indefinitely and Quick remains on bail.
www.theage.com.au
