"Canberra News, Views and Opinion"
The name of the man to have committed seven sexual offences against a twelve year old boy (four acts of indecency, two sex acts and one count of using the internet to deprave young people) has been released in an article by ABC News today.
Michael David Watt, a 25 year old youth worker from Conder, allegedly committed the offences when the boy was in his care between November 16, 2011 and February 23 of this year.
Michael was granted bail by the ACT Magistrates Court, despite the prosecution opposing bail saying that they feared for other children.
Magistrate David Mossop granted bail on the conditions Watt surrender his passport, report to police, not contact the victim or work with children.
This isn’t the first time Watt has been accused of child sex offences according to the Canberra Times.
And the ACT Magistrates Court also heard the Conder man had been accused of child-sex offences in New Zealand but there was no evidence charges were laid.
I don’t know about you, but I’m not a fan of this guy walking around until his next court date next month, even if he’s ‘not allowed to work with children any more’.
What do you guys think?
Loading ...UPDATE 19/04/12 11:04: Canberra Grammar School have posted an Important Notice from the Head in relation to this.
Loading ...
Where’s BerraBoy68?
Any idiot who believes that Child Porn consists of naked kiddy pictures is seriously deluded. Any person who thinks that there is no correlation between a person who commits an act of indecency against a child won’t look at images that encourage their prediliction is also seriously off their rocker. Having worked in a place where I have seen the descriptions of child exploitation material (thankfully not the actual pictures or I would be a basket case) I know that they are never just pictures of naked children. Every person that downloads these images contributes to the abuse of a child and the destruction of their innocence.
Truthiness, your comments scare the hell out of me, you appear to be trying to justify something that you perceive as harmless. Viewing Child Exploitation Material is not harmless. It is certainly not harmless to the child and it only encourages those who perpetrate these acts to continue doing so because they now can share with so-called like minded people. And yes, Truthiness, they do share. I have seen the documentation to prove it. I have also seen documents about paedophile sites where subscribers are encouraged to share their abuse images to prove that they are who they say they are as a ‘buy in’ to the sick little community.
Truthiness, get some help. Get it now. There is no excuse for looking at these images no matter what you say. Anyone who thinks differently is trying to justify this behaviour and there is no justification for the abuse of a child. Ever.
legal_chick86 said :
Exactly this guy has nothing to lose.
It seems cruel to give someone a last-taste of freedom when it’s almost certain they are about to spend a big chunk of their life in prison. Mr Watt will be sitting at home nothing to do except dwell on his bleak future, counting down the days until sentencing.
Also, until Mr Watt is locked-up the victim’s family has to fight that natural urge of just driving over to his house and bashing/killing him.
Truthiness said :
Truthiness slips a conspiracy theory of epic proportions in his post and no one called him on it?
This site used to pound crazycheaster for her conspiracies about CIT management, but let one go about a child-sex ring operating above the law?
After what the Wood royal commission dug up you wouldn’t want to discount the possibility.
It just doesn’t excuse anything else.
BearBuns said :
I acknowledge that it is a very emotional topic. Which is why it becomes extra important to read what people are writing and not just jump to conclusions. The way I read that, the point that was being made was that there is a risk in focusing a significant part of the available resources on this issue because in the scheme of things it involves only a very small percentage of all sexually abused children. And I think every case is one too many and also that the penalties for downloading child porn should remain. But personally I can kind of understand thrutiness’ frustration with there being a real risk that this issue will distract too much attention from the far more tragic fact that the majority of sexual abuse happens in the home (I think it is about 85% of cases) and next by people known to the child. Abuse by strangers is very rare, despite what the media and hysterical parents try to make us believe. And in that context it is probably pretty irrelevant to the victims if the abuser does or does not download child porn.
In addition to that, the best way to prevent the abuse that results in the images is for the AFP to continue the work they are doing in cooperation with international colleagues to track down the source and catch the animals who are responsible for it. They have had a couple of success in recent years and I have nothing but praise for their efforts.
And after all that, I have to repeat that this guy in the OP was NOT charged for possessing child porn images.
Until we name and shame every child sex offender, and make these offensive topics common conversation, kids won’t feel that its something they can discuss and raise with their parents and they keep the shame, and secret to themselves. It needs to be a conversation every parent has with their child, nephews, nieces etc…. the more its discussed – the less shame and ‘taboo’ there is about this, and the more reporting will occur. IMO
The fact he was in a position that carried a duty of care (as a youth worker) and he broke that duty of care, I think his presumption to be bailed has been lost as a consequence of his act. It is one thing to commit an offence, it is another when you have a specific duty of care to prevent offences like this. Bail is a priveledge not a right, and in this instance I think he has lost that right as his act can be described as “heinous” due to the breach of the duty of care specifically entrusted to him. For that reason I would deny him bail.
Sammy said :
Indeed. Very “brush under the carpet” sort of response. Shouldn’t the school instead be calling for anyone who might have something to report to contact them confidentially and in an emotionally safe environment?
Mordd said :
s22 of the Bail Act 1992 is a good place to look for the actual criteria they use.
I suspect 22(1)(c) in particular was the issue, these creeps tend to get beaten up in custody. Court probably doesn’t want to see him get beat up then get compo and endanger the case. Sucks in the short term but he’ll get to meet his match eventually behind bars.
Having been a primary school teacher and seen the effects that sexual abuse had on children I think the only real solution for those found either abusing children or posting pictures of children being abused is capital punishment…end of story.
BearBuns said :
Really? “Downloading music is killing the music industry”, “downloading movies is killing the film industry”, “piracy is killing game developers” but downloading Child Porn HELPS the child porn industry?
I assume you meant to say “purchasing” or something of the sort – I’m not in any way shape or form defending the possession of such images by the way (likely a stepping stone toward offences against real children), but it’s hysterical and absurd to claim somebody merely downloading such material is directly supporting its production.
Unless they’re actually paying for it (which some such offenders presumably are), there’s no incentive to produce further material created by someone downloading the material. They’re a sick f*ck who needs to be dealt with before they commit an offence in person, but don’t make absurd claims of a causal link that isn’t there.
It’s most certainly necessary that the state intervene, punish, counsel and keep a very close eye on anyone who’s found in possession of CP of course (particularly the latter).
farq said :
There *was* a ring of extremely well-connected paedophiles operating in Canberra between the 70′s and 90′s. They were well-acquainted with the bent pervert lawyer John Marsden (who can no longer dishonestly sue people, on account of his being dead, hooray), and John Marsden wasn’t the only member of the legal fraternity of their number. Not by a long shot. In fact, it was a bit of a lawyers’ own boy-molesting club.
The AFP looked into them for a while in the late 90′s and experienced all the same things Channel 7 experienced with Marsden at around the same time: the paedophiles had the best legal advice/training money could buy and they expended inordinate resources on interfering with all the potential witnesses. And the victims were all powerless and scared, damaged and easily discredited.
HenryBG said :
There have also been large rings of extremely well -cnnected and powerful child-sex traffickers busted across Europe.
far_northact said :
+1
This site http://safelyeverafter.com/tips.html has some great ideas on it for ways to help teach your children ways to suss out and stay away from ‘tricky people’ . I think it’s a good resource for parents.
DeskMonkey said :
That’s a pretty good question and we can only hope there are satisfactory answers.
Jim Jones said :
Yeah, but we’re talking about the police force that locks up the convenient local nutter after a mafia hit on their own assistant commissioner.
Firstly, I am saddened that my comments in this thread have led people to wish harm upon me, and that some think I need help. I am certainly not promoting the idea of child porn in any way and am sorry for even bringing up the topic in relation to an unrelated case.
That said, I do feel the focus is not on the worst offenders, politicians, police, lawyers, clergy and foreign dignitaries who organise and protect child exploitation rings. We know they do it, because they keep being caught.
MP Terry Martin http://aussiecriminals.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/pedophile-ex-mp-terry-martin/
MP Bob Collins http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Collins_%28politician%29
MP Leslie Logan: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-19/former-mp-named-in-sex-abuse-inquiry/3899130
Peter Versi http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/developer-peter-versi-named-as-sex-abuser/story-e6freuzi-1226325298562
Corrupt police protect pedophile judge: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/4686
Not to mention the hundreds of priests who have avoided punishment after their crimes were revealed. http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/seewhatsusiesays/index.php/heraldsun/comments/pedophile_priests_deserve_to_be_named_and_shamed/
I could go on and on and on, but what we see time and again is that when these people do get caught, the rest of the ring is not brought down with them. Time and again we have people coming forward and claiming just such a powerful ring exists, protected by the police: http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/conspiracy/coverups/aussiechildabuse3.html
And as others have said, this is not just an Australian thing, there have been rings like this found in Europe and America, South America, Asia and Russia. In fact every continent on earth is home to these corrupt and powerful rings, trading children’s lives. For a bit more background on just how endemic this problem is, I urge you to check out this Discovery channel investigation into an American child prostitution ring, which was banned from broadcast after pressure from politicians, lawyers and police. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weSzkIB8184
Every case of child abuse is heinous and wrong, viewing the images of such crimes is not right either, however it is not actually the same thing as abusing the child. What really gets my goat is that for every offender the media and police are happy to throw under the bus, a hundred other high profile offenders gets let off the hook. There are kids being traded into prostitution in this very city, and the best our police can do is track down a teacher with a previous record after a child comes to them. Where is the investigation into the child trafficking? Where is the investigation into the politicians who use this city as their sick playground, or the diplomats who have children shipped in from their country of choice.
We are barely scratching the surface, and the more the media focuses on individual cases like this, painting paedophiles as lonely strangers, the more they miss the far greater problems which are much deeper within our society.
Tetranitrate said :
Wow…what a terrible argument you have right there. Well done. A more apt comparison would be to look at the steady rise of music, movies and games available for online download as the demand for it increased.
We’re not saying that there is a casual link (though I wouldn’t be shocked if there was). We’re simply saying that child porn is not okay. If you personally think that there is nothing wrong with downloading child porn, then by all means argue away.
Truthiness said :
I think that you got people’s backs up when you started off defending those that download child porn. Apart from the fact that it was incredibly creepy, it was really irrelevant as well.
Now I kinda see what you were trying to say. Next time, start off with that instead
I gave a qualified “yes.”
As in; “Yes he should be allowed bail, if he promises to off himself quietly when out.”
As someone who has had a father and a fiance commit suicide in separate instances after allegations of this type of misconduct – one case definitively proven false, one case probably true – I can tell you that the tacit gentleman’s agreement in police circles to give men, especially older men, time to kill themselves before being taken into custody is abominable. It does not help those making the allegations, who are left with an enormous legacy of guilt (although in the case of those making false allegations, it’s deserved). It does not help the families of those accused, who will live with was-he-or-wasn’t-he-guilty forever. It does not distinguish between the guilty and the innocent, who face just as much shame and ruin. Rightly or wrongly, we do not have capital punishment in this country, and to create systems that actively encourage an informal death penalty is wrong.
kepayne said :
That’s just plain intellectual dishonesty.
In the very post you quoted I specifically said:
Tetranitrate said :
Firstly I would like to commend Riot for posting this story and getting the information out there and for getting a discussion happening. Pity we don’t talk about this more freely.
From a mum’s point of view it scares the hell out of me that someone like this was put in a position of trust to already vunerable children, why weren’t more checks done? It is something that I worry about with my kids and hope as a family we never have to experience.
I don’t think he should have been let out on bail, the fact that he may not be a flight risk is minor compared to the fact that he will more than likely reoffend before his court date. The courts have a lot to answer for to have let someone like this back out into society. I do believe that everyone should have their day in court to have their side told. But when it comes to the fact that the a ‘system’ already failed us once in protection and the fact this man has previous enquiries about his past then they should have held him on bail.
Personally I think anyone who gets their jollies looking at naked kid pictures are just as bad as those who then go on to act on their fanatsy. I do think that looking is only the start before they need progress to something more to get their fix. I don’t think that any person who does any crime against a minor should be given the liberty to stay in society, they should be locked up for not only their safety but for all those around them and to restrict any access to what they may see as their fantasy.
Tetranitrate said :