Grindelwald flasher escapes conviction in Launceston Supreme Court

The man, who legally cannot be named, had not long moved from interstate when he struck up a friendship with the nine-year-old's mother and moved into their house.

READ MORE: Possible change to 2022 school start date

The Launceston Supreme Court heard the man and the child travelled to Grindelwald in January 2018, played mini-golf and swam in the pool before making their way to the spa.

When in the spa, the child ducked their head underwater and it was at that moment the man, who is now 43, removed his penis from his shorts in a "spontaneous event" he saw as a "joke".

The court heard the child then slipped and "came close to [the man's penis]" before getting out of the spa and going to the change rooms to get changed.

Justice Robert Pearce suggested the child removed themselves from the situation because they were made to feel uncomfortable.

Counsel acting for the Crown told the court when the pair were driving back to Launceston from Grindelwald the man told the child he had shown his penis "because it's funny" and "not to tell your mother what occurred".

The court heard the man, who pleaded guilty to indecent assault when faced with the matter, had forged a bond with the child during his time at the child's house to the point the child had an attachment to him.

The man found the attachment "kind of flattering".

Before meeting the nine-year-old and his mother the man lived interstate and travelled to Tasmania to "escape a series of unfortunate events" and so he could "start over again".

During his time in Tasmania, before moving back interstate after the indecent assault, the man worked for organisations that saw him working alongside children.

The man's defence counsel told the court the indecent assault, which saw charges laid against him, had a "devastating effect" on his client, but that he was "very remorseful".

Justice Pearce referred to a letter from the man when he said it had contained the words of a man who was "overwhelmed by shame".

Justice Pearce took into account a psychologists assessment that said the man was a low-risk of reoffending, and had substantial remorse and empathy for the child when he decided not to record a conviction upon the man.

READ MORE: How airports will look from December 15

The court had earlier heard how a conviction would prevent the man from gaining the authority to work with children at any stage in the future, would impose a "high hurdle to overcome" and would see him placed on a sex-offenders register.

Justice Pearce said the criminal charge the man was subject to as a result of the indecent assault had "already had a significant impact".

He said the man "did not pose a risk of committing a reportable offence in the future".

The man walked free from the courtroom, accompanied by his parents, without a conviction and subject to a two-year good behaviour bond.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

Follow us on Google News: The Examiner