Mum used WhatsApp, Kik to swap child exploitation material

In a ‘gross abuse of trust’, a mother took pictures of her naked, autistic son and swapped them online in chats with paedophiles in exchange for other child exploitation material.

Generic picture

A Central Queensland mother who once worked as a nurse in a mental health unit took 31 pictures of her naked, pre-pubescent autistic son and swapped them online in chats with paedophiles in exchange for other child exploitation material.

Her crimes were detected by interstate police after they uncovered the material which identified the victim.

Crown prosecutor Joshua Phillips said an examination of her devices revealed the woman used WhatsApp and Kik to exchange CEM.

“It is a gross abuse of trust for a mother to betray her young son,” he said.

Mr Phillips said the child was subject to a shared custody arraignment, resulting in his father being unaware of the offending.

“Parents need to know this is to be denounced and will be punished by an actual custodial sentence,” he said.

The woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of the child victim, claimed she started the five-month offending period because she was suffering adjustment disorder post major surgery and had disassociative episodes.

She also claimed she had been sexually, physically and mentally abused by family members growing up.

Defence barrister Sheridan Shaw said her client suffered chronic illnesses and mental health diagnoses which would make her vulnerable to harm in the prison environment.

The court was provided with a psychologist’s report and medical documents, however Judge Jeff Clarke raised questions about the timeline of the defendant’s employment history, qualifications obtained, allegations she had made about abuse carried out upon herself, timeline of relationships and her medical issues.

He ordered a “comprehensive psychiatric analysis with fact checking” to be done as part of a presentence report and that it be provided to parties within 28 days.

Judge Clarke said there was nothing before him at this point to convince him the defendant should not spend time in actual custody, revoked her bail and remanded her in custody.

He adjourned the woman’s matters to April 21 for a mention.