Scott William James Boyd faces multiple child exploitation charges but police brief still outstanding

A 52-year-old man was charged in October with 96 offenses, but his lawyers are still waiting for the police brief of evidence.

Police have been given an ultimatum by a Toowoomba court to complete and disclose to defence lawyers the brief of evidence relating to a 52-year-old man charged with multiple grooming and child exploitation material matters.

Scott William James Boyd was initially charged with 60 charges including multiple counts of grooming children, child exploitation material and indecent treatment of a child in October.

He was charged with a further 25 counts of similar matters two weeks later.

Police claim Mr Boyd allegedly reached out to mothers online in an attempt to access their children for sex.

He is now facing 96 charges which include: 40 counts of grooming a child under 16 years or parent – expose to indecent matter child or fictitious person believed to be under 12; 39 counts of grooming child under 16 years or parent – expose to indecent matter; eight of using carriage service to prepare to cause harm or engage in sexual activity with or procure for sexual activity person under 16; two counts each of making child exploitation material, indecent treatment of child under 16; and one count each of involving a child in making child exploitation material, possessing child exploitation material and procuring young person for penile intercourse.

Toowoomba Courthouse in Hume St, Toowoomba City.

He has not as yet been called upon to enter any pleas to the charges.

The police brief of evidence was to be disclosed to the defence by December 4, however, Legal Aid Queensland solicitor Nikola Prince told Toowoomba Magistrates Court this week no material had been provided to the defence.

Magistrate Clare Kelly adjourned the case for two days in which time the police prosecution was to update the court as to where the police material was.

On Friday, December 22, police prosecutor Nick Pratt told the court the outstanding statements had been received from the complainant and another police officer, both from interstate, but they had yet to be checked by the Queensland authorities which was procedure.

Mr Pratt said the arresting officer was hoping to have the brief checked forthwith but if it wasn’t it would be prepared early next month.

Ms Prince asked Magistrate Clare Kelly for a direction that the brief be disclosed as her client was in custody.

Ms Kelly directed the brief of evidence be disclosed to the defence by January 9 and adjourned the case for mention back in the same court on January 12.