By Cam Lucadou-Wells
A man jailed for “one of the most destructive cases of stalking” including posting photos of his wife online has applied to get back his seized computer and family photos from police.
The City of Casey man, who Star News has chosen not to identify, applied to Dandenong Magistrates’ Court to halt the destruction of the “tainted” computer.
He also applied to retrieve the photos and documents stored on the computer, then for it to be wiped clean and returned.
In October, he was jailed for nine months by Dandenong Magistrates’ Court; the computer and its contents were ordered for destruction.
During the 21 May application, his lawyer argued that he faced “undue hardship” if the computer, his phone and his electronic tablet weren’t returned to him.
“It’s important for him gaining stability in his life.”
He sought his holiday photos because he’d since suffered “estrangement” from his family, his lawyer told the court.
“Funny that!” magistrate Jack Vandersteen said.
“It’s a consequence of what he did. It’s one of the most destructive cases of stalking in terms of the impact on his family.”
Mr Vandersteen noted one of the offending photos featured a holiday photo of his wife with his daughters cropped out of the image.
Another featured his wife and “her cleavage” being identified within a group shot, Mr Vandersteen said.
The lawyer said the man required his “personal” documents such as superannuation and taxation files and his resumé.
They could be transferred onto a “clean” hard drive supplied by his sister, he submitted.
In opposing the application, police prosecutor Leading Senior Constable Kerryn Savin said it could be hard to distinguish which files were “tainted”.
Undisclosed files and photos could also be hidden in “all different areas” of the computer.
The phone and tablet were the initial means of proving he had uploaded the offending images, Lead Sen Const Savin said. The computer was used to access offending websites.
The applicant’s lawyer said he was aware it won’t be a fast process, but could specify the required folders ‘My Documents’ and ‘My Videos’.
Mr Vandersteen ruled that the man could be supplied copies of the documents only.
“It’s not appropriate for anything further than that because it’s all tainted property, all used in the commission of the offence.”
