Where are Michels and Stanley…and what have they done?


POLICE suspect a fugitive couple at the centre of a nationwide missing persons search may have been helped by a third person.

Missing persons, Raids, Computers seized, Ghosts,Hire cars, disappearances,The Paranormal, Lovers on the run…What’s next? Taped sacrificial ceremonies?

Sounds like a movie script, but this is real and these 2 are wanted by police. WHAT FOR? well that has not been revealed publicly, but computers get seized for only a few things, fraud/embezzlement type issues and child pornography are the few I can think of. I was spot on the mark back on the 11th November, they have been making child porn in the home with underage children. I hear that one and or both might of even been in the videos themselves…If that was not bad enough they decided to transit the homemade porn as well…Scum of the earth both of them

Why they have not come forward and surrendered, or made contact through a solicitor is a mystery if they have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide. So if you know these people or are helping them, then you may find your self in as much shit as they are in, so give them up I would suggest. The cops have not gone public with all the information but the talk around town is not nice about the activities that have allegedly taken place that led to the pending charges…

STAY TUNED FOR THE LATEST AS IT COMES TO HAND FOLKS.

UPDATE No.3

 November 21, 2011 12:48PM

Craig Stanley appeared at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court for a brief file hearing this afternoon.

Mr Stanley, along with fiancee Rebecca Michels, was arrested last week after the couple had been hiding out in a remote bush camp 400km northwest of Melbourne.

The Langwarrin couple were charged with sex crimes involving a minor aged between 10 an 16.

Mr Stanley remained silent throughout the 10-minute hearing.

But his lawyer told the court he planned to apply for bail on Tuesday, Nov 27.

Ms Michels is expected to appear at the same court later today.

UPDATE No.2

Craig Stanley (right) is taken from Horsham police station to Horsham Court

 18/11/11 3.25pm: A FRANKSTON couple have appeared in court and been charged with indecent acts and making child pornography.

Craig Stanley, 28, and Rebecca Michels, 25, appeared separately before Horsham Magistrates’ Court this afternoon after being arrested this morning following three weeks on the run.

Both have been charged with indecent acts with a child under 16, making child pornography, possessing child pornography and transmitting child pornography.

The pair have been remanded in custody to appear on Monday at Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.

UPDATE No. 1   18/11/11  12.10pm: THE Frankston couple who had been on the run for the past three weeks have been found and arrested.

Craig Stanley, 28, from Langwarrin, was spotted at a supermarket in Dimboola, almost 400km northwest of Melbourne, and arrested just after 10am today.

Rebecca Michels is taken from Horsham police station to Horsham Court.

Police then went to campsite at a nearby national park where they arrested his fiancee Rebecca Michels, 25 at about 10.40am.

The couple, who were wanted over serious offences, are expected to be interviewed by police this afternoon.

Ms Michel’s father, Ross McAdie said that her family were “very, very relieved” they had been found safe.

“It’s been a long time,” he said.

“We haven’t spoken to her yet, but from a parent’s point of view you hope every minute of the day it was going to end. Thankfully we are there.”

 Mr McAdie is due to fly from Darwin to Melbourne, with wife Patricia, tonight or tomorrow.

He said he would say to his daughter when they meet: “We love you and are you safe, happy and well?”

Mr McAdie added: “Now we can turn our attention to defending the allegations.”

Ms Michel’s lawyer Ben Archbold said he would be speaking to his client over the phone and she would be giving a no comment interview to police.

The couple have been brought to Horsham where they are expected to be refused bail and remanded in custody over the weekend, he said.

Missing: Craig Stanley and Rebecca Michels...BUT WHY?

Investigators are believed to be examining whether Rebecca Michels and Craig Stanley were picked up by someone at Ballarat after they left their home at Langwarrin in Melbourne’s southeast.

They had left a note for a housemate saying they were going gold prospecting in Bendigo on October 27.

But police believe the real reason for the disappearance may be a police raid on their home earlier that day.

Officers seized a computer which allegedly contained illicit material and warrants were issued for the arrest of both.

The police swoop is believed to have been launched after a complaint from a member of the public and investigators believe there may be others yet to come forward.

Related Coverage

Detective Insp. Shayne Pannell said it was doubtful Ms Michels, 25, and Mr Stanley, 28, are still in Ballarat.

They sent the rented Nissan x-Trail, containing Mr Stanley’s prized metal detector, back to Frankston after arriving.

“They had to have a reason to go there and a reason to have the hire car sent back,” Insp. Pannell said.

“My personal opinion is they had someone meet them there. Why would you leave yourself stranded. It’s something we have to find out.”

Arrest Warrants out Craig Stanley and Rebecca Michels

Detectives are working through 40 information reports received from the public.

But there is still no clue on where they have headed and there has not been a positive sighting since October 29.

Police have been canvassing transport hubs such as taxis and train stations.

They have also contacted hotels and caravan parks in the search or fresh leads.

Police have not revealed how much money the couple took with them, but they will consider applying to have their bank accounts frozen.

Concerns remain that the pair are under heavy pressure over the police investigation into their activities.

Insp. Pannell urged the couple to get in touch, through a solicitor if necessary.

“We will continue until we find them. We want them to have a good think about it. They know what we want to talk to them for,” he said.

Anyone with information can contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or visit the website www.crimestoppers.com.au.

75 thoughts on “Where are Michels and Stanley…and what have they done?

  1. the paranormal angle the media are playing on today is a bit ridiculous :) Hope someone here can enlighten us on what they are rumoured to have done. curiouser & curiouser

    Like

  2. I haven’t heard any rumours but I’m happy to start one.

    It was reported that Craig Stanley once worked as a private investigator. It was also reported that the police confiscated videos and found illicit material on their computer.

    My guess is that Mr Stanley filmed people in compromising situations and attempted to blackmail them.

    Like

  3. nice one Kim i couldnt put my finger on it but that is surely it. I highly doubt they are fiddlers so that rules that out. However the stuff with the computers email/vids.pics etc sets them up and the coppers with irrefutable evidence. Well done super sleuth, As a bookmaker I would have that very short.

    Like

    • Hi Kim and Bill, yes you could be right, it sure does make a lot of sense (or is that cents? get it?) Because they did nick off into hiding with 4 grand apparently, a bit of extortion going on maybe. Lets see if anyone else comes up with other theories

      Like

    • 2 quick questions:

      1. Why do you “highly doubt they are fiddlers”?

      2. Why should your opinion rule a possible scenario in or out?

      I realise that those questions could be read as combative but that’s not how they’re intended. I’m genuinely interested in your responses.

      The fact that these two have vanished so comprehensively makes me suspicious that it was more than simple fraud. Extortion? Possibly. The blanket silence is intriguing, too.

      Like

    • I’m no detective but 3 things have remain puzzling to me from when it was first learnt the police had visited them on the morning of their disappearance.

      If the police had grounds to suspect them of such illigal activity when they raided the house and found such material then why didn’t they arrest or detain them for further investigation, especially when they make claim about computers email/vids.pics etc as irrefutable evidence.

      I assume you raid a house if your suspicions or intelligence is good enough to bring forth evidence or charges.

      Why did the police not inform the family that they had spoken with the couple on the morning of the disappearance, instead they string the family along treating the case as a missing case

      Like

  4. And in addition to my earlier comment, my wife suggested that perhaps Ms Michels was used as bait. So she may be featured in any videos.

    If you look up “Badger Game” on Wikipedia you can read a brief history of this type of scam.

    Like

  5. very very good kim and wife…i think your on the money with that theory….going to look up “badger game” now…yeah she probably the bait..he the guy in the closet filming.

    Like

  6. Amazing that this is the only site on the whole wide world net that has come up with a very very credible theory by kim…it all makes sense kim..great work.

    Like

  7. this is the only site on the whole wide world net that has come up with a very very credible theory by kim…it all makes sense kim..great work.

    Like

  8. I am tipping that he investigated the wrong person ~ I am also tipping the illicit material being referred to relates to what he found and who he found it out about ~ I am also tipping the PI will now get investigated for being in breach of his license as well as now facing criminal charges for avoiding arrest.

    Whatever he found was big. Something tells me this is not just ‘blackmail’ … Whatever he found out will be dismissed from being used against anyone but the intelligence gatherer ~ who will be accused of gathering intelligence by breaching relevant legislation.

    Something smells here …

    Like

  9. I would normally agree with your theory Kim & Mrs – however – I know Rebecca personally & just can’t picture her getting strung along like that. It’s incredulous.

    I’m certainly not disagree though, you never know what changes a person will go through for their partner. The general theory in D-Town is that the fiance is a bad egg and got Bec messed up in whatever this is.

    Darwin is such a small place & I grew up with Rebecca’s family, I just pray that she comes out unscathed. She is such a lovely girl.

    Like

    • No she isn’t. She chose of her own free will to sexually assault at least one child on camera. That makes her a paedophile and a producer of child pornography. As for the assumption that “he made her do it” in some manner our other – where is your justification? How do you know that she was not the instigator and he the coerced accomplice? Because he has a Y chromosome? That’s ridiculously naive and stereotypical. I’m SO sick of the default man = predator,.woman = victim garbage. It’s factually incorrect a large percentage of the time. Or is it because you know her? Sorry, that doesn’t automatically make someone a saint either…

      Like

    • Such a loverly girl who just happens to make a little child porn on the side…..hmmmmm.
      Does it really matter who instigated it? Even if it was his idea, she went along with it. She continued to go along with it. When it looked like they were busted, she didnt go and hand herself in…..she ran with him. She hid with him. She is just as culpable as he is in this.
      I have done some really dumb things in the name of love. Put up with some really bad behaviour….but this???? If anyone i knew said, “hey, how bout we…” id smack the sick fuck in the head and go to the police….not agree to go along with it.
      Shy or not. Childlike or not….shes in it up to her neck.

      Like

  10. Hi Charlie

    I made my comments on the assumption that what was originally reported in the press was accurate. That’s a dangerous assumption at best, especially as the latest reports have family members saying that the charges aren’t as serious as the fugitive couple may think. If that’s true then my blackmail/extortion scenario is highly unlikely. But then we’re still left with the mystery as to why they’re on the run.

    Like

  11. I joined a facebook group started by Cathryn, Rebeccas sister, to help find Rebecca. Obviously this was when Rebecca was classified as Missing. The group was quickly closed down, and for damn good reason, upon the revelation after raids had been conducted, computer(s) ceased and illicit material found on a property she shared with her partner Craig (Stan) Stanley, Rebecca was a fugitive on the run.
    I happen to think Kim’s theory is credible. I ask;
    1. What year(s) did Stan work as a Private Investigator?; and
    2. What was Stan’s employment at the time he and Rebecca embarked upon their ‘run’.
    Have there been any recent sighting of the pair? I agree the “blanket of silence is intriguing”- Perplexed.

    Like

  12. Is this case officially closed now..media silence..police silence..wtf happend?…this current reporting in australia is like a proverbial tap…media leaks then tap fully turned off…no updates or anything on this case.

    Like

  13. Ha…caught the two fugitive rats..hopefully the media and police will be now more forthcoming after receiving alot of public help and interest catching them.

    Like

  14. Stevem, it makes sense that this is a blackmail / extortion case. That would perfectly explain the police silence. Blackmail victims are very frightened (with good reason) that their blackmailer will manage to carry out his threat to release the compromising stuff, even from behind bars. The victims’ marriages and careers are potentially at stake. If it was a fiddler case, I doubt there’d be the need for all this secrecy.

    I remember when a married South Australian MP was blackmailed by a man (Jake Della-Vedova) he met for gay sex. The media initially stated that the victim was an MP, but afterwards switched to simply referring to him as a “public figure”.

    Talking about fiddler cases… there’s a few kiddie porn cases that could use some follow-up. What’s been happening with the Andy Miurhead case? Has it gone to trial? (He’s long announced that he plans to fight the charges). What about Bernard Finnigan? Any more detail emerged as to the allegations, and how he plans to plead? What exactly was found in his apartment? (Again, there seemed to be a clamp-up as to the specifics). And, if someone could chase this up, I was always curious about what the outcome was in the bizarre case of Jason Ronald Cotter, arrested back in December 2008. It was weird, and the media never reported the outcome. Someone willing to dig through the court files?

    Like

  15. Absolutely stevem – you are right. I guess I got caught up because I know the family & feel for them. But yes you are correct, the victim definately deserves the support instead.

    Like

  16. I’m truly getting frustrated with some australian fellow citzens…roll call of shame recently..14 yr old bali boy..we are told by friends and relatives “he’s a good boy”..then we find out the little rat has been on the gear for ages and then tries cash in on the story..secondly we have roebuk lauded in the press as a fine upstanding man…only to find out he’s been whipping and sodomizing boys in his spare time..then now we have friends and family of these two rats michels and stanley telling us how nice they are..to find out the filthy pigs have been collecting and distributing child porn…thank goodness for aussie criminals website to tell the truth how it is and give some people a friggin reality check.

    Like

    • I agree with much of your post, but the people being whipped (which they consented to) were not boys, but men. As far as I’m concerned, this particular issue does not come under the same heading as an mp screwing a 12 year old or a scumbag couple producing child pornography.

      Consensual adult sex (no matter how kinky/depraved) =/= child exploitation.

      Like

  17. Well, my bet on why it was kept so quiet until they were arrested was for their protection, as disgusting as that concept is. Guaranteed some soft cock somewhere was afraid (justifiably really) that, given these two weren’t just collecting and distributing, but were actually PRODUCING kiddie porn, the risk of vigilantism would be higher

    Have to admit – it would be at my house. Collectors of child pornography should be blinded. Producers should be strung up by whatever protrudes and left to rot.

    Like

  18. No evidence Roebuck was a kiddie fiddler (at least not yet).

    His 3 victims (the boys that were caned) were all 19, and the last guy who accused him is 26. All adults.

    Like

  19. Ah so the Frankston fugitives finally ran out of time. It was always going to happen. They are just not that smart. No-one aided and abetted, no doubt they would have purchased an old bomb somewhere in Ballarat, how else would Stan have made it from a campsite in Little River Desert National park to a supermarket in Dimboola for supplies?

    Regardless, I do think Australia were onto the fact we were dealing with, for want of a better term, ‘kiddie fiddlers’, and so did their respective families. The actual charges would not have been released for fear that these two twenty something year olds mental state, would pop them over the edge and push them into a situation where they felt there was no choice apart from suicide. For his reason their parents plea for come forward and give yourselves up, the charges are not as bad as you might think they are, might apply.They had been given plenty of time by Detectives to give themselves up and chose not to.

    I cannot fathom what Miss Michels family, especially her 2 currently pregnant sisters, must be thinking. The charges of which they face are incredulous to say the least and no doubt have been driven by nothing short of greed.

    I wish them all the best in a court of law.

    My thoughts and healing vibes go out to the victim children and their families and hope they are able to live a normal and healthy life, as possible.

    I, for one, am thankful these two have been apprehended before they did damage to more victims, or did they?

    Like

    • Incredulous charges? I think you’ve chosen the wrong word, that one doesn’t make sense.

      And driven by greed? I think you’re judging them very generously here. I would say driven by their own perversion and sense of entitled invulnerability. They got off on what they were doing and thought they’d never get caught.

      Wish them well in court? I really hope that’s another poor choice of phrase. Personally, I wish them severe punishment and retribution.

      Like

  20. Getting back on topic for this thread, I was staggered that Stanley made no effort to change his appearance. If you look at the photos above, before and after apprehension, he looks exactly the same. You’d think he’d have shaved or something?

    Like

  21. something needs to be done in australia and the world over for that matter in adopting harsher sentencing for any child sex offence. i think its the leniency given to offenders that finds us in this current situation where child sex offences are rife – politicians, apparent upstanding citizens….yeah right!

    how many offenders get out on bail or parole and repeat offend time and time again but still get out….honestly it is unfathomable to me.

    the law should be there to protect our children, not the offenders. you touch a kid inappropriately in any way….sorry the law is you go to jail, no second chances! that’s the way it should be!

    Like

    • In a lot of cases you get more time for Raping an adult than you do for raping a child. Its just not good enough.
      Then while in jail, they are supposedly “rehabilitated” after completing a sexual offender rehab course, set free and let out into society as our neighbours. We are not even allowed to have a public sexual offender list.
      They just re-enter society, while we are left unaware of who they are and where they live/work etc.
      Meanwhile their victims are left with a life sentence.
      Australian child sex laws are inadequite to say the least.

      Like

  22. Perplexed. Meaning of Incredulous: Unwilling or unable to believe something: “an incredulous gasp”. I find myself almost in disbelief that such a young couple would commit such crimes, as I have children not far from their age.

    Driven by greed, perhaps just one motive. As for driven by “perversion and sense of entitled invulnerability”, we do not have a criminal phychological insight into Rebecca and Craig therefore as in my greed, this is your assumption. Remembering they are yet to be convicted.

    I believe this thread/site not to be a place of judgement on each others opinions. I may be wrong in my assumption.

    Like

    • Yes, as I said, that word does not make sense in the context in which you used it. YOU may be incredulous, the charges are not. Basic grammar.

      I don’t understand your unwillingness to believe these two are predators based purely on their age. The preconception that all paedophiles are “dirty old men” is ridiculous, ignorant, and guaranteed to allow sickos like this free reign until they are a) old and b) male. Ridiculous and naive viewpoint doesn’t even begin to describe ebay you are espousing.

      Hmm… Given that the charges specify indecent acts with children on camera and not specifically distribution for profit, I think I’ll go with my analysis/assumption for now, thanks ;)

      As for no judgement – are you kidding yourself? This is the internet, the home of guilt by opinion. If you think otherwise, I commiserate on your naivete, lol. ;)

      Like

  23. I spoke to someone who knows Craig, and he claimed that Craig had a long-standing propensity for teenage girls. He would hook up with a teenager for a few years and then dump her when she got too old for him.

    Note that Ms Michels first met Mr Stanley when she was 14, while he was in the Army. Presumably, he dumped her when she outgrew his preferred age.

    As to where Rebecca comes into the picture, that is more puzzling. The two had only hooked up (or “re-hooked up”) a few weeks before this business. Did she agree to a threesome or something? Dunno. I await further info on her role in this saga.

    Like

  24. Elias, that is really interesting! I have to say that I’ve had a gut feeling from the get go that it was him and not her. I don’t think that it’s just to do with him being a male either, as soon as I read the story about them going missing I felt that way. I’m not saying she is totally innocent, just that she’s not neccesarily the instigator.

    It will be interesting to hear future updates!!

    Like

    • *hands country gal a grain of salt for assistance when dealing with elias*

      Interesting that, at first, elias was completely behind the extortion theory. Now (after the main info has been released) he just happened to be chatting with “someone who knows Craig” and gets all this insight into the whole thing. Which seems to me to be very reminiscent of “This is a true story. It happened to a friend of a friend of mine…” Lol.

      Call me cynical, but…

      Like

    • So, Toke, what’s your take on Rebecca’s involvement then? Are you surprised? Is she the vapid doormat that her supporters are trying to paint her as, or is she a competent adult woman? Sorry for the inquisition, lol, I’d just like to hear from someone actually (if vaguely) connected to these people. Did you know Craig?

      Like

    • I don’t know either of them personally… and clearly my source was wrong, or maybe he doesn’t know the whole story.

      As to the “re-hooked up” business, I was just quoting from the newspaper – I have no personal knowledge.

      As to the charges against Rebecca, see my post below. It’s pretty much all from “reading between the lines” in the paper – no personal knowledge.

      Like

  25. Hey Perplexed, I went to school with the family, they are a kind bunch.

    My opinion (just an opinion guys) is that Rebecca is not quite a competent adult. When I knew her, going back a few years, she was always lovely, but somewhat of a follower and definately not outspoken or outgoing, not one to stand up for anything. I think she is quite a few emotional years below her physical age.

    Saying that though, she is definately capable of knowing right from wrong.

    Like

    • news article today
      A TERRITORY couple who spent 21 days on the run were the target of a police operation tipped off by the FBI.
      Craig Stanley, 28, and Rebecca Michels, 25, who were arrested in Dimboola, Victoria, on November 18, were raided after photos allegedly depicting child pornography were detected by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation.
      A subsequent raid and seizure of computers led to a second couple – who knew Stanley and Michels – being investigated. It is believed both couples are nudists and met at a public pool on a naked swimming night.
      Some charges emanate from a later gathering at a house in Melbourne’s west.
      It is not known if the second couple have been formally interviewed by police.
      The FBI allegedly found transmissions from a computer, which were tracked to an internet protocol address – a registered number attached to computers.
      “And again the story thickens, really feeling for the families, couldnt imagine being their parents and hearing all of this come to light. ”
      The FBI notified the Australian Federal Police, which sent the information to Victoria Police, which executed warrants on a Langwarrin property on October 27. The Langwarrin couple were charged with crimes involving a minor aged between 10 and 16.
      Michels was apparently unaware of the national manhunt for her and her fiance. Both have applied for bail.
      Michels is listed to appear in court today.

      Like

  26. Is there any new, credible info on this case?
    And @ shockhorror….the police wouldnt waste their time over 15 seconds of a 10yr old in the shower…….there was a nation wide man hunt. Raids executed. Other people have been questioned.
    Why the need to down play what these two have done?
    I realise how hard it must be for people who “know” Bec and have for years to come to grips with the fact that they dont REALLY know her at all. How confronting for those who have had her in their
    homes, been to family bbq’s, parties etc with her. Those that grew up with her and considered her a friend…..
    But pedophiles are not the sort who go out and blatantly display their behaviour. They are sly, manipulative…they KNOW they are doing the wrong thing and dont care. They take measures to ensure they dont get caught. They WANT to continue what they are doing.
    I dont undertand why people are gasping in shock and proclaiming ” NOT BEC, it must be all Craigs doing”.
    Im sorry, but wild horses couldnt drag me into something like this. She loved him so much shed do anything for him to make him happy???? Well silly her. No matter what her reasoning….she did this terrible thing. She went along with it. Noone put a loaded gun to her head.
    So how about everyone stop backing up the pedo and show some support for the victim/s…..

    Like

    • definitely not downplaying, indirectly quoting from a news article that gave the age of the child &
      I am quite certain the FBI wouldnt of alerted our authorities if it was innocent bath time as well.
      I am studying child welfare services at the moment, if you read into my message that i was downplaying it … i wasnt :)

      Like

      • Sorry… I tend to get a bit worked up and one minded about these things. Read one comment where someone called the charges “incredulous” and others were saying what a ” nice” person she is…. Then I scrolled down and saw the post about the fifteen seconds and just sounded off. Again my apologies.
        It angers me that people will defend this so called ” nice” woman. She isn’t nice. What she did was not nice. I’m from Darwin and have met Bec. I know a lot of her friends. They are all saying, ” we know Bec.she would NEVER do this. The media is making up lies…”
        Are they that small minded that they think just because they know her she is innocent??? It’s just such a dumb thing for ppl to be saying. The police would not waste their time over nothing. I can just imagine how the victim feels every time someone states that it’s all a fabricated story:(. It’s a big deal for a victim to come forward and follow thru with these allegations. Just to have it reported that it’s all a made up story:(((
        My support and best wishes go to the child victim and his/ her family. Not scum like this.

        Like

      • THANK YOU, Amz. These are the points I’ve been trying to make throughout this thread. Paedophiles aren’t all old men mouth breathing behind their computer screens. The longer the stereotype of the dirty old man remains people’s default mental image when they think of paedophiles, the more children will be sexually assaulted by all sorts of people – including that friendly young couple who just moved in next door*

        *To be clear – this was a hypothetical example. It does not refer to anyone in particular.

        Like

        • I used to write for an American site similar to this one… And I can tell you, pedophiles come in ALL shapes and sizes. Everyone from pretty young woman to slimy looking teens and yes… Dirty old men too.
          The problem is you CAN’T tell what they are by simply looking at them.
          It could be your child’s cute pre- school teacher….. Your teenagers boyfriend, your GP, your scout leader, and yes, the nice couple next door.
          Maybe branding them on the forehead on conviction would do the trick. Then everyone could recognize and avoid them. But till then, we just have to be aware that it could be anyone. Sad, but that’s reality for you !

          Like

    • Really? Is this rumor or fact? I only ask as theres been so little info put out. I’m looking to write an article on this for a crime site so any info ( facts) are very appreciated.

      Like

  27. From todays Age:

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/frankston-woman-released-on-bail-as-police-sift-through-child-porn-images-20111202-1oadd.html

    “It will be alleged that Michels posed naked and in various states of undress in 76 photos with a 10-year-old, her partner and two other adults, the Melbourne Magistrates Court heard today.

    Detective Leading Senior Constable Rosemary Ross told the court Michels was in various positions in the photographs but they did not depict sexual activity.”

    Like

  28. Child pornography offences (Vic Crimes Act)

    Child pornography offences under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic):
    Knowingly possessing child porn: s. 70 (penalty: up to 5 years’ imprisonment
    Making or producing child porn: s. 68 (10 years maximum)
    Inviting or procuring a minor in order to make or produce child porn: s. 69 (10 years max).

    Like

  29. Okay guys… I have some clarification for you. And for those of you wondering about Rebecca and her role.

    We need to separate what exactly the case is against Craig, and what the case is against Rebecca.

    Craig is accused of possessing (and maybe distributing 40K+ images and 400+ vidoes of kiddie porn, much of it vile, gruesome, and horrific. HE didn’t even bother seeking bail. He chose to run as he knows he faces being locked up for a long time. His activities explain the FBI’s involvement.

    Rebecca got bail, as the charges against her are far weaker and more dubious. As I understand it, she is a nudist, and she is alleged to have posed in the nude (in a private home) in photos and a 15-second video which included a 10 year old child and her parents. Note the police statement that “none of the photos involved sexual activity”. She may very likely contest the allegation that these images constituted child pornography under the law. The police submission to the court is that she is not at risk of re-offending. The only opposition to bail was that she was a flight risk. She likely faces a small sentence if convicted, at least compared to Craig. Does this help clarify things?

    (I’m sure we will now get a heated debate on the rights and wrongs of nudist activity which includes children, but that’s a different matter to Craig and his horrifying stash).

    Like

  30. As far as Craig is concerned… besides for his possession and distribution of a huge stash of vile and horrific material. What I’m NOT clear about is what he is (and is not) alleged to have done with actual kids. Rebecca is alleged to have posed nude (not sure of the specifics) with no overt sexual activity, but as to Craig… I have yet to hear if there’s more he’s allegedly done.

    (I stress, all from the papers… no personal knowledge here).

    As to the Victorian law.

    Child porn is defined as material which:

    (1) Depicts a child or children engaged in sexual activity. (Clearly not the case in the images which Rebecca posed in, by the police admission)

    (2) Depicts a child or children in an indecent, sexual manner or context. (I await seeing how this plays out in court. As I said, dunno much about the specifics of images).

    I’m not a lawyer, so feel free to point out if I’ve missed anything or made any mistakes.

    Like

    • I think that what differentiates pics in this context from those of genuinely innocent nudist shots is the word “posed”. This could cover innocent poses, of course, but given the situation, I would not be surprised to hear/read that they are suggestive, even if not overtly sexual. Obviously this is merely my opinion, but it seems logical to me that “posed” pics of a naked child taken by a child porn enthusiast (at the absolute least) are very unlikely to be completely devoid of suggestive content.

      Like

      • There’s also the issue of “various stages of undress”. Does this refer to regular clothes or more suggestive garments such as lingerie or fetish gear? I think this would have to be even more relevant if the latter is the case.

        Like

  31. The case is she is a grown woman who should know right from wrong . ” It will be alleged that Michels posed naked and in various states of undress in 76 photos with a 10-year-old, her partner and two other adults”.WHO TAKES PHOTOS LIKE THIS ? ROCKSPIDERS .

    Like

    • My mother is a nudist, as is her husband. I can garuntee you that they would not EVER pose naked in photos with children. They know this is innapropriate. My children regularly stay with my mother. when they are there, she covers up.
      This whole “but shes a nudist” trip is just a really piss poor excuse.
      She posed naked with minors. The minor was also naked. They didnt take one or two family snaps…there were hundreds of posed photos.
      I agree with Anthony. ROCKSPIDERS!!!
      Sad thing is, with the right lawyers…..shell prob get off :(

      Like

  32. A few things strike me here.
    First, the issue of wisdom and appropriateness. I’d say that, as a rule, posing in nudist shots with children is very unwise. Such pictures, even if taken innocently, will inevitably at some point find their way into the stashes of those with not-so-innocent interests. This case is a perfect example. Rebecca would have needed look no further than her boyfriend Craig to find such a person. In her defence, she may not have known of that side of him. And, as others have suggested she may be somewhat emotionally immature… If not for these two things, I’d say knowingly posing for such photos for a guy like Craig (a hardcore kiddie porn enthusiast) would be criminally irresponsible.

    Now to the law:
    I suspect, in a case like this, the images may be sent to the Office of Film and Literature classification for assessment. If they decide that they don’t depict the child in a sexualised fashion, the case goes no further. And the long-standing ruling is that nudity alone does not automatically quality. Remember the Bill Henson case? Still, as Perplexed has wisely observed, if Craig was involved in staging the images, I don’t favour her chances.

    As to penalties, the nature of the images IS (rightfully, IMHO) seen as a very relevant factor. The child abuse involved in producing nudist images is (relatively) far less than that involved in producing images of children being raped and molested. Ergo, the former usually attract a significantly lesser sentence for posession than the latter. For those interested, look up the wikipedia article on the COPINE scale (which is used to measure the relative evil of different types of kiddie porn). There’s kiddie porn which is merely bad, and then there’s kiddie porn which is truly horrific. (Same as pretty much any crime, it can vary in severity).

    All this, remember, involves Rebecca. Craig’s in far deeper, with 40k+ images and 400+ videos, many horrific. Still await to hear what twisted things he’s supposedly done with real kids, beyond small-fry nudie shots. I suppose we’ll have to wait.

    Like

  33. Ms Michels, who is tiny and has a child-like stature, smiled and nodded from the prisoner’s dock to her father, Ross McAdie, who travelled to Melbourne for the bail hearing.

    Sen-Det Ross said the FBI alerted Australian Federal Police that a number of child pornography images had been uploaded to a website from an email address in Australia that contained the word “lolitasforever”.

    On October 27 police raided the Langwarrin home of Mr Stanley and Ms Michels and seized a number of computers and storage devices and two days later the couple went missing after telling friends they were going gold prospecting near Ballarat.

    Sen-Det Ross said that examination of the computer files revealed a number of images of Ms Michels, Mr Stanley and two other adults sitting naked on a couch together with a 10-year-old girl.

    As a result of police inquiries the other couple are facing charges and the child is in the care of the DHS.

    Under cross examination from defence barrister James Trevallion the detective said it appeared Mr Stanley was a “controlling person” and a witness had described him as being possessive.

    But Sen-Det Ross said that in the pornographic images with the child Ms Michel appeared to enjoying herself.

    “The accused is laughing and she appeared to be a willing participant,” the detective said.

    Outside court Ms Michels’ solicitor, Ben Archbold said his client was happy to be allowed to return to her family in Darwin until the case continues next year.

    Whats to smile about Bec??? The idea of this pedo being released into Her parents care in Darwin makes me ill. Her sisters have kids. Will she have acsess to these children??? Just not good enough.
    I dont care how child like she is. I have children who as young as six knew the difference between good and bad touching. She knew she was doing wrong. How could she not know that kiddie porn is illegal?? How could she condone this because “she loved him.”
    Knowing a person is capable of raping a child …or even knowing they “get off” on pictures and videos of others raping children…..how could you sleep in the same bed as such a person and NOT want to bludgeon them to death in their sleep?
    I wonder exactly how she rationalized this to herself. I wonder if she regrets putting her sisters children at risk…..i wonder if she even cares.
    I really hope she keeps a low profile here in Darwin, coz i can think of plenty of parents who would LOVE to show her exactly what they think of her disgustingly piss poor behaviour and even more piss poor excuses…..GRRRRRRR at the so called “justice” system.

    Like

    • I read those descriptions too and they infuriate me. It’s clear that the tried and true “He’s evil, she’s just an innocent pawn who loved too much” paradigm-setting is well and truly underway >=/

      Emotionally dependent or not, in “love” or not, unless she is actually incompetent to stand trial (in which case she should be housed securely under the care of the state guardianship board or it’s equivalent and not allowed contact with minors) then she must know that what she did is illegal, even if she doesn’t think it’s “wrong”. We are known to be a culture that is very concerned about child abuse. Intolerance of this is everywhere,.vocal and loud. Where was she during the Henson issue? Under a rock? No, I do not accept for a second that a competent adult, no matter how “childlike” (eurgh!), would not know this is not acceptable.

      Like

    • I would hope the child has been removed from the parents care until they can come up with a credible excuse as to why they allowed their daughter to be filmed nude with naked adults……and id hope this child is getting all the support and counselling the system has to offer. She is going to need it.

      Like

  34. ..Computers only get seized for a few reasons? Computers get seized whenever there is evidence stored on them of any form relating to any crime, from earnings projections for drug dealers to an email relating to an assault. Hell, they seize computers when they are stolen as well… You are CLEARLY an authority on this type of thing. Idiot.

    Like

  35. He may not be an authority on the matter….but he was right in his assumptions. They are pedophiles and had hundreds of images of child porn. Does it matter why the computer was seized as long as these two are not around children anymore?

    Like

Post your thoughts here, then PRESS POST COMMENT button folks, cheers

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s