An Australian Federal Police officer and his twin brother charged with child exploitation offences have had new charges laid against them.
AFP officer Joshua Rod Tiffen and Kenan Lee Tiffen, 41, sought a variation of their bail conditions in the ACT Magistrates Court on Tuesday.
Josh Tiffen has been charged with seven counts of distributing intimate images without consent, two counts of intimate observations or capturing visual data and one count of possessing child exploitation material.
- Abuser Name or Alias:: AFP officer Joshua Rod Tiffen (41) and Kenan Lee Tiffen, 41
- Abusers Organisation:: Australian Federal Police
Australian Federal Police officer facing multiple child sexual offences will fight charges
- Abusers job or title:: AFP Officer
- Judges name: Magistrate Louise Taylor
- Judges title: Magistrate
- Paedophile protected: 35yo AFP Officer from Palmerston ACT
- Paedophile protectors court location: ACT Magistrates Court
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Police
- Created: Friday, 12 July 2019 23:13
- Written by Alecomm2

An Australian Federal Police officer accused of having a sexual relationship with a child will fight multiple criminal charges against him.
The 35-year-old man, who was suspended from duty last month, did not appear in the ACT Magistrates Court today.
- Abuser Name or Alias:: 35 year old AFP Officer from Palmerston, ACT
- Abusers Organisation:: Australian Federal Police
- Matter Resolved?: Ongoing
AFP officer charged with child exploitation offence
- Abusers job or title:: Queensland AFP Officer
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Police
- Created: Friday, 08 September 2017 23:06
- Written by Australian Federal Police

The male officer has been suspended from duty and is expected to appear in Brisbane Magistrates Court today (8 September) following a search warrant at a residence in Geebung yesterday.
The officer was formally charged by AFP Professional Standards with accessing child exploitation material contrary to section 474 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth).
- Abuser Name or Alias:: A 45-year-old AFP officer from Queensland
- Abusers Organisation:: Australian Federal Police
- Matter Resolved?: Ongoing
Police officer accused of using hidden cameras in home, possessing child abuse images
- Abusers job or title:: Canberra AFP Officer
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Police
- Created: Friday, 10 May 2019 22:58
- Written by Elizabeth Byrne - ABC News

A Canberra Australian Federal Police (AFP) officer and his twin brother are behind bars after police allegedly found a large quantity of child pornography, hidden cameras and a device transmitting offensive material at their home.
- Abuser Name or Alias:: Joshua Tiffen
- Abusers Organisation:: Australian Federal Police
- Matter Resolved?: Ongoing
Perth cop to face court over child porn
- Abusers job or title:: Police Constable
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Police
- Created: Friday, 28 June 2019 22:35
- Written by Joondalup Times
A PERTH police constable will face court after child porn was allegedly found at his home during a police raid.
The 29-year-old from Currambine is due to appear in the Perth Magistrates Court today charged with child exploitation offences.
Australian Federal Police said Canada’s National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre alerted police to alleged child exploitation offences.
- Abuser Name or Alias:: Perth Police Constable : 29-year-old from Currambine
- Abusers Organisation:: WA Police
- Matter Resolved?: Ongoing
Paedophile Police and Hypocrisy in R v Edwards [2019] QCA 15
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Police
- Created: Sunday, 12 January 2020 22:16
- Written by JUDGES: Morrison and Philippides JJA and Boddice J
Notable Unreported Decision
Appeal Determined (QCA)
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: |
R v Edwards [2019] QCA 15 |
PARTIES: |
R |
FILE NO/S: |
CA No 269 of 2018 DC No 1920 of 2018 |
DIVISION: |
Court of Appeal |
PROCEEDING: |
Sentence Application |
ORIGINATING COURT: |
District Court at Brisbane – Date of Sentence: 19 October 2018 (Smith DCJ) |
DELIVERED ON: |
12 February 2019 |
DELIVERED AT: |
Brisbane |
HEARING DATE: |
6 November 2018 |
JUDGES: |
Morrison and Philippides JJA and Boddice J |
ORDER: |
The application is refused. |
CATCHWORDS: |
APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – GROUNDS FOR INTERFERENCE – SENTENCE MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE – where the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of using a carriage service to access child pornography material – where he was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment, to be released on a $500 recognizance after serving two months, on the condition that he be subject to probation for a period of two years – where defence counsel contended that the imposition of a period of actual custody is manifestly excessive – where the applicant was a serving federal police officer – where the majority of the child pornography material were graphic representations in the form of computer generated figures engaged in sexual activity or stories – where it was submitted the nature of the offending did not attract a period of actual custody – whether the sentence was manifestly excessive Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 17A Criminal Code (Cth), s 474.19(1) Assheton v The Queen (2002) 132 A Crim R 237; [2002] WASCA 209, cited Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v D’Alessandro(2010) 26 VR 477; [2010] VSCA 60, cited Godfrey v The Queen[2013] WASCA 247, cited McEwen v Simmons(2008) 73 NSWLR 10; [2008] NSWSC 1292, cited R v Gordon; Ex parte Commonwealth DPP[2011] 1 Qd R 429 ;[2009] QCA 209, distinguished R v Pham (2015) 256 CLR 550; [2015] HCA 39, cited R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294; [2015] NSWCCA 174, cited R v Reid [2004] QCA 9, applied |
COUNSEL: |
D A Holliday, with L M Dollar, for the applicant (pro bono) B Power for the respondent |
SOLICITORS: |
Robertson O’Gorman for the applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth) for the respondent |
- [1]
MORRISON JA: On 19 October 2018 the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of using a carriage service to access child pornography material contrary to s 474.19(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth). He was sentenced that day to 15 months’ imprisonment, to be released on a $500 recognizance after serving two months, on the condition that he be subject to probation for a period of two years.
Abuse survivor speaks out: “Cops stood guard as I was raped by politicians as a child”
- Editors notes: Baker explained how she and other children around the age of 6 were often brought to various properties and given alcohol and then raped by judges and lords. Jessa Dillow-Crisp recently testified at the Colorado State Capitol, during Human Trafficking Awareness and Advocacy Day, about the horrible experiences that she had in her past. She was unable to report the abuse or go to the police because there were a number of police officers who were involved in her kidnapping and abuse. “There was gang raping, the police officer who handcuffed me and raped me, told me I would be put in jail if I opened my voice,” she said.
- Judges name: Various Judges and Lords
- Paedophile protected: Judges and Lords and Police
- Paedophile protectors court location: Staffordshire, England.
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophile Rings
- Created: Tuesday, 26 May 2015 20:17
- Written by Matt Agorist - The Free Thought Project
Staffordshire, Eng — An abuse survivor has bravely broken her silence to tell her horrific childhood story. In an interview with Sky News, Esther Baker, 32, explained how she and other children were raped by politicians as uniformed police officers stood guard.
“I got the feeling very much that they were protecting somebody, that they were with one of the men,” said Baker.
“One of them (police officers) I knew from church. There were a few occasions where they would be in uniform, and I kind of knew, I learnt that when they were in uniform that it was going to be a rough night,”
- Abuser Name or Alias:: UK Politicians guarded by UK Police
- Abusers Organisation:: UK Government
- Matter Resolved?: No
CA Democrats author bill to protect sex offenders who lure minors
- Type of protection : Granting release
- Details
- Category: Paedophiles in the system
- Created: Tuesday, 19 February 2019 18:00
- Written by Katy Grimes - Californa Globe
No sex offender registry if perpetrator within 10 years of age of the minor
By , February 19, 2019 3:03 pm
State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblywoman Susan Eggman (D-Stockton) introduced recent legislation “to end blatant discrimination against LGBT young people regarding California’s sex offender registry.”
However, under their bill, SB 145, the offenders would not have to automatically register as sex offenders if the offenders are within 10 years of age of the minor.
Wiener claims the current law “disproportionately targets LGBT young people for mandatory sex offender registration, since LGBT people usually cannot engage in vaginal intercourse.”
Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, amended by Proposition 35 by voters in 2012 (Ban on Human Trafficking and Sex Slavery), requires a person convicted of a certain sex crime to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California.
Wiener says, “Currently, for consensual yet illegal sexual relations between a teenager age 15 and over and a partner within 10 years of age, ‘sexual intercourse’ (i.e., vaginal intercourse) does not require the offender to go onto the sex offender registry; rather, the judge decides based on the facts of the case whether sex offender registration is warranted or unwarranted. By contrast, for other forms of intercourse — specifically, oral and anal intercourse — sex offender registration is mandated under all situations, with no judicial discretion.”
“This bill would authorize a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors to seek discretionary relief from the duty to register if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor,” SB 145 states.
Proposition 35 was created and passed to protect children from sexual exploitation and sex trafficking. Victims of sex trafficking are often vulnerable children, “afraid for their lives and abused—sexually, physically, and mentally,” the Proposition said.
What Does SB 145 Also Do?
Legislators Wiener and Eggman say they are trying to shield LGBT young people from having to automatically register as sex offenders for specified sex crimes. But their bill does much more.
SB 145 would allow a sex offender who lures a minor with the intent to commit a felony (i.e. a sex act) the ability to escape registering as a sex offender as long as the offender is within 10 years of age of the minor. No specification is made as to whether the sexual offender is straight or LGBT.
SB 145 would add a section to the state’s penal code (Section 290.55) stipulating that as long as the offender is “not more than 10 years older than the minor,” they are not automatically mandated to register as a sex offender. There is no age limit or range specified, except for existing law which already excludes lewd acts with children under 14.
SB 145 appears to allow adults to victimize minors by luring them with the intent to have sex, and then shields the predator from being automatically registered as a sex offender, as in the case of a 25 year old luring a 15 year old for sex, or a 22 year old luring a 12 year old.
SB 145, as currently written, appears to allow certain sexual predators to live among the population without anyone being aware.
Why is this bill needed?
Here is the text from SB 145:
This bill would authorize a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors to seek discretionary relief from the duty to register if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor.
Digest Key – Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: NO
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 290.55 is added to the Penal Code, immediately following Section 290.5, to read:
290.55. (a) A person convicted of an offense specified in subdivision (b) may, by writ of mandate, seek discretionary relief from the duty, imposed as a result of that conviction, to register pursuant to the act if, at the time of the offense, the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor, as measured from the minor’s date of birth to the person’s date of birth.
Here is the current California Penal Code § 288.3 (2017)
(a) Every person who contacts or communicates with a minor, or attempts to contact or communicate with a minor, who knows or reasonably should know that the person is a minor, with intent to commit an offense specified in Section 207, 209, 261, 264.1, 273a, 286, 287, 288, 288.2, 289, 311.1, 311.2, 311.4 or 311.11, or former Section 288a, involving the minor shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for the term prescribed for an attempt to commit the intended offense.
(b) As used in this section, “contacts or communicates with” shall include direct and indirect contact or communication that may be achieved personally or by use of an agent or agency, any print medium, any postal service, a common carrier or communication common carrier, any electronic communications system, or any telecommunications, wire, computer, or radio communications device or system.
(c) A person convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) who has previously been convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state prison for five years.
Last week, California Globe reported on another sex crime bill introduced by California Democrats: “legislation to shield a person from the consequences of crimes they commit in California, even violent ones, as long as the person reports the crimes to authorities.The language of the proposed statute appears to immunize a person from ANY crime so long as they are reporting a violation of a sex crime law.” Sen. Scott Wiener is the author of California Senate Bill 233.
Source : https://californiaglobe.com/legislature/ca-democrats-author-bill-to-protect-sex-offenders-who-lure-minors/?unapproved=8113&moderation-hash=79a5d8207fe6f5a173520d021b8a8390#comment-8113
More Articles ...
- WA Government confirms 50 victims of child sex abuse in Pilbara, fewer than previously reported
- NT man jailed for sexually abusing family friends kids
- Victorian police in pedophile rings: victims
- Greens slam Judge Garry Neilson's comparison of incest and paedophilia to homosexuality
- Judge Sally Porkorny and Chief Justice Fairchild protecting abusers.
- Has Judge Garry Neilson outed himself for being a paedophile given he implied incest and paedophilia are OK?
- Australia’s paedophile epidemic being covered-up by judges
- Wall of Shame Judges and their accomplices
- Kansas male chauvinist pig Judge J. Patrick Walters of Wichita, US.
Subcategories
-
Adoption paedophile rings
A common problem with adoption these days is the willingness of our governments to adopt children to make couples, whom in turn are in fact adopting these children to paedophile them out.
There has already been numerous cases where males have adopted children to rape. Unfortunately in our politically correct society,it is deemed discriminative to not allow gay men to adopt children - regardless of the statistics that already one in four girls and one and five boys these days are sexually assaulted before the age of 16.
With constant barriers such as Debra Lee Furness, protective parents are finding it near impossible to not only fight against forced adoption but to keep the children safe from predators.
- Article Count:
- 2
-
Family Courts protecting Paedophiles
- Article Count:
- 8
-
Paedophiles and Foster Care
- Article Count:
- 2
-
Paedophiles in the system
- Article Count:
- 35
-
Paedophile coverups by church and state
- Article Count:
- 8
-
Paedophile Judges
- Article Count:
- 22
-
Paedophile Lawyers and Barristers
- Article Count:
- 2
-
Paedophile Police
- Article Count:
- 30
-
Paedophile Politicians
- Article Count:
- 2
-
Paedophile Pell
- Article Count:
- 29
-
Paedophile Priests
- Article Count:
- 12
-
Paedophile Rings
- Article Count:
- 68
-
Paedophile justice
- Article Count:
- 1
-
Paedophile protection by state government
- Article Count:
- 22
-
Paedophile Victims
- Article Count:
- 1
-
Paedophile Protecting Judges
- Article Count:
- 6
-
Judges protecting abusers
- Article Count:
- 3
-
Repeat Offenders
- Article Count:
- 1