John Ronald Brown, 49, appeared in the ACT Supreme Court via electronic means on Friday for what was supposed to be a sentence hearing.

He had pleaded guilty in August to a charge of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child, with the offence taking place in late 2019 and early the following year.

Agreed facts, tendered to the court on Friday, show Brown was friends with the parents of his victim for many years in the lead-up to the offending.

He first encouraged the boy to perform oral sex on him while at the child's home for dinner.

A few days after this incident, he was there again for a party when he led the boy into a bedroom.

Brown told the boy to carry out sexual acts on him, and the boy did.

In text messages sent a few hours later, the child told Brown they must "never repeat it".

The offender replied by writing: "Deal".

But Brown continued the abuse on a cruise he and his wife embarked on with the victim's family a few weeks later.

He fondled the boy in a bed on the ship on one occasion, only ceasing when the child told him: "John, this has got to stop."

Brown made cryptic comments to the boy's parents over the next few days, mentioning there were "some things he could not say because if [they] knew, things would never be the same between them again".

His offending came to light not long after this, when the boy's father spotted Brown exposing himself to the child.

MORE COURT AND CRIME NEWS:

The father, who was described in the agreed facts as feeling confused and lost for words, immediately told his wife what he had seen.

The couple quickly spoke to their son and confirmed what had been happening.

The victim's mother then confronted Brown in a staircase on the ship, where the 49-year-old admitted he had been touching the boy and that "something's going on".

On the same day they returned home from the cruise, the victim's father went to a Canberra police station to report Brown.

When investigators interviewed Brown in June 2020, he denied ever touching or having sexual intercourse with the victim.

But more than a year later, he formally admitted his guilt in court.

When Brown's sentence proceedings were set to begin on Friday, barrister John Purnell SC asked for an adjournment.

His reasons included that he intended to ask Justice Michael Elkaim to impose an intensive correction order rather than a sentence of full-time imprisonment, but a pre-sentence report had not been completed.

There were also some issues relating to medical evidence about Brown.

Crown prosecutor Trent Hickey opposed the adjournment, saying the parties had known the sentencing date for some time.

"Why hasn't this been done already?" Mr Hickey asked of the things Mr Purnell wanted time to deal with.

"The criminal justice system doesn't just revolve around Mr Brown."

Justice Elkaim allowed the adjournment, saying he wanted to see a pre-sentence report even though he thought it was "almost certain" he would send Brown to prison.

"It is almost inconceivable that a full-time custodial sentence will not be imposed on the facts of this case," the judge said.

"The assault on the child was inexcusable, and it is difficult to find any mitigating factor associated with the offending.

"Nevertheless, a court, when sentencing a criminal, must take into account all sides of the case."

Justice Elkaim said Brown had been "running an IT consultancy business" with success at the time of the offending, despite there being suggestions the offender's judgment was impaired by different factors at that stage.

The judge listed the case to return to court in February.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: