In relation to his sexual offending against the girl, which happened when she was aged between eight and 15, the man pleaded guilty to sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection (representative of multiple offences); sexual violation by rape (also a representative charge), two counts of sexual violation by rape, and doing an indecent act on a young person aged under 16 (representative).
The boy was four when the man broke his thigh by kicking him as a disciplinary measure. In relation to that incident, the man pleaded guilty to recklessly causing grievous bodily harm.
He also pleaded guilty to two charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice – by persuading his mother, the victims, and other children who witnessed the offending, to lie for him.
His mother was also charged with obstructing justice and has already been dealt with by the courts.
According to a summary of facts, the sexual offending against the girl happened up to 10 times a fortnight, with the man routinely getting into her bed in the early hours of morning.
He did not have fully penetrative sex with her until she was 15 but in law, his earlier less penetrative acts also amounted to rape.
After becoming pregnant, the girl told a counsellor she was raped by a stranger.
The counsellor informed police and a medical examination was carried out, for which the man's mother was present.
During it, the man sent his mother a text saying, "make sure they don't do the DNA test please".
Police asked the girl to do an interview but the man's mother declined on her behalf.
A couple of days later the man texted his mother again saying, "Hi mum, make sure our girl doesn't say anything about me please".
His mother responded, "I'll make sure that she hasn't mentioned you st [sic] all in the interviews she's done so far hun".
Later medical imaging showed the girl become pregnant earlier than what she claimed to the counsellor.
The pregnancy was terminated in its third month.
Police got a production order to have the foetus's DNA.
The man's mother tried to close down the investigation by saying the girl did not want the sample taken and wanted inquiries to stop.
The DNA test results confirmed the man was the father.
The girl was interviewed and agreed to give a DNA sample.
The injury to the boy happened overnight after another teenager at the man's house claimed the boy was misbehaving.
Kicking him hard in the back of his leg, the man fractured the boy's femur.
The boy cried for a while but then went to sleep.
Later that day, he was taken to hospital and told staff what happened.
The man and his mother had instructed all the other young people at their house to tell police the injury was due to a play fight.
But after the boy's disclosure, two of the young people retracted their false police statements.
Justice Brewer said victim impact statements for the court were brief but made very clear the harm that was done.
Adding all the starting points for the three distinct sets of offending, the judge initially reached a total of 27 years' imprisonment, reducing it to 21 years, for totality.
He gave 20 per cent discount for guilty pleas.
There was no discount for remorse, the judge pointing to a comment the man made about his sexual offending to the writer of a presentence report, that "it wasn't all me … it took two to tango".
Discount for cultural and background factors was limited to five per cent. Justice Brewer said he did not see any real causal link between the man's history and the offending. However, it would not have happened so easily had the man's background been different.
Preventive detention was not necessary and given health reports about the man, the Crown no longer sought it, the judge said.
There was no evidence the man was a paedophile. He had a risk of future offending but not a high one. The principle that a lengthy finite sentence is preferable, applied, Justice Brewer said.
