Sara was arrested and charged with possession of extremist material \u2013 one of almost a dozen young people, some as young as 13, who have been charged in Australia<\/a> for having content such as Islamic State propaganda and the Christchurch massacre video on their computers and smartphones in the past five years.<\/p>\n Experts say broad laws that criminalise for children as young as 10 the possession of material openly available on the internet are problematic, and risk ensnaring vulnerable young people who may be unaware they have committed a crime. These concerns were expressed to federal parliament before it passed the law in 2023.<\/p>\n Sign up for the Breaking News Australia email<\/a><\/p>\n A Guardian Australia investigation has uncovered court records that show many children charged under these laws have an autism diagnosis, language challenges and social issues \u2013 raising questions about the criminal system\u2019s approach to counter-radicalisation while dealing with young people with disabilities.<\/p>\n A clinical psychologist described Sara to the court as a \u201cyoung, naive Muslim girl with autism\u201d. Sara said she had collected the material \u2013 19 clips including \u201cpropaganda for the Islamic State and Hamas\u201d \u2013 out of curiosity and an interest in war and her religion.<\/p>\n A 15-minute bomb-making video had been sent to her by a man overseas on Discord, according to court records, but there was no evidence she sent it to anyone or intended to act.<\/p>\n \u201c[Sara] did not fully appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions and may not have fully understood the intentions of the people or person who sent her the material, or the harm in her engaging with them,\u201d the magistrate said at sentencing, after Sara pleaded guilty to possessing extremist material and possessing a document or record of information for a terrorist act. The case was diverted out of court to a mediation process, where her offending would be addressed to family conference.<\/p>\n In 2024, a 13-year-old Adelaide boy with autism was charged with possession of extremist material, in a case described by his barrister as \u201can abuse of process, doomed to fail and oppressive\u201d. The charge was later dropped.<\/p>\n A Canberra boy, 17, pleaded guilty last year to possession of violent extremist material, including dozens of videos that showed \u201cmurder by shooting, explosives, decapitation and the ISIS flag\u201d.<\/p>\n He was autistic and \u201ca young person with significant neurological disadvantage\u201d, the magistrate said. \u201c[His] interest in the material was shaped less by a desire to harm and more by rigid moral beliefs reinforced by his ASD traits,\u201d a psychologist told the court.<\/p>\n \u2018Blurry\u2019 lines<\/p>\n Security services have repeatedly raised the alarm about the rising number of young people being radicalised in Australia, and the contribution of online connections and exposure to extreme or violent content.<\/p>\n Some far-right groups, such as Australia\u2019s National Socialist Network, have explicitly discussed honing their appeal for young people. The leader, Thomas Sewell, in a video posted in 2025, joked about recruiting \u201chundreds of autistic teenagers\u201d.<\/p>\n Yet lawyers and terrorism experts question whether charges predicated on possession of violent extremist material is the right way to push back against youth radicalisation, especially when such material is so pervasive online.<\/p>\n A report published<\/a> in 2025, for example, found that 24 gore-related websites that host terrorist material, as well as war footage and extreme pornography, received an average of 1m combined total visits per month from the UK, largely from young men.<\/p>\n James Caldicott is a lawyer who has dealt with some of these matters in South Australia. He said it can be difficult for some young people to distinguish between content that is violent, merely offensive, or even part of news reporting, and what can legally be defined as extremist material.<\/p>\n \u201cKids will join these channels on Discord, Telegram, Signal, and may be part of a group of thousands,\u201d he said. \u201cIt is a minefield. Someone might have 10 videos on their phone and not even realise [they would be classified as extremist material]. There\u2019s no real teachings about what they can access.\u201d<\/p>\n Robyn Young, a psychologist and autism researcher at Flinders University, said knowing what kind of content would be legally classed as extremist can be \u201ca little bit blurry\u201d.<\/p>\n One lawyer said it was hard to determine whether content could be legally defined as extremist material. Photograph: Maskot\/Getty Images<\/p>\n \u201cWe certainly do need to protect these people by educating them on the wrongfulness of a lot of this material, because many people would not appreciate that downloading this \u2026 material is against the law,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n While possessing material that supports the preparation of a terrorist act has long been illegal in Australia, intentionally possessing violent extremist material only became a federal offence<\/a> in 2023. According to the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor<\/a>, 60% of those who have been charged since were children.<\/p>\n In South Australia, possessing extremist material \u2013 that a reasonable person would understand as supporting terrorism \u2013 without reasonable excuse has been against state law<\/a> since 2017. At least 10 people under 18 have been charged with the offence; compared with 26 who were 18 and over, according to records obtained by Guardian Australia.<\/p>\n double quotation markMany people would not appreciate that downloading this material is against the lawRobyn Young<\/p>\n Evidence that an act of terrorism is being planned is not required, but police acknowledge such charges are used as a means of early intervention.<\/p>\n In a press conference held after the December 2025 Bondi attack, the Australian federal police commissioner, Krissy Barrett, said that the federal legislation in relation to violent extremist material \u201chas been extremely useful\u201d because it \u201chas allowed us to \u2026 get in early under the radicalisation pathway and put people either before court or disrupt their behaviour at a very early stage\u201d.<\/p>\n Yet there is also a question about whether some young people found with extremist material know they have committed a crime \u2013 not just that others may find the content offensive or repugnant.<\/p>\n \u201cThe rule of law requires that the law must be both readily known and available, and certain and clear. Most significantly it is essential that people know in advance whether their conduct might attract criminal sanction,\u201d the Law Council said in 2023. <\/a><\/p>\n![\"Why](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/1773535329_721_1920.jpg\")
Why Australian police are being accused of further radicalising an autistic 13-year-old boy \u2013 video<\/p>\n