Attorney General for the State of NSW v Steadman (No 2)

The defendant, Steadman, opposed an extended supervision order under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, which was sought by the Attorney General for the State of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the defendant's risk of re-offending and whether such a risk was unacceptable. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the defendant posed an unacceptable risk of re-offending, warranting an extended supervision order. The court had to consider the factors outlined in section 9 of the Act, including the defendant's risk of re-offending, their lack of insight into their offending, and their continued maintenance of innocence. The defendant argued that the order was not warranted, but the Attorney General contended that the risk was indeed unacceptable.

The court found that the defendant posed a significant risk of re-offending, particularly due to their lack of insight and ongoing denial of guilt. These factors, combined with the nature of the defendant's previous offences, led the court to conclude that the risk was unacceptable. The court imposed an extended supervision order for the maximum period of five years, as allowed under the Act.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales ordered that an extended supervision order be imposed on Steadman for a period of five years, effective from the date of the judgment. The order required Steadman to comply with conditions set out in the Act to manage their risk of re-offending.