Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Eades

The respondent, Eades, was subject to a supervision order made under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) by Justice P Lyons on 30 November 2010. The respondent was released on this order, but subsequently befriended a woman whose adult son was married with three boys in his family unit. Eades met the son and his family, went on outings with them, and had visits with the son and his family, without disclosing to an authorised Corrective Services officer that he was having contact with the boys. This behaviour contravened the condition of the supervision order that he not establish or maintain contact with children under 18 years except with prior written approval of a corrective services officer. The Attorney-General for the State of Queensland brought proceedings to address the contravention, seeking to have the supervision order rescinded and for Eades to be detained in custody for an indefinite term for control, care or treatment.

The court was required to decide whether Eades could satisfy the court that the adequate protection of the community could, despite the contravention, be ensured by the existing supervision order continuing or with amendments to address the conduct that resulted in the contravention. The court considered the nature of Eades's offence, his history of reoffending, and the risk he posed to the community, particularly to children. The court found that Eades had not satisfied the onus of demonstrating that the adequate protection of the community could be ensured by continuing the supervision order or with amendments.

The court rescinded the supervision order made by Justice P Lyons on 30 November 2010, and ordered that Eades be detained in custody for an indefinite term for control, care or treatment. The court found that Eades's contravention of the supervision order demonstrated a significant risk to the community, particularly to children, and that the protection of the community required his detention. The court noted that the indefinite detention was necessary to protect the community and to provide Eades with the necessary treatment to address his risk of reoffending.