Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Gray

The case of Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Gray involves the respondent, Maxwell Edward Gray, who was subject to a supervision order under Division 3 of Part 2 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) (the Act). The respondent was arrested for alleged breaches of the supervision order, specifically for assault and unlawful possession of a weapon. The central legal issue for the court was whether the adequate protection of the community could be ensured by the existing supervision order, despite the respondent's contravention of the order. The court had to consider whether the risk of the respondent committing a serious sexual offence was sufficiently low to warrant his release back into the community on the supervision order.

The court's reasoning focused on the respondent's risk of committing a serious sexual offence, which is the primary concern of the Act, rather than his propensity to breach the supervision order. The court accepted the opinion of Dr Ken Arthur, the consultant psychiatrist, who assessed the respondent’s risk of sexual recidivism as low. The court found that the respondent had not committed a serious sexual offence for over 20 years, and his risk of sexual recidivism had reduced over the time of his supervision order. Given this, the court concluded that the adequate protection of the community could be ensured by the existing supervision order.

The court ordered that Maxwell Edward Gray be released from custody and continue to be subject to the supervision order made by Justice P. Lyons on 2 December 2010, as amended by Justice A. Lyons on 20 June 2016. The decision underscores the importance of the risk assessment of serious sexual recidivism in determining whether to release a dangerous sexual offender from custody under the Act.