Attorney-General v. Fisher

In Attorney-General v. Fisher, the respondent, Traven Lee Fisher, was convicted on his own pleas of guilty to multiple serious criminal offences, including rape, assault occasioning bodily harm, common assault, unlawful and indecent assault, and robbery with personal violence. Fisher was sentenced to a head term of four and a half years imprisonment. Following his conviction and sentence, the Attorney-General applied for either a continuing detention order or a supervision order under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003. Fisher objected to the psychiatrist’s evidence, arguing it may have been influenced by uncharged allegations. However, the evidence was admitted, and the court was required to determine whether there was an unacceptable risk that Fisher would commit a serious sexual offence if released, or if released without being subject to a supervision order.

The court found that Fisher posed a significant risk to the community if released without stringent conditions. The evidence, including psychiatric assessments, indicated that Fisher was a serious danger to the community. Fisher's criminal history, particularly the nature and severity of his sexual offences, supported the conclusion that he required close supervision. The court weighed the evidence and Fisher's history of non-compliance with previous orders and found that the risk of re-offending was high without a supervision order. The court concluded that the risk of Fisher committing serious sexual offences if released was unacceptable.

In light of the findings, the court ordered that Fisher be subject to a supervision order with stringent conditions until 22 November 2017, or until further order of the Court. These conditions included regular reporting to and supervision by an authorised Corrective Services officer, restrictions on residence and employment, prohibitions on contact with minors and victims, and mandatory participation in treatment and assessment programs. Fisher was also required to comply with a curfew and monitoring directions as determined by the Corrective Services officer. The order aimed to mitigate the risk of Fisher re-offending and to ensure the safety of the community.