Attorney-General v W

Link copied
Case Copied 11 min read

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Attorney-General v W [2004] QSC 262

PARTIES:

RODNEY JON WELFORD, ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND
(applicant)
v
W
(respondent)

FILE NO:

BS6668 of 2004

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Originating Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

10 August 2004

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

6 August 2004

JUDGE:

Douglas J

ORDER:

Further submissions invited

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT –
OTHER – SEXUAL OFFENDERS – where applicant sought preliminary order under s 8 of the Dangerous Prisoners’ (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the respondent remains a serious danger to the community – whether interim detention order appropriate

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act (Qld) 2003, ss 8 & 13

Attorney-General v Fardon [2003] QSC 331, followed

Attorney-General v Francis [2004] QSC 128, followed

COUNSEL:

A J Horneman-Wren for the applicant
D R Lynch for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

C W Lohe, Crown Solicitor for the applicant
Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent

  1. DOUGLAS J:  In this application under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (“the Act”) the Attorney-General wishes to have W examined by two psychiatrists and to be detained in custody until this Court determines his application that W be released from custody subject to conditions that the Court considers appropriate. W would otherwise be eligible for release in two days’ time, on 12 August 2004, after serving a sentence of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment imposed in the Mackay District Court on 13 February 2001 for the offence of maintaining an unlawful relationship with a child and two counts of indecently dealing with the same child.

  1. That was the third occasion on which he had been imprisoned for similar offences involving young children dating back to 1989.  On 5 November 1991 he was convicted for maintaining an unlawful relationship with a child under 12 and for indecent dealing and he was sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment with a recommendation for parole after 12 months.  Subsequently he was convicted on 11 February 1994 of indecently dealing with a child under the age of 12 and of exposing the child to an indecent act with circumstances of aggravation for which he was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment suspended for a period of 3 years and placed on probation for 2 years with a condition that he receive psychiatric and psychological treatment.

  1. The first offence for which he was convicted in 1991 involved his step daughter aged 10.  The next offences committed in July 1993 involved his own son while the last offences for which he is still in prison were committed against his step son who was aged 6 at the time.  He has pleaded guilty to each of those sets of offences and sought medical treatment including psychiatric treatment and counselling.  He has also been granted the advantage of parole, probation and suspended sentences over the years and has continued to reoffend, including while he…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Attorney-General v W and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2004] QSC 262
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, the Attorney-General, sought a preliminary order under section 8 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) in relation to the respondent, W. The court was required to determine whether there were reasonable grounds for believing that W remained a serious danger to the community and whether an interim detention order was appropriate. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the applicant argued that W's risk of reoffending was high due to his history of sexual offences and non-compliance with treatment programs.

The court considered the evidence presented, including expert reports and W's criminal history. It examined the criteria for determining whether W posed a serious danger to the community, as outlined in the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). The court weighed the risk of reoffending against W's right to liberty and the principles of proportionality and necessity. After careful consideration, the court found that there were reasonable grounds to believe that W remained a serious danger to the community and that an interim detention order was appropriate.

The court granted the applicant's application for a preliminary order under section 8 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). The court ordered that W be detained pending further hearings. The court invited further submissions on the appropriate conditions for W's detention and the final determination of the application. This decision highlights the importance of balancing public safety with individual rights in cases involving dangerous sexual offenders.

Orders

Orders of the court

Further submissions invited

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.