Chief Executive Officer, Department of Corrective Services v Byron [No 5]
[2014] WASC 339
•16 SEPTEMBER 2014
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES -v- BYRON [No 5] [2014] WASC 339
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2014] WASC 339 | |
| Case No: | MCS:5/2007 | 16 SEPTEMBER 2014 | |
| Coram: | McKECHNIE J | 16/09/14 | |
| 5 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Supervision order amended | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES NEVIL BADEN BYRON |
Catchwords: | Dangerous sexual offender Released on supervision Requirement for antilibidinal medication Amendment of conditions No new principle |
Legislation: | Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA) |
Case References: | Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) v Byron [No 4] [2011] WASC 199 The State of Western Australia v Byron [2007] WASC 171 The State of Western Australia v Byron [No 2] [2008] WASC 175 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CRIMINAL
- Applicant
AND
NEVIL BADEN BYRON
Respondent
Catchwords:
Dangerous sexual offender - Released on supervision - Requirement for antilibidinal medication - Amendment of conditions - No new principle
Legislation:
Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA)
Result:
Supervision order amended
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Mr T C Russell
Respondent : In person
Solicitors:
Applicant : Department of Corrective Services
Respondent : In person
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) v Byron [No 4] [2011] WASC 199
The State of Western Australia v Byron [2007] WASC 171
The State of Western Australia v Byron [No 2] [2008] WASC 175
1 McKECHNIE J: This is an application by the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Corrective Services to amend the respondent's supervision order. The court may amend the conditions of a supervision order if satisfied that the person who is subject to the order is not able to comply with the conditions of the order because of a change in the person's circumstances or the amendment is necessary or desirable for any other reason.
2 The respondent was first subject to a continuing detention order on 31 July 2007: The State of Western Australia v Byron [2007] WASC 171, (incorrectly titled, but nothing turns on that). In 2008 I found that the community would be adequately protected by a supervision order, provided the respondent chose to undergo anti-libidinal treatment: The State of Western Australia v Byron [No 2] [2008] WASC 175.
3 The respondent did not immediately choose to undertake anti-libidinal treatment until February 2011 when he commenced a course of treatment: Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) v Byron [No 4] [2011] WASC 199. As the respondent was complying with the anti-libidinal conditions, on 16 August 2011, I released the respondent on a supervision order for seven years, commencing that day. By condition 9 the respondent was required to undertake continual biological anti-libidinal treatment for paraphilias.
4 The respondent has a general practitioner who prescribes Androcur, an anti-libidinal medication, and monitors its use. The respondent has been complying with supervision condition 9.
5 On 25 November 2013 Dr Brett provided a report focusing on the respondent's risk management, specifically the pharmacological management. Dr Brett noticed that the respondent had developed osteoporosis, which is highly likely to be related to his cyproteronin, making him extremely vulnerable to fracturing bones. Dr Brett's recommendation is set out in pars 3, 5, 6 and 7:
3. He has developed a number of side effects from his anti-libidinal medication. These include gynaecomastia and osteoporosis. It has also been suggested that it may have caused his diabetes. I believe that his development of osteoporosis is sufficient for his Cyproterone to be reduced and stopped. I would recommend that it be reduced to 50 mg for a month, then to 25 mg for a month then ceased. A referral to a specialist endocrinologist may also be helpful.
…
5. I believe that consideration should be given for commencing him on a Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor (SSRI), such as fluoxetine. This could be commenced at 20 mg and its effect should be monitored. He has a previous history of depression and this is the Level 2 treatment in the algorithm of pharmacological treatment of paraphilias developed by the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry.
6. It is important for Mr Byron's sexual risk factors [to] be closely monitored. I believe that he would benefit from specialist follow up from a medical perspective. Ideally a psychiatrist would be closely involved in his management, with close liaison with the psychologist and the community corrections officer. It would be useful if the Dangerous Sex Offenders Support Unit review its need for psychiatric input into the management of their clientele.
7. Mr Byron's sexual drive and his sexual cognitions need to be closely monitored. Medically it appears that it is his testosterone levels that are driving the medication changes rather than behavioural correlates. I would agree with Dr Glaser's last 2 bullet points on the last page of his report.
6 A senior Corrections Community Corrections officer has given evidence that, following receipt of Dr Brett's report, the Department of Corrective Services liaised with the respondent's general practitioner and requested that the respondent's dose be reduced in accordance with Dr Brett's report. However, the respondent's general practitioner is aware that, due to condition 9 of the current supervision order that the respondent cannot cease taking the medication and must therefore remain on a low dose.
7 The respondent is now aged 65. There is no evidence in the three years that he has been subject to a supervision order there have been any particular concerns. There have been two breaches of the orders which were dealt with in the Magistrates Court, but neither has led to any action in this court, and in the context I do not regard them as adversely affecting the result. The respondent has developed a good therapeutic relationship with an experienced psychologist, Mr Summerton, which continues.
8 I am satisfied that the terms of the order are appropriate and will not increase any risk to the community. I will make orders, therefore, pursuant to the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA) s 20 that the supervision order made on 16 August 2011 be amended by amending condition 9 to read as follows:
Undergo medical testing or treatment, including anti-depressant medication or anti-libidinal treatment, for paraphilias as directed by the CCO in consultation with any doctor, psychiatrist or endocrinologist.
3
1