Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) v Wozencroft

[2007] WASC 283

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (WA) -v- WOZENCROFT [2007] WASC 283

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2007] WASC 283
Case No:	MCS:16/2007	Heard:	26 SEPTEMBER 2007
Coram:	McKECHNIE J	Delivered:	26/09/07
No of pages:	5	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Respondent released on a supervision order with conditions for a period of 5 years pursuant to Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA) s 17(1)(b)
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (WA) CLIVE ALLEN WOZENCROFT
Catchwords:	Dangerous sex offender
Legislation:	Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA)
Case References:	Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CRIMINAL

CITATION : DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (WA) -v- WOZENCROFT [2007] WASC 283 CORAM : McKECHNIE J HEARD : 26 SEPTEMBER 2007 DELIVERED : 26 SEPTEMBER 2007 FILE NO/S : MCS 16 of 2007 BETWEEN : DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (WA)

Applicant

AND

CLIVE ALLEN WOZENCROFT
Respondent

Catchwords:

Dangerous sex offender

Legislation:

Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA)

Result:

Respondent released on a supervision order with conditions for a period of 5 years pursuant to Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA) s 17(1)(b)

(Page 2)

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Mr P D Yovich
Respondent : Mr P G Laskaris

Solicitors:

Applicant : Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)
Respondent : Legal Aid (WA)

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Nil

(Page 3)

1 McKECHNIE J: This is a hearing for final orders under the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA). On 20 June 2007, Blaxell J ordered that the application for a div 2 order pursuant to s 17(1) of the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act be heard on 26 September 2007. He ordered that the respondent undergo examination by two named psychiatrists, Dr Wojnarowska and Dr Hall, for the purposes of preparing reports. Those reports were prepared, received and made available to counsel.

2 This morning counsel, with the consent of the respondent, tendered a book of evidence consisting of 42 documents (which are numbered as exhibits). I have had regard to all of those documents. In addition, I have had evidence in expansion of their reports by Dr Hall and Dr Wojnarowska, and also Ms Corrigan. The essence of the psychiatric reports is that the respondent is of medium to high risk of offending. In order to proceed to make orders under div 2, I must first be satisfied, by acceptable and cogent evidence to a high degree of probability, that the respondent is a serious danger to the community; that is, that there is an unacceptable risk that if he were not subject to either a continuing detention order or a supervision order he would commit a serious sexual offence.

3 Specifically, I have noted the diagnosis of paedophilia made after a guided clinical judgment by each doctor, as well their conclusions as to risk. The evidence discloses that the respondent has a propensity to commit serious sexual offences in the future. The nature and number of offences committed so far by the respondent are not such as to enable me to conclude to a high degree of probability that there is a pattern of offending behaviour, although I note Dr Wojnarowska's observations about the offender befriending women with children.

4 In the past, the respondent has made some effort to address the causes of his offending behaviour, successfully completing programs in prison, but it is also reported that there has been considerable regression from that position, not least of course by further offending subsequent to those courses. Finally, I have very clearly reached the view that there is an unacceptable risk to the community that unless the respondent is subject to a supervision order he would commit a serious sexual offence.

5 On the available evidence, it does not appear that the respondent is at high risk of committing offences against children who are strangers to him, but that children whom he befriends or meets and makes acquaintance with, through their parents, or otherwise, are at significant risk.

(Page 4)

6 The finding that the offender is a serious danger to the community triggers a discretion under s 17 as to whether he should be ordered to be detained in custody or subject to supervision with conditions. The DPP does not submit that detention in custody is necessary for the protection of the community, which of course is the paramount consideration. Having heard the evidence, I agree with that view and consider that the paramount consideration of the protection of the community can be accomplished within a supervision order.

7 Indeed, it is my view that the community is, in the end, better protected by a supervision order rather than by continuing detention, because it is the fact that, unless we are prepared to detain people forever, eventually they must return to the community. It is best that they do so with considerable resources put in to assisting them, with the aim of protecting the community against further offending.

8 That being so, I will make a supervision order with certain conditions to which the parties have agreed:

(1) To report to a community corrections officer ('CCO') at Victoria Park Community Justice Services, 269 Albany Highway, Victoria Park no later than 10.30 am on 27 September 2007;

(2) To refrain from breaking the law;

(3) To advise the CCO of his current name and address;

(4) To report to, and receive visits from, a CCO as directed by the CCO;

(5) To notify a CCO of every change of his name, place of residence, or place of employment at least 2 days before the change happens;

(6) To be under the supervision of a CCO;

(7) Not to leave, or stay out of, the State of Western Australia without the permission of the CCO;

(8) Not to commit a sexual offence as defined in the Evidence Act 1906 s 36A during the period of this order;

(9) To report to the CCO at least once a week during the first 6 months of a supervision order, and thereafter as directed by the CCO;

(10) To comply with the same requirements set out in s 76 of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 that offenders must comply with under that section;

(Page 5)

(11) To comply with the interagency case management process as directed by the CCO;

(12) To agree to the exchange of information between persons and agencies involved in the management of his order, including otherwise confidential information;

(13) To reside at the address approved by the CCO unless authorised in advance to be absent by the CCO;

(14) Not to change address or commence or change employment without the prior approval of the CCO;

(15) To attend and comply with the requirements of all programmes designed to address his offending behaviour as directed by the CCO;

(16) To engage with a mentor, support service and/or support person nominated by the CCO for the period set by the CCO;

(17) To engage with Outreach, Outcare and/or the Department of Housing and Works as directed by the CCO;

(18) To have no contact with any child under the age of 16 years unless the contact is supervised by an adult previously approved by the CCO;

(19) Not to form any domestic relationship with a person who has children under the age of 16 years in their care either full time or part time;

(20) To reside only at accommodation approved in advance by the CCO;

(21) To allow the CCO or other persons or agencies approved by the CCO to interview any potential friends or social supports, and to disclose to them his offending history;

(22) To permit persons monitoring his compliance with his obligations under the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2004 to enter his residence for the purpose of that monitoring.