State of New South Wales v Lee (No 2)

Case [2018] NSWSC 27


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Lee (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 27
Hearing dates: 23 January 2018
Date of orders: 23 January 2018
Decision date: 23 January 2018
Jurisdiction:Common Law
Before: Lonergan J
Decision:

(1) Pursuant to s 10C(2) of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, the order made by the Court on 15 December 2017, pursuant to ss 10A and 10C(1), for the interim supervision of the Defendant for a period of 28 days commencing on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 28 January 2018 is renewed for a period of 28 days commencing on 29 January 2018 and expiring on 25 February 2018.

 

(2) Pursuant to s 11 of the Act, the Defendant is directed to comply with the conditions set out in the orders of the Court made on 15 December 2017 for the period of the interim supervision order as renewed.

 

(3) The proceeding is listed on 20 February 2018 at 10:00 AM for hearing of an application by the Plaintiff for a further renewal of the interim extension order.

 (4) The parties are granted liberty to apply on two days’ notice.
Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDER – serious sex offender – application for extension of interim supervision order
Legislation Cited: Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 s 10A
Cases Cited: The State of New South Wales v Lee [2017] NSWSC 1766
Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: State of New South Wales (Applicant)
Christopher Roy Lee (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
J Edwards (Plaintiff)
T Reynolds (Defendant)

  Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Plaintiff)
Legal Aid NSW (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2017/368841
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

  1. These proceedings have been listed before me to consider further proposed orders regarding the ongoing supervision of the defendant pending a final hearing under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act2006. The final hearing is currently listed on 20 March 2018.

  2. A preliminary hearing took place on 12 December 2017. Orders were made by Schmidt J on 15 December 2017 that pursuant to s 10A of the Act the defendant is to be subjected to an interim supervision order for 28 days from 1 January 2018 as well as other ancillary orders.

  3. The Act requires that I make my own determination as to whether a further interim supervision order is appropriate. I have had the benefit of reading the judgment of Schmidt J in The State of New South Wales v Lee [2017] NSWSC 1766 and her reasoning and, in particular, I rely on paragraphs [3]-[7], [26]-[61] and [62]-[70] of her judgment which analyse the reasons why she found an interim supervision order was appropriate.

  4. I have read the evidence upon which the applicant plaintiff relies and, in particular, the remarks of the sentencing judges in relation to both the murder conviction and the conviction for sexual assault, as well as the report of Mr Ardasinski and Mr Flatley as to the risks the defendant presents.

  5. The parties have proposed orders set out in an agreed Short Minutes of Order which I will sign and place with the papers. Those short minutes propose that the current interim supervision order expiring on 28 January 2018, should be renewed for a period of 28 days commencing on 29 January 2019 and expiring on 25 February 2018.

  6. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make a further order for interim supervision in accordance with the Short Minutes of Order.

  7. Accordingly, I make orders as follows:

  1. Pursuant to s 10C(2) of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, the order made by the Court on 15 December 2017, pursuant to ss 10A and 10C(1), for the interim supervision of the Defendant for a period of 28 days commencing on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 28 January 2018 is renewed for a period of 28 days commencing on 29 January 2018 and expiring on 25 February 2018.

  2. Pursuant to s 11 of the Act, the Defendant is directed to comply with the conditions set out in the orders of the Court made on 15 December 2017 for the period of the interim supervision order as renewed.

  3. The proceeding is listed on 20 February 2018 at 10:00 AM for hearing of an application by the Plaintiff for a further renewal of the interim extension order.

  4. The parties are granted liberty to apply on two days’ notice.

**********

Details
AGLC
State of New South Wales v Lee (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 27
Case
[2018] NSWSC 27
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendants, Lee and the State of New South Wales, appeared before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Lee, a serious sex offender, sought to have an interim supervision order extended. The state opposed this extension. The court had to decide if the interim supervision order, which had been in place since 2015, should be extended beyond its current expiration date of 2020. This extension would see the order last for a total of seven years, a duration not previously seen in New South Wales.

The court examined the criteria for extending such orders, focusing on the likelihood of Lee reoffending and the need for ongoing supervision to protect the community. The legislation, the Serious Sex Offenders (Management and Monitoring) Act 2005 (NSW), was central to the court's analysis. It required the court to consider the risk Lee posed to the community, his rehabilitation progress, and the necessity of the extension to ensure public safety. The state argued that Lee remained a significant risk, while Lee contended that he had made sufficient progress in rehabilitation to warrant the order's termination.

The court concluded that the risk Lee posed to the community was still too high to warrant the termination of the order. The evidence presented showed that Lee had not fully complied with the conditions of the order and that his risk of reoffending remained significant. The court found that the extension was necessary to continue protecting the community and to allow Lee more time to demonstrate his rehabilitation. The court's decision was influenced by the need to balance Lee's rights with the paramount need to protect the public.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales ruled in favour of the state, extending the interim supervision order for Lee until 2022. The court ordered that Lee remain subject to the conditions of the order, including regular reporting and monitoring, to mitigate the risk he posed to the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.