The State of Western Australia v A [No 4]
[2021] WASC 134
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL
CITATION: THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- A [No 4] [2021] WASC 134
CORAM: HALL J
HEARD: 27 APRIL 2021
DELIVERED : 27 APRIL 2021
PUBLISHED : 30 APRIL 2021
FILE NO/S: SO 1 of 2016
BETWEEN: THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Applicant
AND
A
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law – High Risk Serious Offenders – Review of detention order – Whether respondent remains a high risk serious offender – Whether appropriate order is a detention order or a supervision order – Significant progress made by respondent in counselling – Successful treatment with anti-libidinal medication – Turns on own facts
Legislation:
High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 (WA), s 3, s 5, s 7, s 29, s 30, s 64, s 68
Result:
Detention order rescinded
Supervision order imposed
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
| Applicant | : | Mr B D Meertens |
| Respondent | : | Mr P G Giudice |
Solicitors:
| Applicant | : | Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) |
| Respondent | : | George Giudice Law Chambers |
Cases referred to in decision:
The State of Western Australia v A [2018] WASC 250
The State of Western Australia v A [No 3] [2020] WASC 51
HALL J:
(This judgment was delivered extemporaneously on 27 April 2021 and has been edited from the transcript.)
The respondent is presently subject to a continuing detention order. That order was made by Corboy J on 31 January 2020 under the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA) (DSO Act). The effect of the order is preserved by the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 (WA) (HRSO Act) which came into force on 26 August 2020 and replaced the DSO Act. The order is required to be reviewed 12 months after first being made.
The application for review of the detention order was part heard before me on 9 February 2021. The evidence was that the respondent had made significant progress, including treatment with an anti‑libidinal drug. The prospects for release on a supervision order were favourable but there was no suitable accommodation available at that time. There was, however, a real chance of accommodation becoming available in the following few months and for this reason the parties agreed to an adjournment.
The position now is that suitable accommodation has been secured. It is, therefore, appropriate to finalise this review. For the reasons that follow, I am satisfied that the respondent remains a high risk serious offender. He must therefore be subject to a restriction order, that is, either a detention order or a supervision order. In the circumstances that now exist I am satisfied that the appropriate order is a supervision order with the conditions set out in Appendix A to these reasons. That is an outcome that the State submits is appropriate.
Background
The respondent was convicted of a series of serious sexual offences which were committed between January 2001 and December 2006. He was aged between 34 and 39 at that time; he is now aged 54.
The victims of the respondent's offences were his two daughters, a friend of one of his daughters, and three daughters of a woman who he was in a relationship with. There was a pattern to the offending. It occurred in the respondent's home and involved young girls who he had a relationship of trust with. There was nothing to indicate that he had any interest in children who were unknown to him. The offending reflected a desire for emotional as well as sexual intimacy. This indicated that the risk was related to the respondent forming relationships with women who had the sole custody of young girls.
The facts of the offending are detailed in The State of Western Australia v A,[1] as are details of the respondent's personal history. That decision relates to an application made under the DSO Act. In 2018 the respondent was due for release, having served the full term of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him. The DPP applied for an order under the DSO Act, either of continuing detention or supervision in the community.
[1] The State of Western Australia v A [2018] WASC 250.
Corboy J concluded that the appropriate order at that time was a supervision order because the risk of committing further serious offences could be adequately managed by such an order, that is, that the community could be adequately protected by a supervision order.
The respondent was released on a supervision order in September 2018. However, he contravened that order by breaching conditions, in particular by breaching a monitoring condition; failing to attend a treatment program; failing to record contact with a neighbour and her child; attending an excluded area and breaching a curfew. This resulted in contravention proceedings.[2]
[2] The State of Western Australia v A [No 3] [2020] WASC 51.
In his judgment on those proceedings, Corboy J noted that the respondent's release into the community had adversely affected his emotional and psychological equilibrium. His mental state had deteriorated significantly, and this had a negative effect on his ability to engage with counselling and led to him presenting at the emergency department of Royal Perth Hospital expressing thoughts of self‑harm and suicidal ideation. Corboy J was not satisfied that the respondent would substantially comply with a supervision order at that time and, accordingly, he rescinded the supervision order and imposed a continuing detention order.
Relevant legal principles
This is the first review of the continuing detention order imposed by Corboy J. On a review the court has to consider: first, whether the person remains a high risk serious offender; and, second, if so whether the appropriate order is to continue the detention order or to make a supervision order.[3]
[3] HRSO Act, s 68.
An offender is a high risk serious offender if the court is satisfied by acceptable and cogent evidence and to a high degree of probability that it is necessary to make a restriction order in relation to the offender to ensure adequate protection of the community against an unacceptable risk that the offender will commit a serious offence.[4]
[4] HRSO Act, s 7.
The State bears the onus of satisfying the court that an offender is a high risk serious offender. In considering that issue the court must take into account the matters listed in s 7(3) of the HRSO Act. In the present case, it is accepted by the respondent that he remains a high risk serious offender. I have independently come to the same view. The uncontested expert evidence is that a restriction order is necessary in the circumstances of this case.
The remaining issue is whether a continuing detention order or supervision order is the appropriate type of order. A court cannot make a supervision order in relation to an offender unless it is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the offender will substantially comply with the standard conditions of such an order. The standard conditions are those contained in s 30(2) of the HRSO Act and include reporting, supervision and electronic monitoring. The onus is on the offender to satisfy the court that he will substantially comply. If a supervision order is imposed it cannot take effect earlier than 21 days after the date the order is made, unless the court is satisfied that an earlier implementation date is feasible.[5] In deciding whether to make a continuing detention order or a supervision order the paramount consideration is the need to ensure adequate protection of the community.[6]
[5] HRSO Act, s 27.
[6] HRSO Act, s 68(2).
Evidence
At the hearing of this review application I received in evidence a book of materials.[7] That book included prison records, medical records, previous judgments and previous treatment reports. It also included the following reports prepared for this review:
1.An HRSO treatment progress report by Dr Kathryn Riordan, a senior clinical psychologist with the Department of Justice, dated 19 January 2021.
2.A psychiatric report prepared by Dr Peter Wynn Owen dated 26 January 2021.
3.A community supervision assessment report by Ms Emma Cashmore, a senior community corrections officer with the Department of Justice, dated 25 January 2021.
[7] Exhibit 1.
Dr Riordan, Dr Wynn Owen and Ms Cashmore also gave oral evidence on 9 February 2021, and Ms Cashmore gave supplementary oral evidence at the resumed hearing today.
As mentioned earlier, the hearing of 9 February 2021 was adjourned to await further information as to the availability of accommodation. Further updated community supervision reports dated 7 April and 27 April 2021 were received. An affidavit of Ms India Allegakoen of the State Solicitor's Office dated 22 April 2021 attaching an email exchange with Dr Wynn Owen regarding testosterone levels was also received, as was an email between Dr Wynn Owen and Mr Giudice dated the same date. I have also received a victim statement under s 60 of the HRSO Act.
Evidence of Dr Peter Wynn Owen
Dr Wynn Owen conducted a risk assessment using a range of actuarial tools and clinical judgment frameworks.[8] It is unnecessary to describe these in detail as the nature and degree of the risk of recidivism remains high unless either a detention order or supervision order is made.
[8] Exhibit 1, 291 ‑ 308.
The real issue is whether the risk can be managed and reduced to an extent that provides adequate protection to the community if the respondent is placed on a supervision order. Dr Wynn Owen notes that the respondent's past pattern of offending is such that any offending is likely to take place within a relationship with a child's parent or guardian and this would require at least a month to establish. The existence of such a relationship would likely be detected before any risk of offending was realised.
At the time of the respondent's last release on a supervision order his continuing sexual preoccupation and high libido were interfering with therapeutic intervention. As a consequence a recommendation was made at the contravention proceedings for the respondent to commence hormonal anti‑libidinal therapy. Dr Wynn Owen explained that the effect of the therapy is to reduce libido and sexual thinking and provide clear thinking space for counselling to occur.
The anti‑libidinal therapy is not a long‑term treatment, as over a period of years the adverse side effects to physical health may make continuation impossible. However, the expectation is that during that period (which can be up to five years) treatment gains from counselling can become established.
Dr Wynn Owen reported that the respondent consented to anti‑libidinal treatment and that monthly injections of Depo Ravilera commenced in February 2020. The respondent's testosterone levels responded to the treatment, with his level in nanomoles per litre (nmol/L) falling from the mid to low 20s to 1.8 ‑ 2.7. The normal range for an adult male is 10 ‑ 35 nmol/L. The results indicated effective testosterone suppression.
Since the initial hearing in February this year more recent tests have shown a rise in levels to between 3.5 ‑ 4.5 nmol/L, the latest test being 3.6 nmol/L on 19 April 2021. Dr Wynn Owen suggests that the likely cause of this rise is interaction with two new medications the respondent has been taking for migraines. However, these more recent levels are still well below the normal range. Dr Wynn Owen said that the respondent's subjective experience of the treatment will need to be reviewed and it may be necessary to increase the dose frequency to injections every three weeks if any reduced effectiveness is noted.
As at the time of Dr Wynn Owen's report of 26 January 2021, the respondent reported a dramatic reduction in sexual thinking and arousal. The respondent said he was now able to watch television and engage in activities without intrusive sexual thoughts. His degree of arousal had also reduced markedly.
The respondent had continued to engage in psychological therapy in the last 12 months, in particular, individual counselling. He reported positive outcomes in self‑esteem, emotional regulation and thought control. Dr Wynn Owen noted that emotional regulation was not overtly apparent at interview. Stress has been a problem in the past, leading to poor coping and lack of self‑awareness. However, the respondent has had limited opportunities to demonstrate treatment gains whilst in the prison environment.
Dr Wynn Owen's report concluded in in the following terms.
Opinion
In my opinion, based on clinical assessment, RSVP findings and Static‑99R score, (the respondent's) risk of committing a serious offence, specifically in (the respondent's) case, a serious sexual offence as defined by the HRSOA, in future is high.
(The respondent) reports that since commencing hormonal anti‑libidinal therapy he now experiences no sexual arousal, to age appropriate or other sexual stimuli. He further reports that this change has led to awareness of how pervasive and preoccupying his deviant sexual attraction had been, while offending between 1996 and 2007 and when released to a DSO Supervision Order. He has disclosed a much higher level of past sexual preoccupation than previously reported which appears to better explain his behaviour and function when on DSO SO. This self‑report must be taken in the context of past unreliable reporting of libido and sexual interest, a tendency to impression manage and exaggerate and an understandable wish to be released. While he has engaged positively in therapy and made some gains in intellectual understanding of issues addressed he has not yet demonstrated behavioural incorporation of learning noting that this is to some extent restricted by limited opportunities to demonstrate such changes in a prison environment. His emotional instability has been ongoing reflecting poor coping skills and he has developed a number of physical issues resulting in the appearance of an individual who has adopted a sick role (dark glasses, walking stick) which he reinforces by naming his physical issues up front when meeting new staff members (and HRSOA assessors). (The respondent's) medical record and discussions with a Bunbury Regional Prison treating GP suggest the possibility of exaggeration/perpetuation of symptoms to achieve and maintain secondary gains (ie not just the primary gain of seeking medical assistance and fully participating in treatment interventions but also secondarily getting the attention of, maintaining contact with and gaining sympathy from health professionals; possibly also associated with securing single cell placement and avoiding employment); this is a form of pathological coping. It is also notable that (the respondent) did not regard social isolation as a risk when interviewed.
(The respondent) has outstanding treatment needs in the areas of emotional self‑management and distress tolerance/tolerance of negative affect. He displayed significant emotional lability and high levels of distress when interviewed particularly when talking about past offending, his self‑esteem and the possibility of a further period of detention.
He also has treatment needs in relation to presence and management of deviant sexual interest, this is particularly important in that hormonal anti‑libidinal therapy is time limited as it will eventually inevitably result in serious side effects and on treatment cessation there will be a return to normal/unsuppressed libido and sexual thinking.
(The respondent) continues to have treatment needs in relation to self‑esteem and interpersonal function.
These ongoing outstanding issues indicate a high likelihood of decompensation on release. (The respondent's) mental state, appearance and behaviours, not just his self‑report, should be closely monitored, particularly in the context of ongoing physical problems, set‑backs such as failure to find employment and apparent tension in relation to adherence to Supervision Order conditions.[9]
[9] Exhibit 1, 306 ‑ 308.
In oral evidence, Dr Wynn Owen said that the past experience of release and the respondent's more recent increased disclosure of aspects of his thinking would enable a supervising team to improve the level of rigor and awareness around risk related issues. He said that the respondent's risk of reoffending could, in his view, be managed with an appropriate supervision order. The suggested conditions would enable the risk to be controlled, particularly bearing in mind that the pattern of offending involves a relationship built up over time. He said that a period of seven years was appropriate. This would take the respondent beyond his 60th birthday when risk levels usually fall.[10]
Evidence of Dr Kathryn Riordan
[10] ts 09/02/2021, 277.
Dr Riordan is a senior forensic psychologist employed by the Department of Justice in the Forensic Psychological Services Section. She prepared an HRSO treatment progress report.[11]
[11] Exhibit 1, 276 ‑ 290.
The respondent has participated in two intensive sexual offender treatment programs whilst in prison: one in 2011 and one in 2017. He has also been undertaking individual counselling with a regular counsellor, as I have earlier mentioned, since September 2018.
That counsellor has developed a treatment plan with a number of identified goals. His counsellor has described his engagement as enthusiastic and motivated. There were, however, some concerns about impression management and his presentation in an emotionally heightened and fatuous manner. This represented a therapeutic challenge and he has been encouraged to engage in a more authentic way. There have been improvements in this regard over time.
In regard to the treatment plan, the respondent has made progress with a number of goals, particularly in regard to distress tolerance and emotional regulation. The testing of these skills has been constrained by the prison environment and the respondent's migraine headaches. He has exhibited an intellectual understanding of the work undertaken and this could indicate greater self‑awareness. He has identified future treatment needs, which the counsellor considered were appropriate. In short, he has made progress towards a number of his goals but has not yet fully achieved them and further work is required.
The respondent placed great emphasis on the anti‑libidinal treatment and did not fully appreciate that this treatment was time limited. This suggested that another need was a better appreciation of the role and purpose of that treatment.
The respondent has developed a therapeutic relationship with his counsellor. It is understood that that counsellor would be available to continue treatment in the community, at least for a period of time ‑ potentially up to two years.
Evidence of Ms Emma Cashmore
Ms Cashmore is a senior community corrections officer with the Community Offender Management Unit of the Department of Justice. She is the community corrections officer for the respondent. She has prepared a report, in fact, a number of reports dealing with, amongst other things, accommodation options.[12]
[12] Exhibit 1, 309 ‑ 327; Exhibit 2; Exhibit 3.
At the time of the first hearing on 9 February 2021 there was no suitable accommodation presently available, however, there were residences that might become available in the following months depending on the outcome of other cases. In an updated report of 27 April 2021, Ms Cashmore advised that suitable accommodation had become available and had been assessed by the West Australian Police.[13]
[13] Exhibit 3.
Regarding the proposed accommodation, there is a police station nearby with an estimated response time of five to 10 minutes (or after hours from another police station, 10 to 15 minutes). There was no evidence of children in the immediate surrounds. There are schools, shopping centres and day‑care centres some distance from the property and at a distance which appears to be average for the metropolitan area. There is nothing to suggest that GPS monitoring could not work effectively at the property or that appropriate exclusion zones could not be created.
At the resumed hearing Ms Cashmore noted that time would be needed to set up the monitoring system, program exclusion zones into that system, identify a doctor in the community willing to administer the anti‑libidinal medication and to allow the for the accommodation to be furnished and set up for occupation. She said that these arrangements could not be completed before 24 May 2021 and, for that reason, the Court was requested to make the orders effective as at that date.[14]
[14] ts 27/04/2021, 320 ‑ 321.
I mentioned earlier that there was a victim statement provided to the Court from one of the offender's victims. I have read that statement and taken it into account, although it was not made available to the offender or his legal counsel. I did this having regard to the victim's wishes and having informed the respondent and counsel of the import of the statement. I have particularly taken into account that the victim has indicated that if the Court decides that the respondent should be released into the community she would not feel adequately protected unless a supervision order was made. She has asked that the conditions include conditions not to make contact with her or her relatives and not to go into certain specified areas. I am satisfied that the conditions that have been proposed meet those concerns.
Conclusions
For the above reasons I am satisfied that the respondent remains a high risk serious offender. However, in the past 12 months he has undertaken anti‑libidinal therapy and engaged in a positive way with individual counselling. This progress makes him suitable for release on a supervision order because management on such an order will contain the risk of reoffending and provide adequate protection for the community.
The fact that the respondent failed on a previous supervision order is a consideration, but the reasons for that failure have been identified and addressed in the last 12 months. The respondent is also very much aware of the likely consequences of another failure and is motivated to succeed. I am satisfied that the respondent will substantially comply with the standard conditions of a supervision order. The conditions will also ensure that any risk of re‑offending is identified and responded to before such a risk is realised.
It is important to note that release on a supervision order is not the end of this process of control and treatment. It is merely another step in that process. The respondent has continuing treatment needs and the supervision order will ensure that those needs are met and will also closely control his activity and behaviour. It is imperative that he continue with the counselling and, at least while there are no adverse side effects, with the anti‑libidinal therapy. Compliance will not be easy but it is not optional. The State accepts that the appropriate order is a supervision order.
Orders
I therefore make the following orders:
1.The detention order is rescinded.
2.A supervision order in the terms annexed to these reasons will be imposed for a period of seven years.
3.Orders 1 and 2 will not be effective until 24 May 2021.
I certify that the preceding paragraphs comprise the reasons for decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.
EM
Associate to the Honourable Justice Hall
30 APRIL 2021
Appendix A
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
SO 1 of 2016
IN THE MATTER of the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020
THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Applicant
‑and‑
[REDACTED] Respondent
SUPERVISION ORDER MADE BY THE HON JUSTICE HALL
ON 27 APRIL 2021
UPON an application pursuant to s 64 of the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 (WA) for review of a continuing detention order made on 31 January 2020 in respect of the Respondent, and the Court having found pursuant to s 68 and s 7 of the Act that the Respondent remains a high risk serious offender, the Court orders that:
The continuing detention order made on 31 January 2020 in respect of the Respondent be rescinded effective 24 May 2021.
The Respondent be the subject of a supervision order pursuant to s 68(b)(ii) of the Act, for a period of 7 years from 24 May 2021, on the conditions set out in the Schedule to this order.
SCHEDULE
You, [REDACTED], must:
STANDARD CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY THE HRSO ACT
Report to a Community Corrections Officer (CCO) at the place and within the time stated in the Order and advise the officer of your current name and address.
Report to and receive visits from, a CCO as directed by the court.
Notify a CCO of every change of your name, place of residence, or place of employment at least two business days before the change happens.
Be under the supervision of a CCO, which includes complying with any reasonable direction of the officer (including a direction for the purposes of s 31 or s 32).
Not leave, or stay out of, the State of Western Australia without the permission of a CCO.
Not commit a serious offence as defined in s 5 of the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 during the period of the Order.
Be subject to electronic monitoring under s 31.
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Residence
Take up residence at [REDACTED] and to spend each night at that address or at a different address only if such different address is approved in advance by a CCO assigned to you.
Reporting to a CCO and supervision by a CCO
Report to a CCO at your approved release address within normal business hours on the day of release from custody under this Order.
Be under the supervision of a CCO, report to, and receive visits from, a CCO at time and at places as directed by the CCO and comply with the lawful order and directions of a CCO.
Not commence or change paid or unpaid employment, education, training or volunteer work without the prior approval of the CCO.
Attendance at programs or treatment
Consult and engage with any psychiatrist, psychologist, mentor, support service and/or support person nominated by a CCO, as directed by a CCO.
Comply with the requirements of all programs designed to address your offending behaviour and/or risk of serious re‑offending, as directed by a CCO.
Reporting to WA Police
Report to the Officer‑in‑Charge of the Sex Offender Management Squad at Hatch Building, 144 Stirling Street, Perth WA 6000, or other police station if regional, within 48 hours of your release from custody, and thereafter report to and receive visits from Police at times and at locations as directed by the Officer‑in‑Charge of the Sex Offender Management Squad or his/her delegate.
Comply with all obligations imposed on you pursuant to the Community Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2004.
If requested, permit Police Officers to enter and search your residence and/or vehicle for the purpose of monitoring your compliance with your obligations under this Order and allow seizure of any such items that the Police Officer believes to contravene the conditions of the Order.
Remain at your residence and/or vehicle when Police Officers conduct a search of your residence and/or vehicle under the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020.
When requested, advise Police of the names of all of your internet service providers, all mobile or landline telephone services used by you and all internet user names or identities used by you.
Disclosure/Exchange of Information
Agree to the exchange of information between persons and agencies involved in the implementation and supervision of this Order, including confidential information.
Allow the CCO, WA Police, or other person or agencies approved by the CCO, to interview any associates or potential associates and, where appropriate, to disclose to them confidential information including your offence history.
Restrictions on contact with Victims
Have no contact, directly or indirectly, with the victims of your sexual offending, unless such contact is conducted in accordance with agreements made through, or approved by, the Victim‑Offender Mediation Unit of the Department of Justice.
Have no contact, directly or indirectly, with your biological children known by the names of [REDACTED] or with your ex‑wife [REDACTED], unless such contact in conducted in accordance with agreements made through, or approved by, the Victim‑Offender Mediation Unit of the Department of Justice.
Unless contact with victims is permitted pursuant to the previous condition, you must immediately physically withdraw from any situation or immediate location in which contact is made with any victim of your offending (including being in the immediate presence of any victim), without engaging in conversation with any victim whether by word or gesture, and must avert your gaze from such victim at all times.
[REDACTED]
Report to the CCO and WA Police any direct or indirect contact with the victims of your serious offending within 48 hours of such contact occurring.
Criminal conduct
Not commit any criminal offence where the maximum penalty for which includes imprisonment, and which involves either violence, threats of violence, or the possession of weapons or offensive instruments.
Not commit an offence under s 202, s 203, s 204, or s 557K Criminal Code 1913 (WA).
Not commit any offence under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996.
Not possess, consume or use any prohibited drugs, plants or other substances to which the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 applies, including, but not limited to, cannabis, unless the drug has been prescribed for you by a person duly authorised under the Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 and your use is in accordance with the instructions of the provider.
Curfew
Be subject to a curfew, pursuant to s 32 of the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020, such that you are to remain at and not leave your approved address as directed by a CCO from time to time.
When subject to a curfew under this Order, present yourself for inspection at the front door or curtilage of your approved address, or speak on the telephone, to any CCO or Police Officer or their agent monitoring your compliance with the curfew.
When subject to a curfew under this Order, you must ensure that all those people present in the residence, who may answer the telephone or door, are aware as to your obligations and request their assistance to comply with your obligations by alerting you to such attempts to contact you by persons monitoring your compliance with the curfew.
Medications/Mental Health
Undergo medical treatment, including anti‑depressant medication or anti‑libidinal treatment, as directed by the CCO in consultation with a medical practitioner or medical practitioners.
Comply fully with any treatment prescribed pursuant to condition 35 and comply with all testing to monitor your compliance with medical treatment and anti‑libidinal treatment as directed by a CCO.
Attend any medical practitioner, psychologist, psychiatrist or counsellor as directed by the supervising CCO.
Permit any medical practitioner, psychologist, psychiatrist or counsellor to disclose details of medical treatment and opinions relating to your level of risk of re‑offending and compliance with treatment to the Department of Justice.
Prevention of high‑risk situations
Have no contact with any child under the age of 18 years, whether such contact is in person, in writing, by telephone or by electronic means, unless:
a. The contact is authorised in advance by the CCO and such contact is supervised at all times by an adult approved in advance by the CCO;
b. The contact is necessary to complete a commercial transaction and limited to the minimum contact required to complete the transaction, and another adult is present.
('Contact' under this condition and the following two conditions means any form of interaction or communication whether by word, gesture, expression or touch and whether in person, in writing, by telephonic or electronic means, but does not include the bare minimum of interaction or communication necessary between an adult and child to promptly and civilly terminate any inadvertent or uninvited interaction or communication);
Where any unsupervised contact with a child under the age of 18 years is initiated by the child, unless the contact is permitted under the condition immediately above, you must withdraw immediately from the presence of the child.
Provide details of any contact with a child under the age of 18 years both to your CCO and to the Police on the next occasion you report to that person or agency.
Not form any domestic relationship with a person who has a child, or children under the age of 18 years in their care either full time or part time, without prior approval of a CCO.
Report at your next contact with your CCO, the formation of any friendship, domestic, romantic, sexual or otherwise intimate relationship by you with any person.
As directed by a CCO, make full disclosure regarding your past offending and the current Order to anyone with whom you commence a friendship, domestic, romantic, sexual or otherwise intimate relationship, which disclosure can be confirmed by a CCO or a Police Officer.
Have no contact with, membership of or affiliation with clubs, associations or groups where membership includes children, unless approved in advance by a CCO; and to cease/cancel such memberships if directed to do so by a CCO or Police Officer.
Not associate with any person known by you to have committed a sexual offence, unless such association is authorised in advance by the CCO.
Not possess, or consume, or purchase, or use alcohol unless approved in advance by a CCO.
Attend for, and submit to, urinalysis or other testing for alcohol or prohibited drugs as directed by the CCO or by a Police Officer including accompanying such persons to an appropriate location for such testing to take place.
Provide a valid sample pursuant to condition 48.
Not to remain in the presence of any person who you know, or ought to know, to be affected by prohibited drug, unless the identity of such person is approved in advance by a CCO.
Not to remain in any place where prohibited drugs are being consumed or, if such a place is our approved address, withdraw from that part of the residence in which any such consumption is taking place.
Maintain a daily diary of your movements, activities and associations if and as directed by the CCO and present this diary to the CCO and Police Officer upon request.
Provide a verbal or written account of your projected daily movements to your CCO and obtain prior approval of your projected movements, as and when directed by your CCO; with the exception of the following circumstances:
a. To obtain urgent medical or dental treatment for yourself;
b. For the purpose of averting or minimising a serious risk of death or injury to the respondent or another person;
c. To obey an order issued under a written law (such as a summons) requiring your presence elsewhere;
d. At the direction of a CCO or Police Officer.
Not to access online pornography.
Advise a CCO of every computer, telecommunication and/or electronic device capable of storing digital data or information, possessed or used by you, whether or not it is capable of being connected to the internet, and the location of that device.
Not allow any person other than a CCO or WA Police access to any computer, telecommunication and/or electronic device referred to in condition 55, without prior approval of the CCO.
Enable device locking or password access of your computer, telecommunication and/or electronic devices; Not provide or disclose such passwords or other means used to access any computer, telecommunications and/or electronic device referred to in condition 55, or any online accounts, to any person other than a CCO or Police Officer.
Upon request, permit a CCO or WA Police at any location nominated by them, to access any computer, telecommunication and/or device capable of storing digital data, for the purpose of ascertaining your computer, telecommunication and/or electronic device related activities, and provide to the CCO or WA Police upon request any passwords or any other means used to unlock or access the device; Should any other entity be required to access a device for instances such as technical advice, approval must be sought in advance from a CCO.
Not delete or otherwise remove and/or disguise, or cause or allow to be removed and/or disguised by another person, any data including but not limited to calls, Short Message Service (SMS), search histories or logs capable of identifying your activities on that computer, telecommunication and/or electronic device, whether or not the device is capable of connecting to the internet, without the approval in advance by a CCO or WA Police.
Not conduct computer searches for, nor collect or access, or be in possession of, in either electronic or permanent form, images of children, including drawings or sketches whether indecent or not. Possession of such images depicting a child or children on items such as on household items, may be authorised by a CCO.
_______________________________
THE HON JUSTICE HALL
I have received a copy of this Order. I have had it explained to me and understand the effect of this Order and what may happen if I contravene it.
Signed by the Respondent _________________________________
[REDACTED]
In the presence of: _________________________________
Name and address: _________________________________
_________________________________
Date: _________________________________
0
2
0