State of New South Wales v DB (Preliminary) [2019] NSWSC 75

Procedural Posture

Proceedings by Summons Seeking Interim and Final Orders for an Extended Supervision Order Under the Crimes (high Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (nsw) / Preliminary Hearing Concerning Appointment of Psychiatrists And/or Psychologists and Whether an Interim Supervision Order Is Appropriate

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of an extended supervision order.' 'Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to make an interim supervision order.' 'Whether two qualified psychiatrists or psychologists should be appointed to examine the defendant and furnish reports.' 'What conditions should apply during the interim supervision order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the statutory preconditions for considering an extended supervision order were met and that, if proved, the supporting documentation would justify the making of an extended supervision order because it indicated a high degree of probability that the defendant posed an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence, particularly another serious sex offence, if not kept under supervision. Given the defendant's history of serious child sex offending and non-compliance with conditional release and child protection obligations, the Court considered it inappropriate not to make an interim supervision order.

Court Disposition

Interim supervision order made and preliminary orders granted; contested supervision conditions were modified or excluded.

Orders

• ['Two qualified psychiatrists or psychologists (or a combination of such persons), as agreed between the parties, are appointed to conduct separate examinations of the defendant and to furnish reports to the Supreme Court on the results of those examinations by a date to be fixed by the Court.' 'An order directing...