State of New South Wales v Hayter [2008] NSWSC 394

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : State of New South Wales v Hayter [2008] NSWSC 394

HEARING DATE(S) : 28 April 2008

JUDGMENT DATE : 6 May 2008

JURISDICTION : Common Law Division

JUDGMENT OF : Hislop J

DECISION : (1) I order that Warren Graeme Hayter be detained in a correctional centre for twelve months from today. (2) Pursuant to s 20(1) of the Act, I issue a warrant for the committal of Warren Graeme Hayter to a correctional centre for the duration of the continuing detention order in order (1) above.

CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - serious sex offender - application for continuing detention order - order not opposed.

LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act, 2006

CASES CITED : Attorney General for the State of New South Wales v Hayter [2007] NSWSC 1146 Tillman v Attorney General for the State of New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 327

PARTIES : The State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Warren Graeme Hayter (Defendant)

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 11019/08

COUNSEL : P. Menzies QC/D. Kell (Plaintiff) A. Haesler SC (Defendant)

SOLICITORS : Crown Solicitors Office (Plaintiff) Catherine Hunter (Defendant)

- 14 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

HISLOP J

Tuesday 6 May 2008

11019/08 THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES v WARREN GRAEME HAYTER

JUDGMENT

Introduction 1 The plaintiff has applied, by summons filed on 6 March 2008, for an order pursuant to s 17(1)(b) of the Crimes (Serious Sex Offenders) Act, 2006 ("the Act") that the defendant be subject to a continuing detention order for a period of up to five years from the date of the order. 2 When the application was made the defendant was in custody in a correctional centre pursuant to an existing continuing detention order for a period of six months made on 16 October 2007 ("the October judgment") The continuing detention order followed a gaol term of three years three months for a serious sex offence as defined in s 4 of the Act. 3 On 18 March 2008 I made an order, by consent, for the interim detention of the defendant pursuant to s 16 of the Act. Such order was to commence on 15 April 2008 and expire on 13 May 2008. 4 The evidence before the court at the time of the October judgment established to a high degree of probability that the defendant was likely to commit a further serious sex offence if he was not kept under supervision and that adequate supervision would not be provided by an extended supervision order. 5 The psychiatrists and psychologists who gave evidence at that time were unanimously of the opinion that the defendant required treatment, both psychological (through the CUBIT programme) and by way of anti-libidinal medication and that in the absence of successful treatment, it was highly likely the defendant, if released into the community, would pose a significant threat to the safety of the community by reason of his high risk of reoffending. 6 The CUBIT programme was, and is, only available to persons in custody and whilst the medication could be prescribed and monitored either in custody or in the community, there were identifiable benefits in commencing the medication in a controlled custodial environment. 7 The defendant had commenced the CUBIT programme prior to the October judgment. The best estimate of the period of treatment required at that time was six months within which it was anticipated that the CUBIT programme would be completed and the defendant stabilised on anti-libidinal medication. It was recognised that a longer period may ultimately prove necessary, in which event a further application by the Crown would be made. 8 The defendant's background and the reasons for the imposition of the continuing detention order are fully set out in the October judgment - see Attorney General for the State of New South Wales v Hayter [2007] NSWSC 1146.