State of New South Wales v Burchell (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1191

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Burchell (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1191 Hearing dates: 4 September 2017 Decision date: 06 September 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Adamson J Decision: See paragraph [86]. Catchwords: CRIMES (HIGH RISK OFFENDERS) ACT 2006 – high risk sex offender – offences against sections 66I and 66J of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) –application for extended supervision order sought by the State – HELD – matters pursuant to section 9 of the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 taken into account in making an extended supervision order – defendant's risk of sexual re-offending remains high – supervision required to maintain consistency and routine in offender's life – risk of drug use connected to offender's sexual offending unless there is external support and supervision– safety of the community requires that extended supervision order be granted

CRIMES (HIGH RISK OFFENDERS) ACT 2006 – conditions of extended supervision order – whether sufficiently certain – reasonableness and relevance to risk posed – presumption that conditions will be enforced reasonably and for a proper purpose – whether condition empowering Departmental Supervising Officer to direct defendant to engage in employment appropriate Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 (NSW), ss 5, 13 Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 (NSW) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 5, 5B, 5H, 5I, 6, 7, 9, 10, 10A, 11, 12, 21, 25 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 38, 61I, 61J, 61M, 61N, 91H, Pt 3 Criminal Code Act (Cth), s 474.19 Cases Cited: State of New South Wales v Amohanga [2015] NSWSC 875 State of New South Wales v Banks [2016] NSWSC 926 State of New South Wales v Burchell [2017] NSWSC 712 State of New South Wales v Russell [2015] NSWSC 488 Thompson v The Council of the Municipality of Randwick (1950) 81 CLR 87 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Timothy Michael Burchell (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: I Fraser (Plaintiff) A Cook (Defendant)