Attorney-General v Cobbo [2023] QSC 205

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Cobbo [2023] QSC 205 PARTIES: ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND (applicant) v ADAM JOHN COBBO (respondent) FILE NO/S: BS No 282 of 2014 DIVISION: Trial Division PROCEEDING: Contravention of Supervision Order ORIGINATING COURT: Supreme Court at Brisbane DELIVERED ON: 6 September 2023 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 5 September 2023 JUDGE: Ryan J ORDER: Order as per Annexure “A” to these reasons CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING ORDERS – ORDERS AND DECLARATIONS RELATING TO SERIOUS OR VIOLENT OFFENDERS OR DANGEROUS SEXUAL OFFENDERS – DANGEROUS SEXUAL OFFENDER – GENERALLY– where the respondent has been the subject of a supervision order pursuant to the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where the respondent contravened the supervision order – where the psychiatric evidence generally shows the respondent to be a low or moderate unmodified risk of relevant re-offending – where the evidence was to the effect that his risk would remain low or moderate were he to be released under supervision – where the applicant sought an addition to the supervision order, reinforcing that its prohibition on the consumption of illicit substances extended to the consumption of any medication which contained tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) – whether respondent ought to be released on supervision COUNSEL: B Mumford for the applicant C K Copley for the respondent SOLICITORS: Crown Law for the applicant Martin Law for the respondent -- 1 of 13 -- 2 [1] The respondent is the subject of a supervision order, made on 28 May 2018, by the Chief Justice, and extended, on 23 May 2022, by her Honour Justice Wilson. The order will expire on 14 November 2023. [2] He has been before the Supreme Court for contraventions of his supervision order on four occasions (the present is the fourth). [3] The respondent was last re-released on supervision in May 2022. [4] He was prescribed Suboxone (Buprenorphine) to deal with his opioid use disorder. [5] In July 2022, the respondent was permitted to move from the Wacol Precinct to community accommodation. He formed a relationship with a woman, who was pregnant by January 2023. His mother became ill in August 2022 and died in September 2022. The respondent struggled with his grief after her death and there was some family conflict over money. The respondent said he resumed cannabis use (including the use of un-prescribed “medicinal” cannabis) at this time. He sought a prescription for medicinal cannabis but was unsuccessful. [6] By January 2023, the respondent had tested positive to cannabis use on 21 occasions and repeatedly failed to comply with other conditions of his release. Those supervising him reported he repeatedly failed to charge his electronic monitoring device, repeatedly was in breach of his curfew, and repeatedly “deviated” from permitted activities whilst on leave, among other contraventions. [7] On 29 January 2023, the respondent “demonstrated significant emotional collapse” and he was returned (it seems at his instigation) to the Wacol Precinct. He was told to cease his cannabis use and told he could not return to community accommodation until he did. He said he was using cannabis to assist him to cease Suboxone. [8] Once back at the precinct, he was thought to be “topping up” his Suboxone prescription by injecting the substance illicitly. [9] On 8 and 17 February 2023, he was found to have consumed both cannabis and buprenorphine – in contravention of his supervision order. -- 2 of 13 -- 3 [10] On 24 February 2023, he was in breach of his curfew, and loitering outside his residence with another person housed at the precinct, acting suspiciously – in contravention of his supervision order. [11] The contraventions set out in [9] and [10] were relied upon in support of a warrant issued under section 20 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003. [12] The respondent was arrested under the warrant and brought before the Supreme Court on 1 March 2023. On that day, on the strength of the alleged contraventions, the applicant filed an application seeking the rescission of the supervision order, or in the alternative, the respondent’s release on supervision; and Justice Boddice (as his Honour then was) ordered that the respondent be returned to custody pending the determination of the application. [13] The respondent then pleaded guilty to section 43AA offences based on the contraventions set out in [9] and [10] above. His pleas of guilty were admissions of the contraventions alleged (cf section 22(1) of the Act). [14] The application, filed 1 March 2023, was before me on 5 September 2023. [15] Under section 22(2) of the Act, having been satisfied that the respondent had contravened the requirements of the supervision order, it was for the respondent to satisfy me, on the balance of probabilities, that the adequate protection of the community could be ensured – despite the respondent’s contraventions – by the existing order, as amended as required or permitted by section 22(7). [16] I was so satisfied, and on 5 September 2023, I made orders accordingly, which released the respondent from detention, subject to the amended supervision order. [17] These are my reasons for making those orders. [18] As I have mentioned, this is the fourth occasion on which the respondent has breached the conditions of his supervision order. [19] However, as the applicant very properly acknowledged, the current expert evidence from Dr McVie and Dr Arthur, psychiatrists, is that, despite the contraventions, the relevant risk posed by the respondent (that is, the risk of his committing a serious -- 3 of 13 -- 4 sexual offence, involving violence or children), assessed by them to be low or moderate (unmodified), is adequately managed by the supervision order. [20] At interview by video-link, on 27 June 2023, Dr McVie found the respondent to display good insight into his situation and the potential consequences of further breaches of the order, although he had a limited commitment to ceasing cannabis and Suboxone use. [21] Dr McVie assessed the respondent’s current risk of reoffending as “low”. She noted that he was 19 when the index offences were committed; he had not re-offended sexually since, nor were there any concerns about his preoccupation with sex or pornography. She considered that the imposition of the supervision order ensured his relevant risk remained low. There was no clear association between his use of illicit substances and the index offending – although substance use was associated with his general offending. She thought the respondent might benefit from an opioid substitution program, and from therapy to assist him to achieve relationship stability and to deal with his substance abuse issues. [22] In Dr McVie’s opinion, the release of the respondent (again) under his supervision order would ensure that his risk of committing a serious sexual offence remained low. [23] She suggested that the respondent could receive Suboxone in depot form – which would reduce the respondent’s ability to abuse it. She did not recommend a prescription for cannabis. She considered it would likely lead to increased substance misuse; and it would interfere with the respondent’s ability to drive and find work. [24] Also, in her view, the respondent’s risk of serious sexual re-offending was not such as to warrant an extension of his supervision order. [25] Dr Arthur interviewed the respondent on 17 July 2023 via video-link. Dr Arthur found him polite and co-operative with no evidence of hostility or guardedness, although there was ongoing evidence of positive impression management. The respondent externalised blame for his contraventions and displayed limited insight into his substance use. [26] Dr Arthur considered the respondent to have shown a consistent lack of motivation to comply with many aspects of his supervision order. Inter alia he engaged in -- 4 of 13 -- 5 ongoing cannabis use; was deceptive about his relationship with his partner; minimised interpersonal stressors and was adept at making excuses for his behaviour. However, he had coped reasonably well with the stressors around the death of his mother. And he had been able to maintain a relationship with his partner without evidence of conflict, domestic violence, or infidelity. He remained invested in his family. Although he displayed subtle, negative attitudes towards women, and had a tendency to idealise relationships, he had a level of commitment to his partner and a desire to be involved in his baby’s upbringing. [27] Dr Arthur found no evidence of increased sexual pre-occupation; nor any indication of deviant sexual interests or activities. He noted that the respondent had not sexually re-offended whilst on the order. [28] Dr Arthur considered the risk of the respondent committing a serious sexual offence in the future (unmodified) to be moderate. He had been returned to custody in the context of escalating substance us, after an accumulation of psychosocial stressors. However, despite his drug use, there had been no escalation in violence, or evidence of heightened sexual preoccupation or an overt rejection of supervision. However, he continued to employ avoidant coping strategies and had difficulties with self- awareness – despite therapy. [29] If he were intoxicated and sexually aroused, there was a risk that he might utilise coercion to achieve sexual satisfaction, and to misidentify acquiescence with consent. And he might not concern himself with issues around his sexual partner’s age or her consent. But, as he aged, it was less likely that he would find himself in a situation where that risk arose. His maturity, and the effects of the treatment he had received whilst under supervision, meant that he was more likely to be more aware of the consequences of his actions and increasingly sensitive to consent issues. [30] In Dr Arthur’s view, the supervision order had functioned adequately in identifying risk indicators and had allowed those supervising the respondent to act in a timely manner to manage his moderate risk. [31] If he were released, Dr Arthur recommended that the respondent resume psychological therapy; and, once stable, that he leave the precinct to distance himself -- 5 of 13 -- 6 from anti-social peers. Dr Arthur suggested that it might be of benefit for the respondent to live with his partner and child, whilst still under supervision. [32] Dr Arthur did not consider the respondent to have the capacity or motivation to manage oral Suboxone – although there were benefits to his undertaking an opiate substitution program. Medicinal cannabis was not an appropriate therapy, given his history of substance abuse and the potentially negative effects of the drug on his cognition and behaviour. [33] Dr Arthur did not recommend for the respondent any substance containing THC – but in his view the respondent could take cannabis oil (containing CBD but not THC) under the guidance of a licenced medical practitioner only. [34] Dr Arthur considered an extension of the supervision order to be likely counterproductive, with a risk that it would cause the respondent to deploy avoidant coping mechanisms and escalate his levels of psychosocial stress. [35] Thus, the expert evidence was to the effect that the adequate protection of the community could be ensured by the release of the respondent again on supervision – despite these most recent contraventions. On the evidence, an extension to the order was not recommended and indeed might prove counter productive. [36] On the strength of the evidence before me, I made the orders referred to above. [37] The applicant sought an addition to the supervision order, reinforcing that its prohibition on the consumption of illicit substances extended to a prohibition on the consumption of any medication which contained tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) as an active component. The respondent did not object to the amendment of the order by the addition of such a condition. I considered the condition necessary and added it to the supervision order upon which the respondent was released. My orders appear in Annexure “A” to these reasons. -- 6 of 13 -- ANNEXURE “A” SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND REGISTRY: Brisbane NUMBER: BS 282/14 Applicant ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND AND Respondent ADAM JOHN COBBO ORDER Before: Ryan J Date: 5 September 2023 Initiating document: Application filed on 1 March 2023 (CFI No. 132) THE COURT, being satisfied to the requisite standard that the respondent, Adam John Cobbo, has contravened the supervision order of Bowskill J made on 28 May 2018, and pursuant to the declaration under the order of Wilson J made on 23 May 2022, ORDERS THAT: 1. the respondent, Adam John Cobbo, be released from custody subject to the requirements of the supervision order of Bowskill J made on 28 May 2018, and to remain subject to those requirements until 14 November 2023, with the following amendment: (a) requirement [23A] be inserted: -- 7 of 13 -- 23A not take (for example, swallow, eat, vape, smoke or sniff) tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in any form, prescribed or non-prescribed. You are also not allowed to have with you or be in control of any products / substances that contain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The full set of requirements to which the respondent will be subject are set out in the Schedule annexed to this order. Signed: ……………………………………………….. Registrar of the Supreme Court of Queensland -- 8 of 13 -- SCHEDULE THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT the respondent be subject to the following conditions until 14 November 2023. The respondent must: General terms 1. report to a corrective services officer at the Queensland Corrective Services Probation and Parole Office closest to his place of residence between 9am and 4pm on the day of release from custody and at that time advise the officer of his current name and address; 2. report to, and receive visits from, a corrective services officer at such times and at such frequency as determined by Queensland Corrective Services; 3. notify a corrective services officer of every change of his name, place of residence or employment at least two business days before the change happens; 4. be under the supervision of a corrective services officer for the duration of this order; 5. comply with a curfew direction or monitoring direction; 6. comply with any reasonable direction under section 16B of the Act given to him; 7. comply with every reasonable direction of a corrective services officer that is not directly inconsistent with a requirement of this order; 8. not commit an offence of a sexual nature during the period of this order; 9. not leave or stay out of Queensland, without the written approval of a corrective services officer; Employment 10. seek permission and obtain written approval from a corrective services officer prior to entering into an employment agreement or engaging in volunteer work or paid or unpaid employment; -- 9 of 13 -- 11. notify a corrective services officer of the nature of his employment, or offers of employment, the hours of work each day, the name of his employer and the address of the premises where he is or will be employed at least two days prior to commencement or any change; Residence 12. reside at a place within the State of Queensland approved by a corrective services officer by way of a suitability assessment and obtain written approval prior to any change of residence; 13. comply with any regulations or rules in place at the accommodation and demonstrate reasonable efforts to secure alternative, viable long term accommodation to be assessed for suitability by Queensland Corrective Services, if such accommodation is of a temporary or contingency nature; 14. not reside at a place by way of short term accommodation including overnight stays without the permission of a corrective services officer; Contact with victim(s) 15. not to have any direct or indirect contact with a victim of his sexual offences; Requests for information 16. respond truthfully to enquiries by a corrective services officer about his activities, whereabouts and movements generally; Disclosure of plans and associates 17. disclose to a corrective services officer upon request the name of each person with whom he associates and respond truthfully to requests for information from a corrective services officer about the nature of the association, address of the associate if known, the activities undertaken and whether the associate has knowledge of his prior offending behaviour; -- 10 of 13 -- 18. submit to and discuss with a corrective services officer a schedule of his planned and proposed activities on a weekly basis or as otherwise directed; 19. if directed by a corrective services officer, make complete disclosure of the terms of this order and the nature of his past offences to any person as nominated by the corrective services officer, who may contact such persons to verify that full disclosure has occurred; 20. advise a corrective services officer of any repeated contact, with a child under 16 years of age or, with an adult that he knows has care of a child under 16 years of age; 21. notify a corrective services officer of all personal relationships entered into by him; Motor vehicles 22. notify a corrective services officer of the make, model, colour and registration number of any vehicle owned by or generally driven by him, whether hired or otherwise obtained for his use; Alcohol & other substances 23. abstain from the consumption of alcohol and illicit drugs for the duration of this order; 23A not take (for example, swallow, eat, vape, smoke or sniff) tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in any form, prescribed or non-prescribed. You are also not allowed to have with you or be in control of any products / substances that contain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC); 24. submit to any form of drug and alcohol testing including both random urinalysis and breath testing as directed by a corrective services officer; 25. disclose to a corrective services officer all prescription and over the counter medication that he obtains; Treatment and counselling -- 11 of 13 -- 26. attend upon and submit to assessment, treatment, and/or medical testing by a psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker, counsellor or other mental health professional as directed by a corrective services officer at a frequency and duration which shall be recommended by the treating intervention specialist; 27. permit any medical, psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker, counsellor or other mental health professional to disclose details of treatment, intervention and opinions relating to level of risk of re-offending and compliance with this order to Queensland Corrective Services if a request is made for the purpose of updating or amending this order and/or ensuring compliance with this order; 28. attend any program, course, psychologist, social worker or counsellor, in a group or individual capacity, as directed by a corrective services officer in consultation with treating medical, psychiatric, psychological or other mental health practitioners where appropriate; 29. develop a risk management plan in consultation with a treating psychologist or psychiatrist and discuss it, as directed with a corrective services officer; Attendance at places 30. not visit public parks without the prior written approval of a corrective services officer; Mobile phones and other devices 31. notify a corrective services officer of any computer or other device connected to the internet that he regularly uses or has used; 32. supply upon request to a corrective services officer any password or other access code known to him to permit access to such computer or other device or content accessible through such computer or other device and allow any device where the internet is accessible to be randomly examined using a data exploitation tool to extract digital information or any other recognised forensic examination process; 33. supply upon request to a corrective services officer the details of any email address, instant messaging service, chat rooms, or social networking sites, which he uses, including user names and passwords; -- 12 of 13 -- 34. allow any other device including a telephone or camera to be randomly examined. If applicable, the respondent must provide to a corrective services officer his account details or phone bills, upon request; 35. advise a corrective services officer of the make, model and phone number of any mobile phone owned, possessed or regularly utilised by him within 24 hours of connection or commencement of use, and report any changes to mobile phone details; 36. not own, possess or regularly utilise more than one mobile phone, without the prior written approval from a corrective services officer. Signed: Registrar of the Supreme Court of Queensland -- 13 of 13 --