Attorney-General v Wilson [2017] QSC 327
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Attorney-General (Qld) v Wilson [2017] QSC 327
PARTIES: ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF
QUEENSLAND
(applicant)
v
ALWYN DANIEL WILSON
(respondent)
FILE NO: BS10515 of 2013
DIVISION: Trial Division
PROCEEDING: Contravention of supervision order
DELIVERED ON: 20 December 2017 (ex tempore)
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 20 December 2017
JUDGE: Mullins J
ORDER: Order as per draft initialled by Mullins J and placed with
the file.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING
ORDERS – ORDERS AND DECLARATIONS RELATING
TO SERIOUS OR VIOLENT OFFENDERS OR
DANGEROUS SEXUAL OFFENDERS – GENERALLY –
where respondent contravened supervision order to abstain
from illicit drug use – where application pursuant to s 22 of
the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) –
whether adequate protection of the community could be
ensured by release under the existing supervision order –
where applicant released under existing supervision order
Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), s
22
COUNSEL: M Maloney for the applicant
J Robson for the respondent
SOLICITORS: G R Cooper, Crown Solicitor for the applicant
Legal Aid Queensland for the respondent
-- 1 of 3 --
2 ORDER
HER HONOUR: Mr Wilson is a 51 year old indigenous man. He was released
under a supervision order made by Justice Flanagan on 24 August 2014 for a period
of five years. His response to the supervision order has been problematic. Today is
the hearing of the contravention application filed on 22 May 2017, pursuant to
section 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2013. Mr Wilson 5
accepts that he contravened the supervision order by the use of cannabis sativa.
This contravention was detected in the result from the urine analysis test undertaken
on 24 April 2017. The contravention also extends to further use of cannabis sativa
by Mr Wilson that he described to his supervising Corrective Services officer, and, as 10
a result, another sample was taken on 8 May 2017 that was sent for testing, and the
presence of cannabis sativa was confirmed. Mr Wilson, by his counsel, accepts that
the onus is on him to satisfy the Court that the adequate protection of the community
can, despite the contravention, be ensured by a supervision order.
15
This is Mr Wilson’s fourth contravention proceeding. He has been returned to
custody previously in February 2015, January 2016, and October 2016. After the
respective contraventions were found to be proved, he was released into the
community under the supervision order in August 2015, April 2016 and March 2017.
This latest contravention proceeding was commenced less than three months after he 20
was returned back to the community in March 2017.
During the period between March and May 2017, Mr Wilson was undergoing
counselling from a psychologist, and it is proposed that that counselling will continue
when he is released back into the community again. Psychiatrists Dr Grant and Dr 25
Harden have updated their risk assessment reports in respect of Mr Wilson for the
purpose of this contravention proceeding. Dr Grant’s diagnosis is that Mr Wilson
suffers from an antisocial personality disorder with quite prominent psychopathic
traits, although, falling short of a diagnosis of psychopathic personality disorder. Dr
Grant notes that Mr Wilson also has a past history of significant alcohol abuse and 30
possible dependence, and that he clearly has a strong history of cannabis abuse.
Relevantly, it is noted by Dr Grant that Mr Wilson’s offending behaviour against
women appears to be driven primarily by sexual drive complicated by alcohol and
drug intoxication. Dr Grant’s current risk assessment is as follows: 35
My current risk assessment in the light of the recent contravention in using
marijuana would be that the risk for future sexual offending remains at least
moderate to high. Such an offence would most likely occur in the presence of
significant intoxication of alcohol and/or drugs. Mr Wilson’s own assessment 40
is that alcohol is the more high risk intoxicant; and in that, I think he is being
accurate. However, the combination of alcohol and marijuana or other
intoxicants such as amphetamines would be a serious risk. The use of
marijuana on its own might be a lower level risk, but the problem is that it
might lead on to the use of alcohol as well, in a situation where he is socially 45
unstable or experiencing some emotional decompensation.
-- 2 of 3 --
3 ORDER
Dr Grant’s conclusion, however, is that a supervision order would have the capacity
to reduce and contain the risk for future sexual reoffending. Contraventions of the
order through substance abuse would likely be rapidly detected and that would act as
a further safeguard. In terms of long-term reduction of risk, Dr Grant suggests that it
would be beneficial for Mr Wilson to stay abstinent from alcohol and drugs and 5
attend to aspects of his rehabilitation over an extended period of time.
Dr Harden also has formed the view that the supervision order does reduce Mr
Wilson’s reoffending in the community from high to moderate, and Dr Harden holds
this opinion even though Mr Wilson has breached the order by recurrently using 10
marijuana. Dr Harden recommends that Mr Wilson continue to have individual
psychological treatment focusing on his sexual offending and substance misuse, and
that he be required to be abstinent from alcohol and drug use and undergo an
appropriate random testing regime on a supervision order.
15
The applicant fairly acknowledges that the psychiatric evidence supports the
contention that Mr Wilson’s risk of sexual recidivism can be managed by the existing
supervision order. That is an appropriate acknowledgment in the light of how the
supervision order has worked to date, and ensured that departures by Mr Wilson
from his requirement to be abstinent from alcohol and illegal drugs have been picked 20
up in a relatively timely way. This assists in ensuring the adequate protection of the
community.
I am, therefore, satisfied that Mr Wilson has discharged the onus that he bears to
satisfy the Court on the balance of probabilities that despite his contravention, the 25
adequate protection of the community can be ensured by his release on a supervision
order. I, therefore, make an order in terms of the draft initialled by me and placed
with the file. That will enable Mr Wilson to be released from custody again and
continue to be the subject of the supervision order made by Justice Flanagan on 25
August 2014. 30
______________________
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QSC/2017/327