A prisoner's consistent refusal to participate in sexual offending treatment programs, viewed against a history of irresponsible denial, is a significant factor supporting a continuing detention order over a supervision order, not because participation is a prerequisite to a supervision order, but because refusal undermines confidence that the prisoner will adhere to supervision conditions. Where a primary judge fails to adequately articulate reasons for preferring detention over supervision, the Court of Appeal may exercise the discretion afresh on the evidence and reach the same conclusion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 58 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 58 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.