Under the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Act 2006 (WA), the DPP bears the onus of satisfying the Court that restrictive orders are necessary and must not treat the application as analogous to a parole application where the offender bears the burden. Where a continuing detention order is sought, the DPP must either present cogent evidence negating the possibility of a supervision order or formulate the precise terms of a suitable supervision order. Actuarial risk assessment tools (Static-99, SVR-20, RSVP) that have not been validated for Indigenous Australian populations and whose underlying data has not been independently proved will be given little weight.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 17 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.