The Court granted an interim detention order and ordered psychiatric and psychological examinations at a preliminary hearing under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006, where the defendant did not oppose the orders. On the question of expert appointment, the Court held that the permutations in s.15(4)(a) of the Act are not exhaustive, and the Court may appoint two psychiatrists and one psychologist where the complexity of the case warrants it. The defendant reserved his position to contest any continuing detention order at the final hearing.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.