WA v C

The Court affirmed the supervision order with amended conditions and a five-year extension, finding that the respondent had proved on the balance of probabilities that he would substantially comply with the standard conditions despite six prior contraventions, including commission of a serious offence (accessing cartoon child abuse material). The Court held that a continuing detention order was not warranted because a better understanding of the respondent's dependent personality structure and lack of personal agency now existed, enabling more proactive, directive and intensive supervision than had previously been provided, which would adequately protect the community. The Court also held that further institutionalisation through a continuing detention order risked being counterproductive, particularly given the uncertainty that the Intensive Sex Offender Treatment Program would run or address the respondent's risk factors.