New figures show Supreme Court declared more than 50 convicted crims as high-risk offenders in 2020
Lawyers say they’re unfair and punish offenders twice, but victims advocates say the soaring rate of high-risk offenders orders means people are being protected.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Record numbers of high-risk serious violent and sexual offenders too dangerous to live in the community unsupervised are being placed on extended supervision orders, including more than 50 last year, figures show.
Lawyers have labelled the orders as an unfair “double whammy” for offenders who have served their sentence – only to be punished again by being placed under further controls – while victims rights advocates say the orders provide some comfort to victims who do not want others to suffer as they have.
The laws, which came into effect in 2016, give the Attorney-General the power to apply to the Supreme Court for an “extended supervision order” – community-based monitoring under the supervision of a community corrections officer.
Since 2017, the Attorney-General has made 185 applications for extended supervision to be placed on high-risk offenders, 161 of which have been granted.
There were nine orders granted out of 13 applications in 2017 and by 2020, the number of applications leapt to 55 and all except three were granted.
Law Society of SA criminal law committee co-chair Craig Caldicott said the orders were effectively a “double whammy”.
“They have received a sentence; they know that’s what they have to work towards to achieve parole then at or near the end, applications are made to extend the sentence,” he said.
Conditions of the orders can include drug and alcohol testing, bans on contacting certain people and the requirement to live at a specific address. Offenders can also be electronically monitored.
The orders can remain in place for up to five years but the Attorney-General can then apply for another order. The main consideration for the court when making an order is the safety of the community.
Human rights lawyer Claire O’Connor SC said a better focus should be identifying and preventing people from offending, as well as offering comprehensive rehabilitation to offenders.
“We as a society aren’t doing enough when people first access the criminal justice system,” she said.
“The question is why do we have so many repeat offenders and how do we prevent that?”
She said appearing “tough on crime” was a more popular stance for governments and as a result, “prevention will not be emphasised, high-risk offending will increase and more prisons beds will be needed”.
Commissioner for Victims’ Rights Bronwyn Killmier said the orders provided some comfort to victims.
“They do not want another victim to suffer what they have suffered and appreciate anything that will stop someone from reoffending,” she said.
A spokesman for the Attorney-General’s department said there was no obvious explanation for the rise in extended supervision orders which were not made “on a whim”.
“In considering such an application, both the Attorney and, ultimately, the courts need to be satisfied that there is an appreciable risk to the community that is best managed through either increased supervision post release or, alternatively, through ongoing detention,” he said.
Man dies after cancer ‘missed three times by doctors’
He was told he was in the clear, but terminal stomach cancer went unnoticed by doctors on numerous scans, leaving this man with a year to live, an inquest has heard.
FBI swoops: Adelaide millionaire swaps mansion for Milan jail cell
He owns a $6m Glen Osmond mansion but he’s spent the past four months in an Italian prison on remand as US authorities hunt him down over an alleged $50m criminal plot.