The Daily Telegraph editorial: Convicted serial rapist Graham Kay’s victims face more pain

THEY cannot say they were not warned. In January 2017, a report by psychiatrist Andrew Ellis for the Supreme Court said that North Shore rapist Graham Kay’s psychiatric disorders “are chronic and likely to persist”.

THEY cannot say they were not warned. In January 2017, a report by psychiatrist Andrew Ellis for the Supreme Court said that North Shore rapist Graham Kay’s psychiatric disorders “are chronic and likely to persist”.

That report was delivered as the NSW government applied for Kay to be subject to an extended supervision order. Another psychiatrist, Anthony Samuels, later told the court that “Mr Kay would fall into a group of persons with a risk for serious offending that is statistically moderate-high of committing further serious sexual offence”.

The Supreme Court subsequently ordered that Kay be placed on an extended supervision order for three years.

Serial rapist Graham Kay in jail

Additionally, Kay was ordered to wear electronic monitoring tags for one year — after the government had argued that they also be in place for three years.

One month ago, Kay’s electronic monitoring tags were removed. Last Tuesday, police allege that Kay grabbed a teenager by the waist and kissed her on the cheek at a Rosehill Woolworths.

Ten days earlier a late-night raid revealed that the 66-year-old was allegedly in an undisclosed relationship with a prostitute.

This would be in violation of Kay’s strict court-mandated supervision order, which is still in place. Last night Kay, previously imprisoned for 18 years after being convicted for stalking and raping eight women between 1995 and 1997, was back behind bars.

Given the severity of his crimes — some victims were sexually assaulted at knifepoint — and the concerns of psychiatrists, many will no doubt wonder if that sentence was sufficient.

History cannot be rewritten, nor can a sentence already served be increased. But the opportunity may exist here for the judicial system to reconsider sentencing levels for other offenders whose crimes are equally grave.

Victims of sexual assault are too often condemned to life sentences of their own.

They do not enjoy, as those who attacked them enjoy, the prospect of one day being released. Kay’s victims, of course, now suffer again as their tormentor faces new charges.

One victim, Juanita, told The Daily Telegraph that Attorney-General Mark Speakman should have worked harder to either keep Kay electronically monitored or in jail.

“The current system clearly doesn’t work and needs changing,” Juanita said.

Very true words. And they apply to many more than just the likes of Graham Kay.

HIGHER TAXES? YOU GO FIRST

THE leftist Australia Institute is now campaigning for Australians to pay higher taxes. That’s sure going to resonate in the suburbs.

Why, mums and dads across Sydney have been begging for this for years.

The Australia Institute’s quest has won some support, however — mostly from people in taxpayer-funded employment. No conflict of interest there.

Meanwhile, here’s a tip for any academics or former politicians who want to pay extra tax. There is nothing stopping you. Get out your chequebook now and send a donation to the ATO. Just leave the rest of us out of it.

PUNISH PRIVACY BREACHES

AUSTRALIA’S privacy laws are among the most rigorous on Earth. You would imagine, then, that governments that introduce such laws would be extremely vigilant about any failure to uphold these laws.

But think again because, as The Daily Telegraph reports, organisations that fail as guardians of our health data are not being penalised. Instead, they are allowed to sign undertakings in which they vow to do better.

This no-worries situation compares starkly with what must be a terrible ordeal for anyone whose sexual or mental health history has been exposed.

The number of people potentially involved in such breaches is large. So far, in the first 37 days of a new mandatory reporting regime, sensitive health data is being breached on average every two days. At least one case was so serious the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner ordered payment of compensation to a breach victim.

Yet to this point the companies that have in place such inadequate security as to allow these breaches to occur suffer no loss.

If privacy is serious, penalties need to be enforced.