North Shore Rapist Graham James Kay fails in court bid to hide identity

The notorious “North Shore Rapist” has failed in his bid to cover up his identity due to safety fears as the state seeks another extended supervision order against him.

Convicted rapist Graham Kay at his home in Parramatta in 2018. Picture: Julian Andrews

The state of NSW is seeking a third extended supervision order against the notorious “North Shore Rapist”, who has failed in a bid to cover up his identity due to safety concerns.

The so-called “North Shore Rapist” Graham James Kay was jailed for 20 years with a 15-year non parole period on February 21, 2000 over the sexual assault of multiple women at knifepoint.

He was subjected to a three-year extended supervision order when his parole ended in February 2017, which he breached twice by failing to disclose an intimate relationship to his supervising officer and then by kissing a 16-year-old female supermarket worker on the cheek without consent.

In October 2020, the court granted another two-year extended supervision order, which Kay breached once again by sexually touching and intimidating a woman he had stalked to her apartment in January 2022.

He was ultimately jailed for two years and six months with a 20-month non-parole period after the Crown appealed the leniency of a two-year sentence handed down in the local court.

A 1997 mugshot of Graham James Kay.

Shortly before his parole expired in July 2024, the state of NSW applied for a third extended supervision order, which remains on foot.

In the NSW Supreme Court, Kay sought a non-publication application over his identity on grounds it was necessary for his safety and his rehabilitation, ahead of anticipated media coverage surrounding the third extended supervision order application.

NSW Supreme Court Justice Sarah McNaughton noted that Justice Stephen Rothman had previously granted Kay a non-publication order in July 2020, noting adverse publicity had caused him to receive threats, and lose his employment and accommodation, which would impact on his ability to continue rehabilitation.

However, Justice McNaughton acknowledged Kay had subsequently “reoffended in a significant manner against an unsuspecting female member of the public in a most frightening and serious fashion” despite having the benefit of Justice Rothman’s non-publication order, ostensibly for the purpose of his rehabilitation.

“It cannot be said that the media reports would be simply satisfying some prurient interest in the activities of this defendant,” Justice McNaughton said.

“To the contrary, it could be seen that it may well be in the public interest for members of the public – especially females – to know about the defendant’s past crimes and the plaintiff’s third extended supervision order application to assist in protecting themselves.”

The interim order made in May 2024 for the purpose of the application was revoked.