Background
The State sought a three-year extended supervision order (ESO) under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) for Bradley Moore, a 65-year-old man with convictions including a 2015 Commonwealth offence of using a carriage service to procure a person under 16 for sexual activity. That offence followed approximately 10 weeks of sexually explicit online communications with an undercover persona presented as a 14-year-old boy, culminating in Moore arranging a meeting.
Moore had previously been subject to a three-year ESO made in 2020. He was later convicted of multiple breaches, including unauthorised online activity, contact-related conduct, and use of accounts or services contrary to the order. His ESO expired in January 2026; while on parole for about a year, he had not breached parole or committed a further offence. Two court-appointed psychiatrists nevertheless assessed him as presenting a well-above-average or high risk of further sexual offending, particularly through online grooming or solicitation.
The Court’s Holding
Boulten J held, to the required high degree of probability, that Moore posed an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence if not kept under supervision. The Court accepted that the principal risk was an attempt to groom and solicit an underage male online for real-life sexual activity. Moore’s recent compliance, stable accommodation, therapy and anti-libidinal medication were positive factors, but did not displace the risk demonstrated by his history, prior breaches, continuing sexual interest in young males, limited insight, and expert evidence.
The Court made an ESO for two years rather than the three years sought by the State and supported by the experts. It considered two years sufficient given Moore’s progress over the preceding year and the practical length of time he would have remained supervised by the order’s expiry. The Court imposed the scheduled conditions, including residence approval, monitoring, internet-account inspection, searches, restrictions on material depicting children, and use-of-name requirements. It rejected most of Moore’s objections to disputed conditions, while deleting proposed restrictions on associating with people consuming alcohol or illegal drugs.
Key Takeaways
- An ESO may be made where the Court is satisfied to a high degree of probability that an offender presents an unacceptable risk of another serious offence without supervision.
- Recent compliance with parole and positive rehabilitation can reduce the appropriate duration of an ESO without eliminating an otherwise unacceptable risk.
- Conditions must be appropriate, protective and directed to the future serious-offence risk; the Court upheld proactive monitoring measures where ordinary registration-law powers were considered insufficient.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the protective, rather than punitive, operation of NSW’s high-risk-offender regime. It also shows that the assessment is forward-looking: a decade since the last serious sex offence did not prevent an ESO where expert evidence and later conduct supported a present risk of online grooming.
For practitioners, the case provides a detailed example of how the Court balances personal liberty against community safety when setting both the duration and the conditions of an ESO.