Dangerous sex offenders Ian Everitt Atkinson and Jonathon Neal Lewis to be released despite ‘community risk’

Two serial paedophiles will be released back onto the street despite the State arguing both remain risks to the community and should remain behind bars. The same Supreme Court Justice, Joseph McGrath, heard separate applications to keep both men jailed but decided both predators could be released and safely managed with community supervision orders. Former mechanic Ian Everitt Atkinson, 63, was found to have more than 40,000 child exploitation videos and pictures — including of two minors he babysat — when he was arrested most recently in 2015. He pleaded guilty to 15 charges, including 10 counts of indecently recording a child under 13, with the court hearing he had ingratiated himself to a family with two young children. Atkinson was first jailed for child abuse in 2000 after pleading guilty to 11 sexual offences against two girls aged between 7 and 8 years’ old, including two counts of rape. In that case, he was sentenced to six years in prison but released on parole after serving just two. The second paedophile is Albany man Jonathon Neal Lewis, 32, who was convicted of sexually penetrating a 14-year-old girl in 2010. That offence came two months after he completed a sexual consent and behaviour program, and while he was still subject to a suspended imprisonment order from a previous offence. After an 18-month stint in prison, he was released into the community as a reportable sex offender. Then in 2017, WA Police received a tip-off from US police about Lewis’ online activities. Albany detectives searched his Orana home and seized electronic devices containing messages and videos, which led to a series of charges related to the online grooming of a 14-year-old girl from Oklahoma. Lewis was jailed for 25 months for child exploitation and failing to comply with his reporting obligations. Dangerous sexual offenders legislation grants the Supreme Court powers to order the continuing detention of paedophiles and other abusers who continue to pose an unacceptable risk of reoffending. The State applied for both men to remain behind bars beyond their release dates but in decisions handed down last week, Justice McGrath opted to instead impose stringent community supervision orders. While in prison, Atkinson completed 21 hours of counselling where he “engaged positively”, but admitted he still had “sexual thoughts about his child victims”. Prosecutors said Atkinson was a “serious danger to the community” and that he should be kept in custody for an “indefinite term for control, care or treatment”. During the hearing, psychiatrist Dr Wynn Owen said Atkinson presents a “high risk of future sexual offending if not subject to detention or community supervision”. However, he believed he would comply with the supervision order if given the opportunity. State prosecutor Brent Meertens argued the risk posed by the twice-jailed paedophile could only be managed by continuing detention. Atkinson has 49 conditions to his release including that he must be electronically monitored, is bound by a curfew and that he is not allowed to use the internet or have any contact with anyone under the age of 18. His supervision order will last for five years from November 4. In Lewis’ case, Justice McGrath imposed a five-year supervision order with 52 conditions, starting on November 12. Some of the conditions include no unauthorised contact with victims, complying with a curfew, and maintaining a daily diary if requested. Unless authorised by his community corrections officer, Lewis cannot possess alcohol, have access to the internet, or be in possession of any children’s toy, game or confectionery that could be capable of enticing children. “I do not accept the State submission that Mr Lewis should be incarcerated for another two years to undertake treatment when that treatment may be completed in the community while the ongoing risk is managed by a supervision order,” Justice McGrath said. “I consider that this is a case where the protection of the community may be properly and satisfactorily advanced by a supervision order.”