interim control order — s 104.4(1) — acquitted of intentionally a member of a terrorist organisation offence contrary to s 102.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code — during term of imprisonment offender communicated with persons both in Australia and overseas who are security concern — persons of security concern have made unsolicited contact including for purposes of providing offender an opportunity to marry — extent to which offender was aware of nature of security concerns at time of correspondence is unclear although some evidence that offender was not — offender has not completed any significant rehabilitation programs specifically directed to deradicalization including because they were not provided with any meaningful opportunity to do so when in prison — offender’s past conduct has occurred in circumstances in which they have very poor psychological resistance and they continue to have poor psychological resistance — in all of circumstances it is more probable than not that offender will continue to support ideology intentions and activities of IS including terrorist attacks being carried out by its members and seek out and engage with IS extremists whether members or otherwise including for purposes of pursuing intention to marry IS fighter or terrorist — high likelihood offender will act on intention to marry IS extremist in very short term or will otherwise form relationships in very short term in which they are highly susceptible to influence of others — in context of such relationships, real risk offender will do any act in support of IS cause as may be requested or demanded of them by others including acts of terrorism or conduct supporting or facilitating acts of terrorism — more probably than not that making of interim control order would substantially assist in preventing terrorist attack or in preventing provision of support for or facilitation of terrorist act — offender’s propensity for participating in violent act must be assessed in all of circumstances not only by reference to motivations for travelling to Syria or Turkey or other places in Middle East — absence of expressed desire to personally commit specific act of violence is relevant but must be given less weight in circumstances where there has been express allegiance to leader who has urged upon followers necessity to commit act of violence in order to achieve cause of IS —given less weight in circumstances where material depicting gross acts of violence were consumed and stored over significant period and in significant quantities — offender has an obsession with violence — controls restrict offender’s freedom of movement, association and communication, access to certain materials that is information of specific kind and access to and use of specific articles — controls restrict offender’s means of communication including by hardware devices and software applications that can be used and facilitate ability of police to monitor activities — judge had regard to impact that orders would have on offender as young woman and especially to vulnerable position that offender is in
