In the matter of the Corrections Act 1997
and
In the matter of an Application for Parole by Gregory Terrence Hutt
29 August 2003
The applicant, Gregory Hutt, was convicted of a crime of murder on the 6th September 1988 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He was subsequently re-sentenced to imprisonment for twenty-four years with a non-parole period of fourteen years and he became eligible to be considered for parole on the 14th January 2002.
The crime for which the applicant was convicted was a particularly vicious murder and the applicant has had a bad criminal record. The sentencing Judge took into account the particular nature of the crime and the applicant’s criminal record by imposing a non-parole period of fourteen years. The Judge increased the non-parole period above that which would normally have been given to a person convicted of a crime.
It is not the function of the Parole Board to re-sentence the applicant. That is a function of the Judge who has the advantage of hearing all the evidence that was presented at the trial and any matters given in mitigation. The Judge obviously took those matters into account as evidence by Mr Parker from the normal rules for non-parole periods. The Parole Board must accept that the sentence was appropriate.
The function of the Parole Board is to determine whether a prisoner, who is eligible for parole, should be granted parole and any conditions that may be imposed on any grant of parole. The Board when determining eligibility for parole is required by the Corrections Act 1997 to consider factors listed in Section 72(4) of that act. The Board has considered all of those factors.
The applicant is now age forty-one. He has spent the last fifteen years in prison. The Board considers that after this lengthy period of imprisonment he is unlikely to be a danger to the public if released. He is unlikely to re-offend knowing that he will be in breach of parole if he re-offends and will be subject to incarceration again. The applicant now appears remorseful and accepting of the penalty and the consequences of any breach of parole.
The Board was provided with a psychiatric report from Dr Ian Sale. You will find that there was no evidence of mental disorder in the applicant although he had a problem with alcohol and drugs.
A number of pre-parole reports were provided to the Board. It was indicated that the applicant intended, upon release from prison, to reside with his mother. An interview with Mrs Hutt indicated that she would not tolerate alcohol or drugs in her family home. Mrs Hutt is an elderly woman who is in bad health and requires care from her son.
It was reported that the applicant took on a pre-release program in May 2002, which involved forty-eight hour releases from prison to reintegrate with his mother. In fact he has had in the vicinity of twenty releases from prison and these have extended to up to seventy-two hours. There have been no problems with those releases.
The applicant has completed a parole awareness program on two occasions, in November 2001 and November 2002 and recently completed a ten-week drug and alcohol program. The applicant has also undertaken a bricklaying and plastering course whilst in prison and has been offered employment as a brickies labourer or apprentice bricklayer by a cousin, Mr Tony Freeman, upon his release. There is also the prospect of employment in another area that is as a carpet layer or to a friend who is a carpet contractor.
The Board has taken into account the Victim’s Impact Statement and will impose appropriate conditions in relation to the petition of the victim and family. Severe conditions will also be imposed regarding the consumption of drugs and alcohol in accordance with the recommendation of the Parole Officers who have provided the pre-parole report.
The Board considers that there is no benefit to the community or the applicant of his remaining in prison and that the community are best served by the reintegration of the applicant into the community. This is best served by him continuing his rehabilitation program in the general community, subject to parole conditions.
Mr Hutt, we have considered all the matters that we are required to consider under the Corrections Act. We are going to grant you parole as from the 19th September 2003. You will be on parole until the 18th January, 2012.
