In the matter of the Corrections Act 1997
and
In the matter of an Application for Parole by Bruce Jason Smith
25 September 2009
Reasons for Decision
On the 10th July 2002 the Applicant was convicted in the Supreme Court at Launceston, of murder. He received a prison sentence of 15 years. He is eligible to be considered for parole after serving half his sentence. The Applicant is eligible to be released on parole on the 16th October 2009.
The Board has been provided with the Crown Papers, the Judges Comments on Passing Sentence, Victim Impact Statements and a number of other reports including a Pre Parole Report and a report provided by the Tasmanian Prison Service.
In considering the application for parole the Board has taken into account the statutory criteria which it is required to do pursuant to the Corrections Act 1997 as detailed below.
1. The Board notes the comments of Justice Crawford, as he was then was, on passing sentence. “He had not previously committed a serious offence and is unlikely to do so again.” Justice Crawford further commented, “I find that he had no intention of killing the deceased or of causing him grievous bodily harm. “What caused an overwhelming rage to develop in him is not clear. He suddenly lost his self control and in a fury assaulted the deceased with considerable violence.” “I am satisfied it was never his intention to kill but in the heat of overwhelming passion and rage he administered considerable violence, intent on inflicting physical injury and hurt to the man who had inflicted severe emotional hurt on him. He ought to have known that the degree of violence he was using was likely to cause death.”
2. The Victim Impact Statement has been carefully considered. There is no doubt the Applicant’s crime has changed the life of the victim’s wife and two sons and had a lasting effect on them and many others. The grief and challenge of raising two boys without their father has been difficult and emotionally exhausting. The victim’s death was devastating to his parents who found they had to leave the state. Despite this the victim’s spouse states, “if (he) is let out on parole his son won’t have to miss out on having his dad involved in his life. I imagine it will also be a relief for his parents to have him home. (He ) has been in prison for 7 ½ years. I cannot see what further incarceration can do.” The victim’s wife has also requested the Applicant receive a copy of her statement and this wish will been granted.
3. The Applicant has submitted a 17 page submission, including references, outlining his immense remorse. He is acutely aware of the fact that he has denied two sons of their father and that the victim’s spouse has been left to carry the burden of being a sole parent. He states his wife is enormously supportive of him and that his parents have been a tower of strength. He has actively pursued further education whilst in prison at his own expense. He has gained qualification in accounting. He will be able to continue the employment undertaken whilst in prison. He has been released on day release since mid August to pursue this employment. He has successfully completed qualifications as a personal trainer and developed a training manual for gym users at the prison. He has conducted fund raising projects to purchase equipment for the gym and inmate recreation room. He states no words can express his regret. He submits he is not a threat to the community. He does not abuse alcohol or drugs.
4. A submission by G. Barns has been provided to the Board.
5. The Prison Episode Summary states the Applicant has completed numerous S42 releases satisfactorily and often states his deep regret for the consequences of his actions upon the victim’s family. His behaviour in prison has been extremely good.
6. The Board has read the comprehensive Pre Parole Report dated the 21st September, 2009. It is noted the Applicant has family support and the support of friends upon release. He has employment and suitable accommodation. He is unlikely to re-offend.
In accordance with the Victim request a copy of her statement was given to the applicant to read and he indicated that he had a clear understanding of the impact of his crime upon the victims and their family.
Taking all matters into account, the Board is of the view that the Applicant now meets the statutory criteria to be granted parole and that his reintegration into the wider community will best be served by the Applicant being granted a period of parole.
Paroled from 16 October 2009 – 16 April 2017
