Department of Justice

Parole Board

www.tas.gov.au
Contact  |  Accessibility  |  Disclaimer

Jones, Ivan John

Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Ivan John Jones

8 November 2019

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Ivan John Jones (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 20 years with a non-parole period of 10 years imposed upon his conviction for murder. He has also had parole orders made in his favour revoked on three occasions from January 2016 to July 2018.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 14 November 2019.

The matter was heard before the Board at its meeting on 8 November 2019. On that occasion the applicant was present at the hearing and was invited to provide any information he had in support of his application and made himself available for questioning by the Board.

A pre-parole report prepared on behalf the Board had been read to the applicant prior to his appearance at the hearing.

Statutory Criteria

In determining the application, the Board has had regard to the following statutory criteria:-

The Corrections Act 1997, s72, establishes a statutory criteria for determining suitability for parole.

S72 (4) specifically provides as follows:

“In determining whether or not a prisoner should be released on parole, the Board is to take into consideration –

  • The likelihood of the prisoner re-offending; and
  • The protection of the public; and
  • The rehabilitation of the prisoner; and
  • Any remarks made by the court in passing sentence; and
  • The likelihood of the prisoner complying with the conditions; and
  • The circumstances and gravity of the offence, or offences, for which the prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment; and
  • The behaviour of the prisoner while in prison and, if he or she has been in a secure mental health unit, while in that secure mental health unit; and
  • The behaviour of the prisoner during any previous release on parole; and
  • The behaviour of the prisoner while subject to any order of a court; and
  • Any reports tendered to the Board on the social background of the prisoner, the medical, psychological or psychiatric condition of the prisoner or any other matter relating to the prisoner, including in the case of a prisoner who is or has been a forensic patient any report of the Chief Forensic Psychiatrist; and
  • The probable circumstances of the prisoner after release from prison; and
  • Any statement provided under subsection (2B) by a victim, or, if subsection (2AB) applies, the parent or guardian of the victim, of an offence for which the prisoner has been sentenced to imprisonment; and
  • If the prisoner is a sex offender prisoner, any notice or assessment given to the Board pursuant to section 31(6) or (7) concerning the prisoner's participation or non-participation in appropriate treatment; and
  • Any other matters that the Board thinks are relevant.”

When considering the application for parole of a sex offender s31(3)(b) of the Act is also relevant:

  • “The Director, on giving the sex offender prisoner the opportunity to participate in the appropriate treatment, is to inform the prisoner that…
  • Participation, non-participation or unsatisfactory participation will, if the prisoner becomes eligible for parole, be factors taken into consideration by the Board in determining whether the prisoner should be released on parole.”

The purpose of parole:

The system of parole recognises the capacity of some prisoners for change and reform, the benefits of supervision, treatment and program delivery in the community and ultimately the potential this has for the protection of the community by reducing the risk of reoffending and supervising the reintegration of offenders.

When considering eligibility for parole this purpose must be weighed against the risk each prisoner may pose to members of the community if released to serve the remainder of their sentence amongst them and the ability to remove or mitigate that risk by the imposition of appropriate conditions.

Consideration:

In 2001 the applicant was sentenced in respect of the crime of murder. He killed the occupant of a home which the applicant had entered for the purposes of stealing. He had entered the premises on the belief that its occupant was absent in hospital. The applicant’s murder of his victim was particularly brutal involving the delivery of significant and forceful blows to the head and face with an axe.

At the time of committing this crime the applicant was 19 years of age and was noted to have learning difficulties resulting in him receiving a disability benefit.

The applicant has a lengthy history on parole. He was initially granted parole on 21 March 2011. However, this order was ultimately revoked in January 2016. Over the period of that order there had been significant and repeated failures to adhere to the conditions of the order by the applicant, resulting in a number of notices to attend and warrants issuing requiring the applicant to appear before the Parole Board. These issues revolved around the applicant’s lapses to drug use.

The applicant was again given the benefit of a parole order in September 2016 and that order was ultimately revoked in March 2017. Again over this period the issue appears to be one of drug use.

Once again parole was afforded to the applicant in January 2018. On that occasion, after approximately 6 months, he again appeared to lapse back into drug use, giving rise to the return of the applicant to the custodial environment. Unfortunately, and unlike the previous episodes of parole, this period did result in offending behaviour. Specifically, during that period of parole the applicant was charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest when he was intercepted for the purposes of executing a Parole Board warrant. The applicant’s parole order was revoked in July 2018.

Since that time a further application for parole was refused in November 2018. Sometime has accordingly passed since the last revocation of parole and subsequent refusal of a parole order for the applicant to rethink his priorities, motivation and desire to attain a compliant lifestyle. One of the risks this applicant faces is that ongoing failures on parole is doing little else but adding significant periods on to his sentence.

Specifically implicated in the applicant’s offending behaviour is his social group and the influence they have upon him, his boredom and his drug use.

The applicant has served his sentence compliantly. There has been no internal offending behaviour in the last 12 months and he has achieved a minimum classification and has been engaged in therapeutic and vocational coursework as well as employment as a general hand in maintenance.

Therapeutic courses that the applicant has engaged in include the Apsley Program, Alcohol and Drug Counselling and Equips Aggression.

The applicant has also engaged in section 42 leave for cultural purposes and his behaviour has been described in that period as “exemplary”.

Accommodation identified for the applicant upon release on parole has been assessed as suitable.

The applicant has developed insight into his risks upon return to the community. Specifically he acknowledges that his social relationships are to his detriment as is his engagement in the use of illicit substances.

It has been noted that he requires a structured and supervised environment in order to succeed back in the community.

The pre-parole assessments conducted in respect of his most recent past applications have not endorsed the applicant as suitable for a parole period. It is now noted that the applicant has been honest with respect to his drug use and other difficulties and has been engaging in therapeutic programs whilst in the prison environment. On that basis he is supported as appropriate for a parole order by Community Corrections.

At his presentation before the Board the applicant identified his previous lapses with respect to his capacity to undertake a parole order successfully. He understood that the risks of a further parole order is that the custodial term inextricably increases with every failure. Whilst failing on his previous orders within the community he has not exposed the community to any significant risk by way of reoffending and he professes current and significant motivation to keep trying to remain abstinent from drugs and lead a compliant lifestyle.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied:

Subject to the usual conditions of a parole order together with a mental health care plan, no contact provisions with respect to the registered victims and not to associate with certain named individuals.

Paroled from 19 November 2019 - 16 May 2026