Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Hilton Stanford Jelliman

12 October 2018

Reasons for Decision

The Background

Mr Jelliman (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 20 years with a non-parole period of 11 years imposed upon his conviction for murder.

The applicant became eligible for consideration for parole on 22 January 2018.

The applicant’s application was heard before the Parole Board at its hearing on 12 October 2018. 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.

The documents considered:

1. The application;
2. Victim impact statement;
3. Comments on passing sentence;
4. Papers received from the Director of Public Prosecutions;
5. Prison summary;
6. Record of prior convictions;
7. Prison episode summary report;
8. Getting Smart and Equips exit reports;
9. Federation University results statements;
10. Pre-parole report;
11. Reference and psychiatric report dated 20 July 2018;
12. Updated pre-parole report;
13. Email communication with Border Force.

Consideration:

This application was initially before the Board on 13 April 2018 at which time the matter was adjourned for a psychiatric report to be obtained. That report was obtained from Dr Amy Washington being a report dated 4 July 2018.

The matter then came before the Board at meetings in July and August 2018 but was again adjourned in order for the circumstances in which the applicant would be placed upon return to South Africa was researched. The need for this arose as a result of the revocation of the applicant’s visa entitling him to stay within Australia and accordingly his return to South Africa immediately upon release from his custodial sentence. Ultimately the application was heard before the Board at its 12 October 2018 meeting.

The applicant killed his wife in January 2007 in their home at Devonport by stabbing her with a kitchen knife 28 times. The aftermath of the offending behaviour was witnessed by the applicant and his victim’s 14-year-old son and the victim’s mother.

The offending behaviour not only had a significant and permanent impact upon the victims by the loss of their mother and daughter but also has resulted in significant lifestyle changes in light of the victim’s mother assuming the care of the victim’s son.

The factors that have been identified as contributing to the applicant’s offending behaviour has been the use of alcohol and jealousy. The applicant suggests that his relationship at the time was breaking down and that he lacked the skills or ability to seek help to deal with the emotions he was experiencing at the time of that breakdown. He stated that he was suicidal at the time and indeed attempted to commit suicide following the murder of his wife.

The applicant now expresses remorse in respect of the impact his actions have had in taking the life of his wife and upon his son and mother-in-law. It is, however, noted that at the time of sentencing the Honourable Chief Justice Crawford, as he then was, did not accept that the applicant was genuinely remorseful for his actions.

The applicant has served his sentence of imprisonment without internal offending behaviour and has been described as compliant. Indeed the applicant had been previously housed at the O’Hara Cottages until cancellation of his visa required him to be moved back into the Ron Barwick Centre.

The applicant has engaged in courses both rehabilitative and vocational in the course of his sentence, including Smart Recovery, Getting Smart, Equips Domestic Abuse Group, TAFE courses in financial services, hospitality, accounting, management, human resources management, marketing, bakery and IT.

As previously noted the applicant’s proposed accommodation upon release will be in South Africa with his father. As best as can be done through contact with the father that accommodation has been assessed as suitable.

In her report Dr Washington notes that the deportation of the applicant back to his country of birth will pose a significant challenge for him in transitioning and that he has somewhat unrealistic expectations with respect to his activities upon release. Nevertheless she noted that his historical and clinical factors did not put him at a higher risk of future violence. The risk for the applicant will reside in his capacity to transition back into South Africa after a long custodial sentence and she noted the importance of having supports to assist him in this respect.

The victim impact statement of the mother of the victim has been considered by the Board.

On balancing all matters the application for parole is approved.

Paroled from 19 December 2018 - 22 January 2027