Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by J B A

11 December 2020

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

JBA (the applicant) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of two years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 15 months imposed upon conviction on a charge of ill-treating a child.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 18 September 2020.

The applicant initially appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 11 September 2020 where the application was adjourned for the Board to seek an updated psychological assessment. The applicant appeared subsequently at the hearing on 11 December 2020.

On that occasion the applicant 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 of the Board had been read to the applicant prior to his appearance at the hearing.

Registered Victim

There is a registered victim.

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.”

Documentation

The Board has had regard to the following documents in considering the application: -

1. The application;
2. Comments on passing sentence;
3. Papers provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions;
4. Prison summary;
5. Record of prior convictions
6. Prison episode summary report;
7. Pre-parole report;
8. Home assessment.

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.

In making its decision, the Board carefully considers the circumstances of the victim, and has regard to any statement provided to it by the victim, or the parents or guardians of that victim.

Consideration

The applicant is 27 years of age and was only 22 at the time of his offending. The offending behaviour involved serious ill-treatment of one of 4 year old twin girls,  both who were regularly left in his care, and were children of the applicant’s partner at the time. The behaviour involved several instances of application of physical force by way of blows or impact during March 2014 and September 2015 causing fractures and other injuries to the young child.

In comments on passing sentence his Honour Justice Porter noted that the violence inflicted on the victim was a “grave breach of trust” given the age of the victim and the fact the offending occurred while the victim was in the applicant’s care.

The applicant was convicted of the current index offence whilst serving a sentence of imprisonment for offences of assault and causing grievous bodily harm perpetrated against the other young twin of his former partner.  This aside, the applicant had no previous history of similar violence related offending, and it is reported that the applicant had no drug or alcohol issues, having had a relatively stable upbringing and a reasonable employment history of labouring and unskilled work. There is some indication in reports provided that the applicant had been exposed to some violence in the home towards siblings, but the applicant reportedly does not believe this impacted his offending behaviour.

The explanation provided for the applicant’s offending at time of sentence was that the applicant was unable to cope with the responsibility of caring for children.  The recent psychological assessment prepared for the Board by Dr Amy Washington suggests that the applicant’s personality style indicated a vulnerability to rapidly shifting emotions with poor coping response to stress, and he may be easily angered when situations become unpredictable, leading to increased risk of use of aggression or physical violence.

Dr Washington assessed the applicant as having limited insight into his offending and identified a need for the applicant to continue to engage with supports in relation to his self-awareness and coping skills with particular focus on anger management.

The applicant’s offending is of a serious nature, and the impact of the abuse on the health, behaviour and functioning of such a young victim as described in the victim impact statement is significant and noted by the Board in its consideration.

However, the applicant has reportedly taken some steps to address his behaviour during his custodial sentence. The applicant has participated in the EQUIPs Foundation program and has been waitlisted for the EQUIPS Aggression program. Information provided suggests that the applicant appeared to understand and grasp most of the concepts, although has more work to do to improve his insight into his offending and how to appropriately manage his behaviour.

During his custodial sentence, the applicant has attained a minimum classification and is currently housed in the minimum-security prison. The applicant’s case notes are generally positive, despite 2 minor internal offences in the last 12 months relating to being in possession of unauthorised food items, and he has engaged consistently in prison employment, with his current employment noted as a general hand, Chillroom.

Accommodation nominated by the applicant upon release has been assessed as suitable and providing a supportive and pro-social environment.

On interview the applicant stated his period of incarceration had led to him to reflect more on his actions. He confirmed his participation in meditation and mindfulness activities since completing the Equips Foundation course has assisted him to better manage stress and he expressed a willingness to participate in therapeutic programs to continue to manage his behaviour if granted parole.

The pre-parole report provided to the Board indicates that applicant has been assessed as requiring a high level of intervention and supervision if released to parole. However, Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as suitable for a parole order and provided details of future management of the applicant’s risk factors through engagement in the EQUIPS Aggression program in the community and referral to appropriate psychological services focussed on anger management and coping skills.

The applicant successfully completed a previous period of parole related to his prior offending and given the existence of stable and pro-social support proposed upon release, his expressed willingness to engage in ongoing therapeutic intervention and the management and supervision proposed by Community Corrections, the Board deems the applicant is suitable for parole.

The Board’s determination

Parole Granted

Special Conditions

Subject to the normal conditions of a parole order but additionally:

Engage with a general practitioner to be assessed for a Mental Health Plan and attend psychological counselling as recommended by that plan.

Not contact or approach named registered victims.

Paroled from 22 December 2020 - 18 December 2021