Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Michael Bechara

13 November 2020

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

Mickael Bechara (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 6 years and 7 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 9 months imposed upon his conviction for matters of trafficking in a controlled substance, unlawful trafficking in firearms, dealing with the proceeds of crime and perverting the course of justice and common assault.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible for consideration for a parole order on 29 November 2020.

The applicant ultimately appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on 13 November 2020. There were some delays in achieving a hearing as the Board awaited a decision from New South Wales regarding whether to approve an application for transfer of parole to that jurisdiction. That jurisdiction provided that approval enabling the matter to be heard on 13 November 2020. 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 was read to the applicant prior to his appearance at the hearing.

Registered Victim

No 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.”

The High Court, in Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623 rejected the proposition that the primary purpose of parole is the rehabilitation of the offender, deciding that it is "to provide for mitigation of the punishment of the prisoner in favour of his rehabilitation through conditional freedom, when appropriate, once the prisoner has served the minimum time that a judge determines justice requires that he must serve having regard to all the circumstances of his offence".

The system of parole does recognise, however, the capacity of people to 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 in reducing recidivism.

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, the ability to remove or mitigate that risk by the imposition of appropriate conditions and understanding the victim’s “voice” and the desire to continue to punish for the criminal wrongdoing.

Consideration

The applicant was convicted of drug and firearm trafficking in 2017 as a product of a police investigation into the commercial distribution of methylamphetamine in Tasmania.  The applicant was a resident of New South Wales and was detected to have engaged in a commercial enterprise with others to enable and profit off the supply of drugs into this state.

The applicant has a criminal history commencing in his youth for matters including drug supply and discharge of a firearm with the intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

In light of his strong familial links to New South Wales he has applied for and been granted an application to transfer his parole order, should one be granted, to that jurisdiction.

Suitable accommodation is available for him in New South Wales with his family.

Risk factors for the applicant’s return to offending includes his close engagement with an antisocial cohort.  He has an awareness of the risks that returning to his former lifestyle and associates has upon his intention to reform and asserts he will focus on his family on release.

Despite the fact that there is some internal offending and a 2019 conviction of assault he has achieved a minimum classification with some good case notes regarding his behaviour. Internal prison records reflect on their face a substantial improvement in behaviour with the last internal offence occurring in August 2019 when he used another division’s showers.

The applicant has engaged well with therapeutic programs to the extent possible in light of the disruption to program delivery caused by COVID19.  He commenced Gottawanna until suspended due to the pandemic and undertaken the Circle of Security course, Equips Aggression and Foundation courses. He has also engaged with vocational courses directed toward literacy and construction which should enhance his employment prospects upon his return to the community.

Exit reports from the programs in which he has participated consistently paint a picture of a proactive, engaged participate with a focus for reform.

This applicant presents a compelling case for a parole order.  Whilst he has a lengthy criminal record for serious matters of violence and drug supply as mentioned above, since his sentencing he has presented with an emerging focus on self-improvement and socially responsible behaviour. Indeed an indication of this is perhaps to be found in the fact that prior to sentencing he spent a prolonged period on bail of over two years without returning to offending behaviour in that period.  At the hearing of his application the applicant claimed he was a different person at the time of his offending with nothing to lose.  Now he is motivated by his family, has greater maturity and is wishing to remain on a pro social path.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

The usual conditions.

Paroled from 30 November 2020 - 29 August 2023