Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Mark David Howard

11 December 2020

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

Mark David Howard (the applicant) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years with a non-parole period of 18 months imposed on conviction on charges of dangerous driving, driving while disqualified, assaulting a police officer, resist a police officer and several other related summary offences.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 12 November 2020.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application 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 are no registered victims.

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 now 35 years old. He has a lengthy history of offending, including drug offences, anti-authority offences and some matters of dishonesty.  Additionally, the applicant has an appalling record of relevant driving matters, involving both drugs and alcohol.

The applicant’s current offending involved a course of risky and dangerous driving behaviour at a time when he was disqualified from driving. Additionally, at the time of driving the applicant had two adult passengers and his 3 year old son with him in an old single cabin utility, in excess of the capacity limit.

On the day of the incident, over a distance of about 8 km, the applicant was pursued by police but continued to drive erratically, failing to pull over and swerving in the direction of a police officer who was on the side of a road ready to deploy road spikes to slow the applicant.  As a result of the applicant swerving in the direction of the officer, the officer was forced to jump out of the way believing he would be struck.  This action formed the basis for the charge of assaulting a police officer.

In comments on passing sentence, his Honour Acting Justice Porter noted the applicant’s dangerous driving behaviour was at the serious end of the scale and that his conduct had exposed a number of people to a high level of risk.

Clearly contributing factors to the applicant’s long history of offending are his drug use and addiction which it is reported to have commenced in his late teens, initially involving cannabis use but escalating to use of amphetamine and methamphetamine.

Despite his appalling record, the applicant has demonstrated some prospects for rehabilitation. During his custodial sentence, while the applicant committed several internal offences in the early part of his sentence, there is no record of internal offences in the past 12 months. He has attained a minimum-security classification and accommodation and has been approved for admission to the O’Hara Independent Living Units pending an available place.

He is currently employed as a prison baker and has maintained this position for over 7 months.  Case notes regarding his employment are extremely positive and note “he continues to do an outstanding job, completing all tasks to a high standard and is a great mentor to new members of the team.

Relevant to the applicant’s risk of re-offending, in comments on passing sentence, Porter AJ noted the applicant had demonstrated a capacity to remain drug-free in the past, reportedly linked to a gap in his offending between 2009 and 2011 when he was employed full-time.  Information provided to the Board suggests the applicant has reported being drug-free in prison, despite being offered illicit substances.

The applicant has had sole care of his son at times in the past but because of his offending and subsequent incarceration, his son was placed in the care of another family member.  The applicant has expressed motivation to continue to pursue his relationship with his son through Child Safety Services but does understand this may take some time given the nature of his offending.

When challenged on interview by the Board about his offending behaviour involving his son being present in the vehicle, the applicant expressed recognition of the serious risk his behaviour posed to everyone, most particularly his son.

The accommodation nominated by the applicant has been assessed as suitable and supportive and located at the opposite end of the state from his previous offending and past pro-criminal associates.

Community Corrections have expressed concerns regarding the applicant’s ability to comply with strict parole conditions and remain drug free in the community given his history of offending and the failure of previous opportunities of community-based supervision to have deterred the applicant from his recent serious offending behaviour.

While these concerns are noted, the applicant’s behaviour in prison, periods of remaining drug free in the past and protective factors such as family support and suitable and supportive accommodation located away from past associates, are relevant in the Board’s assessment that the applicant meets the statutory criteria to be deemed suitable for parole.

The applicant has expressed a belief that he does not believe remaining illicit substance free in the community would be an issue for him stating he “does not want to go back to his old ways”. However, the Board believes therapeutic intervention regarding illicit substances will be an important factor in supporting the applicant to abide by the strict conditions of a parole order.

Accordingly, in determining this applicant is suitable to be afforded the opportunity for a parole order, the Board requires the applicant engage in specific alcohol and drug treatment as a condition of his parole.

The Board’s determination

Parole Granted

Special Conditions

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

Must engage in specific alcohol and drug counselling.

Paroled from 21 December 2020 - 12 July 2022