Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Christopher John Humphreys

14 August 2020

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Christopher John Humphreys (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months imposed upon his conviction for drug possession and trafficking.

The applicant became eligible for consideration for a parole order on 25 November 2019.

The applicant was heard before the Board at its meeting on 14 August 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.

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

A pre-parole report prepared on behalf the Board was 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 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 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 the desire to punish for the criminal wrongdoing.

Consideration

On the 10^th of May 2018 this applicant was convicted of possession of a controlled drug and trafficking.  In respect of that matter he was successful in an application for parole being granted an order effective from the 4^th of March 2019.  Ultimately that order was revoked on the 22^nd of November 2019 due to non compliance with the conditions of the parole order, most particularly the requirement of abstaining from drug use.  A further application made for parole was refused on the 8^th of May 2020.  At sentencing for the trafficking matters the Applicant was described as the principal offender in a commercial enterprise.  He has a past conviction for trafficking the sentencing on that matter appears to have been insufficient to deter him from repeating his behaviour.

In addition to the failure on parole already referred to, the Applicant has demonstrated noncompliance with court orders noting he has offended whilst under a suspended sentence and breached bail orders in the past.

Despite these concerns, however, there is some basis for optimism that the Applicant is, of late, demonstrating a greater resolve and desire to assume a pro social path.  He is classified medium security but has good case notes to the effect that he is a polite and compliant inmate.  He works as a litter collector with his work being described as of a high standard.  Whilst he has engaged in internal offending behaviour those occasions are now quite aged, the last example occurring in November 2019.

The applicant has sought therapeutic input.  He has undergone the Equips Addiction individual program however his request to engage in the Apsley program was unsuccessful due to that unit’s closure. The applicant has, however, engaged well with one on one Drug and Alcohol counselling.

Accommodation identified for the applicant has been assessed as suitable.

For the applicant to succeed on a parole order he needs to be vigilant with respect to drug avoidance and disassociate from his pro criminal cohort.  There are positive factors which will assist him in this. He has good family support and engaged in relapse prevention planning.  At his hearing he revealed good insight and a strong determination to maintain his health and succeed on a parole order.  He also had good prospects for a return to employment.

It is the finding of the Board, noting that the last period of parole, albeit unsuccessful, did not result in any offending behaviour, that the applicant does not present a significant community risk and would benefit from the supervision an order would provide.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

Mental health care plan.

Paroled from 24 August 2020 - 11 May 2022