Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Jodie Essie Latham

19 June 2020

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Jodi Essie Latham (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 2 years with a non-parole period of 12 months imposed upon her conviction for assault and dangerous driving

The applicant became eligible for consideration for parole on 2 July 2020.

The matter was heard before the Board at its meeting on 19 June 2020. On that occasion the applicant was present at the hearing and was invited to provide any information she had in support of her application and made herself available for questioning by the Board.

The pre-parole report prepared on behalf the Board had been read to the applicant prior to her 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 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.

Consideration

This applicant has a long record of prior convictions involving principally matters of driving and illicit drug use and possession. The matter for which she is currently serving her custodial sentence occurred on 3 January 2019 when her vehicle was approached by a Tasmania Police Constable. The applicant’s response to the circumstances was to suddenly place her vehicle in reverse in an effort to leave the scene at speed. In doing so the Constable was hit by a part of the vehicle. Whilst attempting to evade Tasmania Police the applicant drove at significant speed in built-up residential areas. Ultimately the vehicle came to a halt after ploughing through road spikes. Upon apprehension she was also found to be in possession of methylamphetamine.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, in light of her extensive criminal history the applicant has been the beneficiary of supervision orders in the community in the past. Probation orders imposed over the period 2000 to 2017 have resulted in poor compliance and, in respect of the 2017 order, the applicant reoffended during the period of the order.

Complicit to the applicant’s offending behaviour has been her use of illicit substances and alcohol, although there have been times in the past where has she has been able to remain drug abstinent.

The applicant has reached a minimum classification whilst serving the current custodial term and been employed in the main laundry. She has undertaken vocational courses, including Pathways, obtaining her white card and literacy work. She has also enrolled in a certificate II in applied fashion design and technology.

Behavioural reports on the whole have been positive with respect to the manner in which she has served her custodial sentence. Although there have been two occasions where the applicant has breached internal prison regulations. The last of those occasions being in September 2019 when she had in her possession an unauthorised article.

Accommodation proposed by the applicant were she to be afforded a parole order has been assessed as suitable.

Report received from Drug and Alcohol Counselling confirms the applicant has participated in counselling during her custodial term. In doing so she has been described as very engaged and having developed insight and has developed what is described as a realistic and honest relapse prevention plan. It is thought that the applicant would benefit from ongoing support with drug and alcohol counselling once released into the community.

Pre-parole assessments undertaken of the applicant have noted that whilst she has an extensive criminal history and a poor history of compliance with community based sentencing she does appear to have “demonstrated a positive shift in her motivation to make change”. This shift in attitude has been demonstrated by her move to good behaviour whilst in the custodial environment and her engagement in therapeutic treatment by way of drug and alcohol counselling for a lengthy period.

Certainly the applicant’s appearance before the Board revealed her to be an impressive applicant for a parole order. She demonstrated good insight into the issues for her upon her return into the community and expressed well her desire to lead a prosocial lifestyle. The applicant would benefit from an attempt at supervision whilst in the community on a parole order and it is not believe that she poses any significant risk to the community were she to be so released.

The parole order is accordingly approved.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

Subject to the usual conditions of a parole order together with:

A non-association order with certain named persons;

To obtain a mental health care plan.

Paroled from 2 July 2020 - 2 July 2021