Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by B C P

18 September 2020

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

BCP (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of two years and six months with a non-parole period of 15 months imposed upon his conviction for three matters of rape and two of indecent assault.

The applicant became eligible for consideration for a parole order on 23 September 2020.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on 18 September 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.

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 eighteen years old when he first came into prison.  This is his first prison episode.  He has no relevant criminal history.  The applicant’s sentence of imprisonment was imposed upon his conviction on three counts of rape and two counts of indecent assault.  The offending behaviour involved one victim and occurred in the course of one evening when the applicant was at a sleep over involving a number of teenagers.  The victim was sixteen years of age at the time of the offending.

At his sentencing the Court described the applicant as “…an immature adolescent with no previous behavioural transgressions”.  The shortest possible non-parole period was applied by the Court.

The applicant is classified as minimum security and his case notes describe him as a polite and friendly inmate.  During his custodial term he has undertaken the New Directions course which he completed on the 8^th of September this year.  In the exit report from that program it was noted that whilst the applicant at initial assessment was in the pre contemplative stage of change, not acknowledging his problem areas and maintaining a denial around some of the offending behaviour, as the program progressed his insight and engagement improved.  Gains were reportedly made in the applicant’s understanding around consent and the impact of substance abuse on his behaviour and decision making.  It should be noted that the report does sound a warning that as a young man in a prison environment the applicant may be susceptible to the anti-authoritarian influence of other inmates and that with a supportive family and achievable goals his prospects of successful reintegration back into the community would be enhanced by a parole period.

Suitable and supportive accommodation is available for the applicant upon his return to the community under a parole order.

The assessment of Community Corrections is that the applicant was benefit from the structure and support of a parole order.

In considering the application for parole regard has been had the statement of the victim as to the impact the offending behaviour has had upon her, provided by her at the time of the applicant’s sentencing.  She talks of her anger, her loss of motivation and difficulty in maintaining relationships.  Her life has irrevocably changed as a result of the applicant’s conduct.

The applicant’s crimes were apparently atypical of him given his lack of any relevant criminal history.  He was a youthful offender and there appears positive prospect for change under the dictates of a parole order.  Drug use has been identified as contributory to his offending behaviour and this risk factor would benefit from the structured support provided by a parole order.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

Not to contact the victim directly or indirectly;

To obtain and comply with a mental health care plan.

Paroled from 28 September 2020 - 23 December 2021