Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by P P R

27 November 2020

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

PPR (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 5 ½ years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 9 months imposed upon his conviction for maintaining a sexual relationship with a young person.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible for consideration for a parole order on 25 July 2020.

The applicant’s application initially came before the Board at its hearing on 17 July 2020 but required adjournment due to the absence of suitable accommodation and the request by the Board that he undergo assessment with a psychologist for the purpose of obtaining a report. That assessment was undertaken by Mr Damien Minehan. Ultimately the application was heard before the Parole Board at its hearing on 27 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

There is a 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 is serving a sentence imposed upon his conviction for sexual offending for a prolonged period against a child who was the son of his then partner when he was aged between 3 and 8 years old.  The offending was not only perverse as the exploitation of a young child for the sexual pleasure of an adult but also represented a significant betrayal of the trust a mother and her young son had in the applicant as a partner and father figure.  The offending was not spontaneous, brief or isolated but represented the outcome of manipulation and occurred over a number of years.

Whilst the applicant has a prior criminal history he has no previous convictions for sexual offending. Matters that could perhaps be identified as contributory to his offending on this occasion includes the use of cannabis, a disinhibition and a focus on his sexual needs.

In light of the applicant’s criminal record he does have a history of involvement with Community Corrections and their supervision in the context of community service and probation orders.  It is noted that the applicant was convicted for breach of a community service order in 2017 and a probation order in 2005.  This raises some concern regarding his capacity and willingness to comply with the conditions of a parole order however it is noted that the breaches are now relatively aged.

Perhaps also an indication of how the applicant may serve his parole period is the manner in which he has behaved during his custodial sentence.  He has received good reports regarding his behaviour having been described as polite, hardworking and friendly, and is classified as requiring minimum security.  Indeed part of his sentence has been served from the O’Hara units until the closure of those units in April 2020.  He has demonstrated a commitment toward achieving parole in his planning and reintegration sessions and by his participation in therapeutic programs. The applicant has completed the Sex Offender Intervention Program, engaged in counselling, and undertaken some vocational courses in horticulture and construction.

The applicant has also had the benefit of s42 leave into the community to engage in the Charity Gardens Project.

In his report of the 10^th of October 2017 Dr Minehan identified the factors relevant to the offending behaviour as impulsivity and highly sexualised and disinhibited traits.  As such he concluded that these factors remain his areas of risk and would call for attention before his return to the community.  Dr Minehan undertook further assessment of the applicant at the Board’s request and after his completion of the Sex Offender Treatment Program whilst in custody.  In his report of the 27^th September 2020 he noted that the applicant does not suffer a mental illness and that it was his sexual deviance and cognitive distortions that called for directed treatment.  He expressed therefore some concern that the applicant, after treatment, continues to deny any sexual deviancy attributing his offending to the particular victim rather than a general sexual interest in young boys. He further notes that the applicant has disclosed his own history of sexual abuse as a child which could well explain his sexual deviancy.  This was explored with the applicant in considerable detail at his hearing before the Board with the applicant acknowledging the need to remain vigilant against sexually deviant thinking and action.  He intends to gain assistance in this by engaging with psychological therapy upon his return to the community and supervision needs to be directed toward these issues.

A further risk factor is substance abuse.  The applicant has had a reliance on cannabis and it is important for him to remain abstinent from drugs.  He has had a negative urinary drug screen in late 2019 in the prison.  Suitable accommodation has been sourced for the applicant’s return to the community.

On balancing all matters it is considered that this applicant has demonstrated a capacity to be compliant with the rules of the custodial environment, a determination to maintain appropriate behaviour and a high level of engagement in therapeutic work addressing the risk factors to his offending.  Whilst some concern exists regarding his ongoing efforts to deny the full extent of his sexual interests he can be assisted with this deficiency in the community whilst under supervision of Community Corrections and treatment by a psychologist.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

Not to approach directly or indirectly the victim;

To obtain and comply with a mental health care plan;

To not be in the presence of persons under the age of 18 years unless in the presence of an approved nominated person.

Paroled from 8 December 2020 - 25 April 2023