Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Robert Frederick Bowden

9 July 2021

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

Robert Frederick Bowden (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 8 years with a non-parole period of 5 years imposed upon his conviction for manslaughter

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant initially became eligible to be considered for parole on 3 October 2019 and a parole order was granted at the meeting of the Board on 22 January 2020. This parole order was ultimately revoked in July 2020 for non-compliance.

The applicant’s subsequent application for parole was required to be adjourned at the meeting of the Board on 30 October 2020 due to lack of suitable accommodation. The applicant then appeared before the Board in respect of his current application at the hearing on 9 July 2021.

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 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.”

Documentation

The Board has had regard to the following documents in considering the application: -

• The application;
• Comments on passing sentence;
• Papers provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions;
• Prison summary;
• Record of prior convictions
• Prison episode summary report;
• Pre-parole report;
• Home assessment.

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 punish for the criminal wrongdoing.

Consideration

At the time of his offending the applicant was 50 years of age and has a significant prior offending history involving several matters involving violence and dishonesty. The nature of the current offence involved sudden, inexplicable and unprovoked behaviour that led to disastrous consequences for the victim and her family.  The victim, a 71-year-old lady, standing on a traffic island waiting to cross the road was suddenly pushed by the applicant causing her to fall, strike her head and because of consequent injuries, die.

In assessing the applicant’s initial application for parole in 2019, the Board noted it required careful analysis of the risk the applicant may pose to members of the public considering his propensity for violence. The Board also noted the applicant had served several custodial sentences in the past, but that the threat of an imposition of a gaol term did not appear to have caused the applicant to moderate his behaviour.

Additionally, relevant to the current assessment of the risk the applicant poses to members of the public if returned to the community, is the applicant’s inability to comply with the strict conditions of his initial parole order, leading to revocation of the order in July 2020.

A significant contributing factor to the applicant’s current and past offending behaviour has been his alcoholism. Information before the Board indicates the applicant has a long-standing problem with alcohol, having struggled with alcohol since his teens, and when drunk becomes angry and loses self-control.  Prior to the offence, the applicant had been abstinent from alcohol for a period to try and gain control over his health and aggressive behaviour, but this achievement was derailed by the death of his mother.  The applicant had returned to drinking and was reportedly under the influence of alcohol, and Valium, at the time of the attack on the victim, having consumed both the night before.

The applicant is not however without prospect for rehabilitation. In initially granting parole in 2019, the Board considered a report of 14 January 2020, provided at the Board’s request, by forensic psychologist, Mr Damien Minehan. Mr Minehan noted the applicant had insights into aspects of his offending lifestyle that place him at risk, including alcohol use and lack of engagement in meaningful activity.  The Board accepted the applicant had insight into the impact of his offending and the need to maintain sobriety and abstinence to enable him to control his behaviour and aggression.

The applicant appears to have attempted to address these risk factors during his custodial sentence, having in the past engaged in therapeutic inputs, undertaking the Stopping Violence, Equips Foundations program and alcohol and drug counselling.  Since his return to custody on revocation of his parole order, the applicant has re-engaged in therapeutic counselling and one-to one drug and alcohol counselling.  In a summary report provided to the Board, the applicant is described as highly engaged, and being able to challenge past behaviours, having gained insight to understand his behaviour triggers and developing strategies to manage situations more positively.

The applicant has served his custodial sentence in a reasonably compliant manner, having worked his way through the system to attain minimum security classification and accommodation in the minimum-security O’Hara Cottages.  Case notes reflect generally polite and compliant behaviour.

Control of his behaviour is clearly a significant challenge for the applicant if he was to return to the community. His last period of parole was characterised by poor behaviour and compliance, with problematic interventions with various services and individuals which led to difficulties in access to and maintaining suitable accommodation.

Despite this, the pre-parole report prepared for the Board reports the applicant has shown a recognisable shift in his thinking and engagement in the analysis of his behaviour, which suggests an improved commitment to change.

At interview by the Board, the applicant was questioned about his ability to manage his behaviour in the community. He reported he now thinks of the consequences of how he speaks to and deals with people, acknowledging past problems with being able to express himself appropriately.  The applicant attributed some of the shift in thinking to his engagement in therapeutic counselling relating to past complex trauma and substance abuse. He expressed motivation to continue to engage in the community, in addition to vocational courses including construction and IT that he commenced during his sentence.

While the applicant’s offending history and previous non-compliance does increase identified risk factors for reoffending, there are additional protective factors to assist Community Corrections in appropriately managing the risk.  The applicant’s nominated accommodation has been assessed as suitable, and additionally had been assessed as suitable for electronic monitoring of any parole conditions imposed. The applicant will also have the benefit of additional support provided by Beyond the Wire program.

Considering the above, Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as suitable for a further opportunity for parole, and the Board agrees with this assessment.

The Board’s determination

Parole Approved

Special Conditions

• Be assessed for a mental health plan and attend psychological counselling as recommended by that plan.
• Be excluded from entering the suburb of Newtown in Tasmania.
• Must submit to electronic monitoring

Paroled from 20 July 2021 - 8 March 2023