Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Christopher Colin Broderick

3 September 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Christopher Colin Broderick (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for a vast number of matters including the activation of a suspended sentence, driving offences, breach of bail, and matters of dishonesty including burglary and stealing.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 03/09/2021.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 03/09/2021.  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 purpose of 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 has a criminal history commencing from the age of 12 years.  He has offended both in this state and in Queensland.  He has typically engaged in matters of dishonesty including burglary and stealing and driving matters.  Understandably considering this history the applicant has served previous sentences of imprisonment, been released under parole orders, and has also come under the supervision of Community Corrections under Community Service and Probation Orders.

Records reflect that the applicant’s response to community supervision has been mixed.  Whilst in 2003 the applicant breached his parole order by absconding and reoffending, he was able to complete a Drug Treatment Order in 2013 with the terminal report reflecting on the applicant’s “positive frame of mind”.  The applicant’s non-compliance with community supervision is now somewhat aged and has been assessed by Community Corrections as not impacting upon the applicant’s suitability for parole.

The applicant stated to the Board that he attributed much of his offending in the past to the exigencies created by his unsettled lifestyle including homelessness and lack of support. He claims now to be future focused, wishing to turn his life around.

Were he to be granted parole the applicant has suitable and supported accommodation available for him. He was also able to identify several other supports within the community including his daughter and the NDIS.  His plans included engaging with his local men’s shed.

The applicant has served his sentence in a compliant manner achieving a minimum rating with the one exception of inappropriate language or behaviour in early July 2021.  He has some outstanding matters that remain before the Magistrate Court in respect of alleged offending occurring in 2020 however it appears that these will be unlikely to resolve for an extended period.  The Board considers that these matters are not a barrier to the provision of parole in those circumstances.

The applicant impresses as an individual who is seeking to alter his life’s course.  He is vulnerable to reengaging in offending behaviour if he returns to homelessness.  The provision of parole will provide supervision, direction and support that may well assist the applicant in his effort to reform during a period where he can reside in appropriate accommodation.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

nil

Paroled from 13 September 2021 - 3 March 2022