Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Christopher Vernon Clark

3 September 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Christopher Vernon CLARK (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Assault and Causing Grievous Bodily Harm.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 06/06/2021 .

The applicant initially appeared before the Parole Board in respect of his application on the 28^th of May 2021 however, due to the lack of suitable accommodation the matter was adjourned.  The matter was ultimately heard by the Board on the 3^rd of September 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 lengthy criminal history.  He has engaged in a lifestyle which has seen him frequently before the courts and convicted on matters of dishonesty, drugs and violence including family violence. The matter for which he is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment involved him attempting to evade the police by driving away in a vehicle in which there were two young sleeping children. The children’s mother had been in the car but was effectively ejected by the applicant attempting to drive the vehicle causing her to fall out and under the vehicle.  Also injured by the applicant’s actions was one of the police officers whose hand became trapped in the car.

In the past the applicant has shown resistance to sentencing options that have provided for his supervision in the community by way of a probation and community service order. He was not able to successfully complete either order.

Contributory in his offending has been the use of drugs and the effects of a traumatic childhood.

Despite his history and lifestyle Escourt J at sentencing observed that the applicant had prospects for reform;

“I take into account that matters put o his behalf by his counsel, Mr Rainbird, including, that in recent times has had a good work record and he has a strong interest in the care of his children.  To his credit, he completed a drug and alcohol course in prison and sought assessment from the Bridge program.  He is determined not to associate with his former pro-criminal associates and he has a job to go to on his release from prison.”

This view of the applicant’s potential has been born out by the way he has served his custodial term to date.  He has achieved a minimum rating, is described as positive, compliant, and polite, engaged in study and in drug and alcohol counselling and when employed has executed his work to a high standard.

The applicant’s engagement with Tafe has been particularly rewarding in his take up of the opportunity for further learning but also in his inclusion in a forum presented by Tafe as a presenter and he has been described by planning officer at the prison as appearing very future focused.

There has been one internal offence which is now quite aged having occurred in May of 2020 and involved trafficking with another inmate.  The way the applicant has served his custodial sentence is a credit to him and attests to his intention for lifestyle change.  His efforts in this regard will be assisted by the provision of parole.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• To obtain a mental health care plan

Paroled from 13 September 2021 - 22 July 2022