Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Rodney Gene Crosswell

25 June 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background

Rodney Gene CROSSWELL (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Stealing, Armed Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Unlawfully setting fire to property & Perverting Justice, Escape, Parole Revocation, Aggravated Burglary, Stealing, Stealing a firearm, Unlawfully injuring property x2 and Assault Police Officer.  The convictions for these matters have variously occurred between 2010 to 2020.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 14^th of July 2019.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 12^th of March 2021. At that time the matter was adjourned due to the lack of suitable accommodation. The matter was subsequently brought back before the Board for hearing on the 25^th of June 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 more recent of the matters for which the applicant is serving his sentence of imprisonment involve his theft from a residence of property including 6 firearms and his assault of police officers by pointing a crossbow at them whilst at his uncle’s home.  The police were in attendance to arrest him in respect of the stealing matters and because of a neighbour’s complaint that he had also been threatened with the crossbow.  The situation evolved into a siege with police surrounding the premises. Sadly, inside the premises were not only the applicant but also his two young children who bore witness to the events, including the applicant’s threats to kill and the police entry with guns drawn into the home.

The applicant has a criminal record that reflects that he has embraced a criminal lifestyle.  His offending commenced from a young age and has continued unabated, except by periods of incareration, since.  By the time of his sentencing in 2012 he had committed over 125 burglary and stealing offences, had 24 convictions for motor vehicle stealing and numerous other convictions for crimes of violence and matters of dishonesty.

The applicant’s experience of Court orders and on community-based orders and supervision is similarly poor.  He has frequently breached bail and failed to comply with Community Service and Probation orders.  Significantly he was afforded an opportunity on parole in 2017.  That order commenced in early January of 2018 and would have been completed on the 14^th of June 2020.  In August of 2018 the order was revoked, and the applicant returned to prison as a result of his commission of the above-mentioned firearm theft and assault matters.

The applicant again sought a parole order in April of 2020 however that application was refused.

The applicant has also demonstrated a disregard for rules and regulations whilst in the prison environment.  He has been classified as maximum rated and has committed internal offences including trafficking and an assault of another inmate.  The trafficking appears to have involved his partner and his son, during a prison visit, passing a ring to him.  It is however noteworthy that the last of the internal offences occurred in January of 2021. Since that time the applicant has been able to demonstrate compliant behaviour.

The applicant strongly asserts a desire to change and cease offending behaviour.  In light of his past lifestyle and conduct this will be a significant endeavour for him.  He claims to be particularly motivated by his children which is somewhat ironic considering what he has exposed them to thus far, the siege and passing his ring to him during a prison visit.  He claims to have changed during this sentence and recognised that at times he needs to ask for help when in the community.  The fact that he has been able to demonstrate compliance within the prison for a lengthy period may be evidence of the change in attitude the applicant professes.

It is also noteworthy that recent case notes reflect not only polite and positive behaviour but also record the applicant as being future focused, wishing to settle down with his family, and as having exercised maturity in influencing other inmates to act appropriately during a muster.  The applicant has also engaged in work within the prison.  He has received good work reports for his employment as a wardsman.

At hearing the applicant talked of a resilience program undertaken by him within prison and of the significant benefits he felt he had gained from his involvement in that program. He has also engaged with the TPS Family and Parent reintegration officer since December 2018 which has assisted in providing some through care and management for the applicant’s eventual return to his family.  The officers from that program have reported their observations of the applicant’s interaction with his partner and children as being positive and strongly bonded.

Suitable accommodation is available to the applicant for release on parole.  That accommodation is also able to accommodate electronic monitoring which will provide an extra layer of monitoring of the applicant whilst on parole.

The assessment of Community Corrections is that whilst the release of the applicant on parole is not without risk there is benefit to having him released under supervision where he can access services to assist him reassimilate and reform.  The ability to utilise electronic monitoring also enhances the capacity to supervise and ensure compliance with parole condition.

The applicant if afforded parole, has the resources and supports that should assist him to change his lifestyle to one that is pro social and respectful of the community. This is his opportunity to achieve what he asserts is his aim, a quiet life, with his family and as a father who is a good role model for his children.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied

• Not to associate with certain named persons
• Mental health care plan
• Electronic monitoring

Paroled from 6 July 2021 - 27 February 2026