Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Brodie Joseph Miller

28 May 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background

Brodie Joseph Miller (‘the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 10 months with a non-parole period of 7 months, imposed upon conviction of charges of aggravated burglary, burglary, attempted burglary, stealing and motor vehicle stealing.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 2 June 2021.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 28 May 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.

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: -

1. The application;
2. Comments on passing sentence;
3. Papers provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions;
4. Prison summary;
5. Record of prior convictions
6. Prison episode summary report;
7. Pre-parole report;
8. 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

The applicant is currently 25 years of age.  The applicant’s pattern of offending behaviour relating to his current custodial sentence is a continuation of a history of dishonesty and violence offences occurring over the past several years. By his own admission, this is the longest period of incarceration served to date.

As is often the case, complicit in this type of offending is the applicant’s addiction to illicit drugs, in particular methamphetamine which he commenced using at the age of 16.  In addition to his drug use, the applicant developed a gambling addiction and reportedly stole to fund and sustain his drug use.

The applicant does have a supportive family who have attempted to assist him to address his drug use, but the impact of his behaviour ultimately led to him being required to leave the family home.  The applicant wrote of the loving and supportive nature of his family in his application, and acknowledged the disappointment he has caused his family with his offending behaviour and substance use.

During his custodial sentence, the applicant has engaged in one-to-one alcohol and drug counselling, and a report provided indicates the applicant “has worked diligently to address his past drug addiction and criminal conduct that he clearly identifies as being linked”.

The applicant is classified medium security, and although case notes record two internal offences in the past 12 months, the applicant is employed as a general hand on the maintenance crew and case notes regarding work behaviour and performance are positive.

Accommodation identified has been assessed as pro-social and supportive.

The applicant’s prospects for rehabilitation are good as he appears motivated to change past behaviour, expressing during his appearance before the Board that he was “keen to get out and make a new start”.  The applicant stated he is drug free, has put on weight while in prison and “feels better than I have for years”.  Information provided in the Pre-Parole Report indicates his family have noticed a change in the applicant and are willing to provide ongoing support in the community.

The applicant’s change in attitude and focus on addressing his behaviour and substance use is relevant in Community Corrections assessing the applicant as suitable for parole.  The Pre-Parole Report notes the applicant reported remorse and shame regarding his prior offending and is aware of the impact on both the victims of his offending and his own family. While the applicant has a history of poor compliance, it is noted the applicant has shown a commitment to parole and rehabilitation during his current custodial sentence.

Despite the applicant having a short time to serve on his current custodial sentence, when questioned by the Board, he sought to proceed with his application for parole.  He noted this most recent custodial sentence was the longest time he had served, and it had been a “wake-up” call.

In acknowledging his poor attitude to rehabilitation in the past, the applicant stated he believed the structured nature of a parole order would assist him to succeed in making the changes towards a more pro-social lifestyle, which he finally feels motivated to pursue.

The Board is satisfied that given the existence of pro-social and protective factors noted, in addition to the applicant’s attitude and motivation, he sufficiently satisfies the statutory criteria to be granted an opportunity for parole.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Paroled from  7 June 2021 - 6 January 2022