Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Patrick Simon Mitchell

17 September 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Patrick Simon MITCHELL (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Stealing by misappropriation.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 20/09/2021.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 17/09/2021.  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 was a financial planner, and, in that capacity, he defrauded a client of their life savings.  The amount taken was significant.  The applicant’s conduct was a flagrant abuse of the trust that the victim had in him and occurred despite, and possibly because, of the close personal relationship that existed between them.  The victim had been a long-term client of the applicant and before him, his father. It is unclear whether the victim has been able to recoup any of her lost funds.  At the time of the offending, it did not appear that the applicant had any pressing financial issues that may have been an explanation for his conduct.

This is the applicant’s first sentence of imprisonment and indeed he has no relevant criminal history.  He has served his sentence in a positive manner.  He is classified as minimum with good reports concerning his behaviour and has been employed as an assistant event coordinator. He has had two urinalysis tests in 2021 clear of illicit substances.  The applicant has engaged in therapeutic and vocational programs including the Apsley Program, and a Bachelor of Communications.

The applicant has supportive and suitable accommodation available for him upon his release.  He is motivated to not reoffend.  He does not want to return to the custodial environment and wishes to reengage with and be a supportive parent for his children.  The applicant points to, at the time, unresolved mental health issues that may have contributed to his offending and is committed to engaging in appropriate treatment on return to the community to ensure his mental wellbeing. Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as having a low level of risk and suitable for parole.  The board concurs with that assessment.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• To obtain and comply with a mental health care plan

Paroled from 27 September 2021 - 20 September 2024