Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Leigh John Parker

14 May 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Leigh John Parker (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months imposed upon his conviction for two assaults.

The applicant became eligible to be released on a parole order on the 26^th of May 2021.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on 14^th of May 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’s victim was his former partner.  At the time of his assault of her she was recovering from the effects of treatment for cancer.  Alcohol appears to have been a factor relevant to the offending behaviour. In any event the applicant and his victim quarrelled culminating in the applicant hitting his victim over the head with a tea pot and then twice pushing her to the floor.  The effects of this on the victim was significant in that it opened a surgical scar requiring urgent medical attention and intervention. The applicant sought that attention by calling for an ambulance this, at least, is to his credit.

The applicant does have a criminal history principally involving driving and drinking offences but does also have a record of domestic violence involving this and former partners.  There is little doubt that in large part his past problematic behaviour is the result of the misuse of alcohol.  This factor was also relevant to past supervision of him by Community Corrections who noted in the context of a Community Service Order in 2016 that whilst the orders had been completed the applicant had not made any positive gains in addressing his “risk of recidivism regarding his alcohol consumption.”

The applicant has achieved a minimum classification as a custodial inmate, with positive case notes and employment as a general hand in maintenance.  He has undertaken the Equips Foundation program on a group basis, Family Violence Offender Intervention Program on a group and individual basis and engaged in individual alcohol and drug counselling.  The reports from those therapeutic interventions speak of a participant that appeared to understand content, was hesitant to be actively engaged and somewhat resistant to the concept of ceasing alcohol use.  Planning for the applicant’s release has included a referral for ongoing drug and alcohol counselling to maintain sobriety and the applicant is willing to engage in that input.

Upon his release the applicant has suitable accommodation available to him and the prospect of employment.

The assessment of Community Corrections is that the applicant is a suitable candidate for a parole order.

The Board acknowledges the impact statement made by the applicant’s victim.  There is no doubt that the applicant’s conduct has caused her irreparable physical and mental harm let alone constituting a significant departure from the levels of care and comfort she should have been able to expect from her partner particularly at a time when she was vulnerable and required the care and concern of her partner given her extant medical condition.

However, despite its difficulties the applicant has engage in therapeutic programs to understand and equip him with the skills to move away from his offending behaviour.  In large part that behaviour is a product of his alcohol abuse.  The applicant’s willingness to engage with alcohol and drug treatment in the community is reflective of his acceptance that he needs to address this aspect of his lifestyle to avoid future reoffending. The Board believes that the applicant would benefit from the support of parole supervision upon release from the custodial environment and in order to consolidate on gains already made by the applicant toward his reform.

The Board’s determination

Parole is approved.

Special conditions applied

• No contact with the victim
• Electronic monitoring

Paroled from 26 May 2021 - 26 February 2023