Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Troy Daniel Perry

12 February 2021

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

Troy Daniel Perry, (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 4 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months imposed upon conviction of the charge of trafficking in a controlled substance.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 22 February 2021.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 12 February 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.

Registered Victims

No registered victims

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

This applicant’s incarceration is a result of his involvement in 2018 as a paid courier travelling between Tasmania and mainland Australia for the purposes of importing and exporting illicit drugs and cash between the states.  The applicant’s offending was described by Geason, J in comments on passing sentence as “participation in a regular and commercially based course of conduct over a period of around three months, which revolved around the transmission of drugs from suppliers to customers.”

The applicant has no prior convictions for the crime of trafficking but has prior convictions for drug related offending both in Tasmania and Victoria. The applicant is originally from Victoria.

The applicant has a relatively stable background although suffered the loss of both parents quite close to each other by the age of 20. Around this time the applicant commenced a relationship with the mother of his now 17-year-old son and became close with his former partner’s step-father who has remained a support during his life prior to and during his incarceration, and has been involved in the care of the applicant’s son.  The applicant is currently in a relationship with his partner of 7 years, who has an older child from a former relationship and a daughter with the applicant, who was born soon after the applicant’s remand into custody.

It appears the motivation for the applicant’s offending relates primarily to the ability to earn quick and easy money, significantly more than amounts he would ordinarily earn as a contract plasterer in his own business, something he had been doing since leaving school.  At the time of his offending, the applicant reports he was using methyl amphetamine recreationally, having previously been a regular user of cannabis, and his involvement in the “drug running” ensured the drug was freely available to him.

Despite the serious nature of his involvement in the commercial level importation of illicit drugs, the applicant does have prospects for rehabilitation. If granted parole, the applicant is seeking to have his parole order transferred to Victoria which would provide him with a range of family supports and connections with his children and partner.

The applicant expressed an intention to return to working as a plasterer if he were able to relocate back to Victoria and appeared genuine in his motivation to remain drug free as he has been able to do in prison and be a better role model as a father for his own children and step-child.

The applicant indicated on interview that while he initially struggled with his incarceration, he had always worked during his custodial sentence and was currently employed in a privileged position in the prison kitchen.  Case notes provided report the applicant’s behaviour has been generally positive, despite two internal offences in the early part of the applicant’s time in custody prior to sentencing in July 2020.

The applicant has attained a minimum-security classification and is housed in the Ron Barwick Minimum Security prison.  The applicant has had limited access to therapeutic programs within the prison due to most of his sentence being spent on remand prior to trial.

It is reported however that the applicant has expressed regret and remorse for his actions, reflecting on the impact of his offending and his family and has stated that he was thankful for being caught as he was able to end the relationship with the people he had been working with to import drugs.

The applicant has nominated accommodation in Victoria that the Board has been advised has been assessed as suitable and pro-social by Corrections Victoria.  The Board has been advised that the applicant’s application for an interstate transfer of his parole order if granted has been approved by Corrections Victoria.

Community Corrections has assessed the applicant has having a high risks/needs profile based on the LS/CMI risk assessment tool and have assessed the applicant as suitable for a period of supervised parole. The Pre-Parole Report recommends that applicant needs to focus on continued support in the community to remain free of illicit drugs and to assist him to engage with social support networks and seek gainful employment.

The Board has determined that considering the existence of protective factors such as strong family support, good prospects of employment and the ability of the applicant to gain access to appropriate therapeutic interventions to assist him to remain drug free, the applicant is suitable for parole. Additionally, his application to transfer his parole order interstate to Victoria is granted.

The Board’s determination

Parole Granted subject to the standard conditions of a parole order.

Special Conditions

NIL

Paroled from 22 February 2021 - 22 December 2022