Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Jemma Fay Rumley-Cantrell

10 December 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Jemma Fay RUMLEY-CANTRELL (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon her conviction for Accessory After the Fact to Murder.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 11/01/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 10/12/2021.  On that occasion the applicant was present at the hearing and was invited to provide any information she had in support of her application and made herself available for questioning by the Board.

A pre-parole report prepared on behalf of the Board was read to the applicant prior to her appearance at the hearing.

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:

This is the applicant’s first sentence of imprisonment. She was 22, nearly 23, years of age at the time of the offending.  She has no criminal history.  What she did have leading up to and at the time of her offending was a significant drug addiction which ultimately placed her on a path in which she became associated with other drug users who were living a negative lifestyle.

The applicant entered a relationship with Shannon Duffy.  Drug use and mixing with an anti social cohort was a significant feature of that relationship.  Mr Duffy shot and killed his housemate.  He did so at a time when the applicant had been driving both him and victim around and after they had stopped so that each could leave the vehicle to urinate.  Mr Duffy then re-entered the car and instructed the applicant to drive away leaving the victim in the dirt.  The applicant’s crime was that instead of reporting what had occurred to the police she aided Mr Duffy to evade detection and arrest.  She transported him to places in which he hid.  She hid with him at those places.  She purchased items for him including a new mobile phone and SIM. She changed the colour of her hair to alter her appearance.

Ultimately both the applicant and Mr Duffy were arrested. The applicant spent one and half years on bail in the community between arrest and sentence.  During that time she was compliant with her bail conditions and ceased drug use.  Effectively she was able to maintain abstinence from drugs for the 1½ year period.

This is the applicant’s first sentence of imprisonment. She has served the sentence in a compliant manner.  Her case notes regarding her behaviour describe her as polite, compliant in all interactions and rarely presenting with issues.  She has been employed as a general hand and main laundry assistant with reports describing her work as being to a high standard.  The applicant has engaged in therapeutic and vocational course work during her sentence.  She has undergone a dialectical behavioural therapy course and obtained her white card, test and tag certificate and completed books on CD.  The applicant has received a positive reference from Red Cross for whom the applicant acted as a member of the Peer Support Program within the prison and who describe her as “polite, professional, accepting and passionate about supporting other inmates”.

Suitable, supportive, and pro social accommodation is available for the applicant during parole.  Prior to sentence the applicant engaged in psychological therapy which she found beneficial and will continue to engage with a psychologist upon her release. The applicant demonstrated understanding and awareness of the seriousness of her conduct when appearing before the Board.  She is focused on the future and living without addiction.  She has been assessed as suitable for a parole order by Community Corrections.

The applicant’s offence is significant.  She was involved, after the fact, in the death of another.  The decisions she made at the time to support her partner and not report the events to police served to increase the distress that must have been felt by the victim’s family.  A significant aspect of her offending, particularly in the context of an otherwise clean criminal record, was her drug use and relationship.  Neither of those factors appear currently present nor are they likely to become issues in the foreseeable future.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Mental health care plan

Paroled from 11 January 2022 - 11 March 2023