Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Paul Wayne Simpson

9 July 2021

Reasons for Decision

Offences and Conviction

Paul Wayne Simpson (“the applicant”) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 22 months imposed upon conviction of the charge of wounding.

Parole Eligibility Date

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 15 June 2019. An application for parole was not received by the Board until 4 May 2021.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 9 July 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: -

• The application;
• Comments on passing sentence;
• Papers provided by the Director of Public Prosecutions;
• Prison summary;
• Record of prior convictions
• Prison episode summary report;
• Pre-parole report;
• 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’s offending occurred in the context of family violence, where the applicant, under the influence of alcohol and drugs, attended a residence where his former partner of 12 years and their 3 youngest children were staying with a friend. The applicant verbally abused his former partner and then proceeded to attack her by throwing various objects in anger at her, including a kitchen knife that struck her face and caused a 6cm laceration, leading to the charge of wounding.

The applicant and his former partner had separated several months before and a police family violence order was in place. The seriousness of his conduct was exacerbated by the presence of his young children who witnessed the incident.

The violent nature of this incident was another in a long history of similar offending.  The applicant has convictions for violence resulting in lengthy terms of imprisonment and in fact has spent most of his adult life in prison. A significant factor in his offending has been his abuse of alcohol. Unfortunately, as is often the case where violent offending is prevalent, the applicant’s own childhood was marred by trauma due to violence perpetrated by his alcoholic father towards his mother and the applicant himself.

However, in comments on passing sentence, Justice Wood accepted the applicant was remorseful and had shown insight into his wrongdoing and remorse for the impact on his former partner, and his children. Her Honour also noted the attempts the applicant has made during previous periods of incarceration to address his offending and substance abuse, attending the EQUIPS Addiction Program and Holyoake Gottawanna program.

The applicant has previously had the benefit of parole orders in 2012, 2015 and again in 2017, all of which were revoked within 6 months of parole being granted by the Board. In assessing the risk the applicant may pose to the community it is relevant to consider the applicant’s apparent lack of ability to comply with the strict conditions of previous parole orders.

Despite this, it is notable that although the applicant was eligible to apply for parole in 2019, he has not sought to pursue an application until recently.  On his own admission, and supported by information provided to the Board, he has been hesitant to apply for parole due to his poor compliance history but now feels he has appropriate supports in place to succeed on a parole order.

During the applicant’s current custodial sentence, the applicant has had limited access to therapeutic programs due to his security classification and is on the waiting list for alcohol and drug counselling and the EQUIPS Aggression program. He has been accommodated in the maximum-security area of the prison for most of his sentence and this classification and the impact of COVID-19 precluded the applicant from completing the Family Violence Offender Intervention Program (FVOIP) as recommended at sentencing.

However, the applicant was recently able to complete the Resilience Program in Maximum and progressed from maximum to medium security classification, and this is reported as a significant achievement for the applicant. Case notes reflect the applicant is quiet, has actively been working with planning and reintegration regarding his application for parole and no internal offending has been recorded since a trafficking offence in January 2021.

The Pre-Parole Report prepared for the Board outlines the applicant’s significant history and non-compliance with community-based supervision including parole orders and assesses the applicant as being at very high risk of reoffending.  However, it is reported that “with maturity the applicant appears to be gaining insight into the relationship between his complex history and problematic alcohol and other drug use”.

This maturity appears to be reflected in the applicant’s hesitancy to apply for parole until appropriate support networks were in place to assist him.  On interview, the applicant reported he has formed a stable relationship with his new girlfriend, who has care of his 15-year-old daughter and is a close friend of his mother’s. These family members have continued to have contact and visitation with the applicant throughout his custodial sentence. The applicant expressed significant remorse for the injury inflicted on his former partner and his children and expressed motivation to work constructively with Child Safety Services towards reconnecting with his younger children.

The accommodation nominated by the applicant has been assessed as suitable, prosocial, and supportive, and he has agreed to engage with a mentor in addition to appropriate alcohol and drug programs and therapeutic interventions in relation to trauma and relapse prevention as a priority if returned to the community.

Community Corrections have suggested that as the applicant has spent much of his life incarcerated, the applicant would benefit from a period of parole for additional support to develop basic life skills in addition to therapeutic supports to address his complex trauma and substance use history. A parole order would also provide an opportunity for the applicant to complete the FVOIP program in the community.

The applicant presented as motivated to work on developing respectful relationship skills and addressing the issues that have driven his offending. The existence of community supports combined with the apparent stable and pro-social circumstances of his family support are protective factors that will assist the applicant to manage the risks associated with relapse and comply with the strict conditions of parole.

Additionally, Community Corrections have assessed the applicant has suitable for electronic monitoring, which provides additional capacity to supervise and monitor the applicant’s compliance with parole conditions.

Balancing all factors, the Board concurs with the assessment that the applicant is suitable for parole.

The Board’s determination

Parole Granted

Special Conditions

• Must attend a General Practitioner to be assessed for a Mental Health Plan and attending psychological counselling as directed by that plan
• Must not attend or enter a specified address
• Must submit to electronic monitoring of parole conditions.

Paroled from 19 July 2021 - 8 September 2022