Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Nicholas Mark Stebbins

23 July 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Nicholas Mark STEBBINS (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment of 12 ½ years imposed upon his convictions for Trafficking in a Controlled Substance.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 27^th of July 2021.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the  23^rd of July 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 convicted of trafficking in cocaine, amphetamine, cannabis, and ecstasy between 1^st August 2012 to 15^th of January 2014 and amphetamine from the 1^st of June 2014 to the 28^th of July 2014. The latter period of offending occurred whilst he was on bail having been detected for the earlier crimes. He sourced drugs for sale from offshore. He was detected to have paid, over a total of 17 transactions, $116 900 to two Chinese entities and $30 000 through crypto spend.  Drugs sent for him via various addresses were intercepted by Australian Customs and police. Whilst offending the applicant was a member of the Rebels Motorcycle Club.

At the time of his sentencing the Court noted that the applicant professed an intention to utilise his time in custody to “…repair the damage he has done to himself and others, and to regain trust in his ability not to re-offend.  He has severed ties with the Rebels Motorcycle Club and has undertaken that he will cease all contact with his former associates.”

The applicant maintained this intention at the hearing of his parole application however the record of his custodial period demonstrates that at times complaint behaviour has been difficult for him.  Whilst he is classified as minimum security there are some past occaisons where he has infringed prison rules.  In August of 2020 the applicant failed a urinalysis for buprenorphine and lost, for a period, his minimum classification.  Also, in that month he was found to be in unauthorised possession of several items including a PlayStation game and fold out ruler.  In January of this year, he was found to have trafficked cut craft wood from his workplace.  Since this offence, however, he has maintained compliance with no further record of rule breaches.

Case notes described the applicant’s behaviour as having been generally good.  An apparent improvement in attitude is noted from early this year, and there are positive statements for his work as a dog handler and as a senior hand in woodwork.

The applicant has also availed himself of opportunities to engage in therapeutic work designed to address the factors that led to his offending behaviour and develop strategies to assist him lead a pro social, crime free lifestyle going forward.  The applicant has completed the Gottawanna, Equips Aggression, Addiction and Foundation programs and Getting Smart. He has also completed a Certificate II in Automotive.  The completion reports from the therapeutic programs reveal common themes.  The applicant is described as having insight into and motivation to change his attitudes and behaviour with the aim to reduce his risk of recidivism.

The applicant has had the benefit of two periods of resocialisation leave into the community. Both occurred without incident.

Prior to his conviction on these matters and aside from several traffic matters, the applicant did not have a criminal history.  He has not previously been made the subject of Community Service or Probation Orders. He has positive familial support and suitable accommodation in which to reside if granted a parole order. Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as a suitable candidate for such an order.

The applicant has the potential for employment labouring or plastering which he intends to pursue however ultimately his intention and focus is to obtain a building apprenticeship. In discussing his custodial episode with the Board, the applicant reflected that on the last occasion he had been classified and housed in maximum security his relationship with his family had become fractured as a result and he felt as if he had “hit rock bottom” and decided he needed to change.  His motivated to change his outlook and behaviour led to his return to Ron Barwick.  He now feels he has regained control of himself and the trust and support of his family.

The applicant’s efforts to reform have been reflected in his custodial journey.  He will be assisted by the supervision that a parole order provides whilst he finds his feet back within society.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Not to associate with the rebels motorcycle club or any outlaw motorcycle club including attending at any clubrooms
• To obtain and comply with a mental health plan

Paroled from 2 August 2021 - 27 January 2027