Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by

10 December 2021

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Harley Luke STURZAKER (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Aggravated burglary x2, Stealing, Aggravated Armed Robbery, Possess shortened firearm, Possess ammunition when not the holder of a firearms licence of the appropriate category.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 08/12/2021.

The applicant initially appeared before the Parole Board on the 26/11/2021 however the hearing into his application could not then proceed due to the absence of suitable accommodation at that stage.  Subsequently the application for parole was heard by the Board on the 10/12/2021.  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 of the Board was read to the applicant prior to his appearance at the hearing of the application.

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:

This is the applicant’s first experience of serving a sentence of imprisonment.  It is an experience, he asserts, that he does not wish to repeat, and which has given him the opportunity to address issues that had been present in his life including fracture from his family relationships and drug use.

He states that during the custodial term he has had good support from his family who have remained in regular contact with him particularly his sister and his Aunt.  He has also used the opportunity to be honest and frank with his family concerning his drug use and offending behaviour.

Nevertheless, it needs to be recognised that the applicant’s offending was violent, selfish and cruel. He gave no regard to the health and safety of the victim whose home he had invaded, from whom he stole personal belongings and to whom he meted out significant violence.  The actions of the applicant were, however, somewhat atypical and surprising.  His criminal record to that point consisted of minor summary driving offences.  This offending represented a significant departure from his previous standard of conduct.

Factors identified as contributory to his offending were his addiction to methylamphetamine and keeping company with bad people doing bad things.  The risk that he poses to himself and the community upon release, lies in his returning to drug use and keeping poor associations.  When assessing this risk, it is a concern that the applicant was found to have used buprenorphine unauthorised in September of 2019.  However, he was subject to negative drug screens undertaken prior to this and has not offended since.  The applicant has also successfully completed the Gottawanna program.

The applicant has demonstrated compliant behaviour whilst serving his sentence.  He has worked in the Kitchen and then as a cleaner.  The applicant has also engaged well with his planning and reintegration officer.

It is noted that Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as a suitable candidate for parole supervision and advised that one on one counselling with Alcohol and Drug services have been arranged for him to access in the community if granted parole.

The impact of the applicant’s conduct will no doubt be significantly felt by his victim for the remainder of his life.  He has had the quiet and peaceful sanctity of his home destroyed by the behaviour of the applicant and his co offenders.  His confidence in his safety whilst in his own home will most likely not be regained. However, there is potential here to harness the applicant’s motivation to not return to prison or to harm others the way that he has done.  His risk lies in drug use and reengaging with his anti-social cohort.  He is aware of this and identifies his family and the determination not to return to custody as protective factors against this happening.

Noting the supports in place up his return to the community, the good behaviour of the applicant whilst in custody, the previously complaint way he has lived his life and his willingness to engage with alcohol and drug support the application for parole is approved.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Not to associate with certain named persons

Paroled from 20 December 2021 - 23 January 2024