Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Cody Richard Cartledge

19 August 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Cody Richard Cartledge (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months with a non-parole period of 6 months imposed on conviction on various charges of burglary, stealing, breach of family violence order, evade police, injure property, breach of bail, drive whilst disqualified and several summary firearms and drug offences.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 31 May 2022, but his application was adjourned at the hearing on 27 May 2022 due to lack of suitable accommodation.

The applicant then appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 19 August 2022 and on that occasion, he 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.”

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 punish for the criminal wrongdoing.

Consideration:

At 26 years of age the applicant is a relatively young offender.  He has a long-standing history of drug use, commencing in his late teens and escalating to daily use of methyl amphetamine by the age of 18.   This has been significant factor in the cycle of offending relating to a cluster of different offences which the applicant states he committed to fund his “drug habit”.

He also reports having used drugs as a coping mechanism in response to the unexpected death of one of his 3 young children approximately 18 months ago. On interview by the Board, he openly discussed his inability manage his grief and loss of contact with his other 2 children because of his drug use and behaviour which resulted in a custodial sentence.

The applicant’s behaviour in custody has not been without incident, with 6 behaviour related internal offences recorded in the past 6 months, perhaps reflecting his inability to appropriately manage his emotions and behaviour.  He has however recently attained medium classification and case notes suggest he has some insight into his poor behaviour and has engaged well with planning for release into the community.

Despite limited access to drug treatment in the past and in custody due to continuous lockdowns and COVID-19 responses, information provided to the Board suggests the applicant is motivated and willing to work with Community Corrections to improve his behaviour.  The applicant presented as having some insight into the problems he has faced in the community previously, citing lack of structure, lack of engagement with support services and general lack of will to change his lifestyle.  He outlined positive changes that have occurred recently to motivate him, including re-connection with his 2 children through Child Safety Services, commencing medication and plans to engage with a psychologist in the community to assist with managing his grief.

The applicant has secured stable accommodation which is pro-social and supportive.

While the applicant has been assessed as requiring a high level of intervention, Community Corrections suggest the support and structure provided by a parole order would assist the applicant in building a safety support network to assist reintegration.

On balancing all factors, the applicant is assessed by the Board as suitable for a parole order.

The Board’s determination:

Parole granted

Special conditions applied:

• Must attend a general practitioner to be assessed for a mental health plan and attend psychological counselling as recommended by the plan

Paroled granted  29 August 2022 - 28 February 2023