Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Jamie Mchael Clark

14 October 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Jamie Michael CLARK (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Breach of bail x2, DWD, False report to Police, Common Assault, False report to Police x10, DWD x3,  Computer Related Fraud x2, Breach of bail x2, Use a controlled drug, Possess thing used for admin of controlled drug, Sell controlled drug and Drive a motor vehicle whilst a prescribed illicit drug is present in your oral fluid.

The applicant became eligible for a parole order from the 07/08/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 05/8/2022 however suitable accommodation was not available to him at that time and the hearing adjourned to the 14/10/2022.  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.

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 has a criminal history of committing driving offences as well as matters of public nuisance, family violence and stalking.  The more serious of the applicant’s offending behaviour, that of the family violence and stalking, did not commence until the applicant was in his thirties.  In 2019 he successfully completed a parole order albeit with compliance concerns around drug use.  A Drug Treatment Order imposed in 2021 was cancelled due to reoffending and compliance issues.  Whilst in the custodial environment the applicant has demonstrated good compliance and positive behaviour.  He is classified as requiring minimum security and is described as “polite, cheerful and happy to work.”  During his sentence the applicant has been employed as a senior hand in woodwork and is described as doing an “excellent job”.

The applicant has sought to engage in therapeutic courses in prison and had a brief intervention with Alcohol and Drug counselling but has otherwise remained on the waitlist for that intervention. Drug use has been identified as contributory to his offending behaviour.  The applicant’s planning officer has described him as being motivated and goal orientated and he has been assessed by Community Corrections as suitable for supervision under a Parole Order.

At his hearing before the Board the applicant demonstrated good insight into the negative impact that drug use has had upon his life’s trajectory.  He asserted that he had not used drugs since January of 2022 and that he is feeling better for it.  He wishes to remain drug free.  He has positive pro social plans of obtaining work and saving to buy himself a home. He intends on engaging with SETAC and utilising their drug and alcohol counselling services.  His proposed accommodation will provide significant support for him.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved.

• Special conditions applied:

Paroled from 24 October 2022 - 24 April 2023