Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Renae Lorraine Donald

25 February 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Renae Lorraine DONALD (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon her conviction for being an Accessory after the fact to Murder.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 09/03/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 25/02/2022.  On that occasion the applicant was present at the hearing and was invited to provide any information she had in support of her application and made herself available for questioning by the Board.

A pre-parole report prepared on behalf of the Board was read to the applicant prior to her 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:

On returning home to the house, she shared with one of her past and her current partners the applicant was informed by her current partner that he had killed her former partner by multiple strikes to the head with a hammer.  Thereafter she engaged in a course of conduct in concert with her partner aimed at concealing the death and his responsibility for it.  This conduct included sending text messages on the victim’s phone to his family pretending to be him and thus alive.  This ruse continued for several months until the victims father became suspicious and reported his son’s disappearance to the Police. Subsequent investigations revealed the applicant and her partner had accessed the victim’s bank account making several withdrawals following his death for their own use.  At sentencing the Court concluded that the applicant’s conduct in attempting to conceal the murder, protect her partner from detection and prosecution and her accessing the victim’s funds demonstrated the absence of remorse.

The applicant had a minor prior criminal record consisting of two matters of assault.  This is her first sentence of imprisonment.  The applicant has struggled in the custodial environment.  She is classified as requiring maximum security most probably because of numerous breaches of prison regulations she has committed.  The last of these occurred in January of this year however it is noted that the applicant has struggled at times with her mental health and that the breaches by her of the rules are describes as being at the lower level of seriousness.  Case notes describe her as being capable of behaving pro-socially and compliantly.

The applicant has attempted to engage in therapeutic inputs to address her criminogenic needs, but her dialectical behaviour therapy course was prematurely terminated due to COVID.   She has accessed alcohol and drug counselling with her counsellor describing her as having shown insight and rational thinking with some developed plans for post release including obtaining support from family, counselling, and psychologist. The applicant has accessed vocational courses covering numeracy, salon assistance, cleaning, and IT.

Suitable accommodation is available to the applicant over the parole period.  She has been assessed by Community Corrections as suitable for a parole order noting that she has previously successfully completed a Probation Order under their supervision.

The applicant presented as remorseful for her past conduct.  She has had an unstable and difficult family history.  She has developed firm pro social plans for her future and recognises the need to ensure she maintains good mental health, drug abstinence and remains away from past negative associates.  The Board finds the applicant to be suitable for parole.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Mental health care plan
• No contact directly or indirectly with the family of the victim

Paroled from 7 March 2022 - 9 March 2025