Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Brock Mathew Everett

16 September 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Brock Mathew EVERETT (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Cause grievous bodily harm to another person by negligent driving, Cross continuous line on multi-lane road, Driver not holding Australian driver licence, foreign driver licence, international driving permit with alcohol in body, Drive while disqualified, Fail to wear seat belt, Drive whilst Disqualified, breaches of bail and suspended sentence.

The applicant became eligible for a parole order from the 23/09/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 16/09/2022.  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:

At the time he was sentenced for committing the crimes for which he is serving his custodial sentence the applicant was 21 years of age.  He has been offending since a youth and has created a record for mainly matters of stealing, drugs and dishonesty.

The circumstances of the current matter of cause grievous bodily harm to another by negligent driving were that the applicant, under the influence of alcohol, drove on the incorrect side of the road resulting in a collision with a vehicle resulting in injuries suffered by the driver of that vehicle and her children and the passengers in his vehicle who were 17 years old at the time.  The applicant has, however, recognised the stupidity of his actions and that quite clearly, they could have resulted in the death of those involved.  He realises that their involvement in the accident has caused them hurt, injury, inconvenience, and distress.

The applicant’s involvement with an anti-social peer group has been identified as a significant contributory factor to his offending behaviour.  Should he be given parole his living circumstances are considered suitable and supportive and alert to the need to sever his past negative associations.

The applicant has served his sentence, with one exception, in a well behaved and compliant manner. The once exception occurred in July 2022 when he was intoxicated and passively resisted custodial officers in their attempt to remove him.  Otherwise he appears future focused and motivated to live a pro social lifestyle. He attributes this motivation to his family and particularly his baby daughter.  He has commenced to address his limited literacy during sentence and is keen to obtain employment.  He has been assessed by Community Corrections as suitable for a parole order.

Given the applicant’s age, his obvious desire to change and capacity to do so given the support he has from his family, he is considered suitable for parole.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved.

Paroled from 3 October 2022 - 23 March 2023