Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by

28 August 2020

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Geoffrey Peter FOSTER (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Assault x 2, Demanding Property with Menaces with Intent to Steal and Parole revocation.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 09/07/2020 and indeed was released under an order on the 8/09/2020.  Unfortunately the order was revoked on the 1/10/21, a matter of days shy of its completion, due to the applicant’s disengagement with supervision and breach of the conditions of the order.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 11/02/22.  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 11/02/22.

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:

Since the applicant’s return to the custodial environment following the revocation of his parole order he has demonstrated excellent behaviour and is described as a trusted inmate. He is classified at minimum security and is housed in the O’Hara cottages.  The applicant has also maintained employment as a leading hand in the oyster basked shed with his work and attitude being described as showing leadership, positive and of a high standard.

Before the Parole Board the applicant described his frustration at failing to complete his parole order blaming it on his complacency.  He recognises the need to observe his parole conditions and engage in his supervision whilst under an order and indeed, overall, he had managed to do this in the 12 months he had been under the previous order.

The applicant has suitable accommodation available to him for the duration of this order.  He remains appropriate for supervision.

The Board’s determination:

• Parole is approved

Paroled from 22 February 2022 - 31 October 2022