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:

Cameron Scott MacDonald (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 20 months, imposed upon conviction for charges of dangerous driving, breach of bail and minor traffic offences.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 4 August 2021. Due to outstanding court matters, his application was adjourned at the Board’s meeting on 12 November 2021.

The applicant subsequently appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 14 January 2022 and on that occasion the applicant 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:

The applicant is 42 years of age.  He has a significant history for relevant driving matters and other offending in several states, and this is not his first sentence of imprisonment. At the time of this offending the applicant was driving unlicensed contrary to bail conditions regarding other offending and to avoid apprehension by police drove in a dangerous and erratic manner in a built-up suburban area on two separate occasions.

Contributory to the applicant’s history of offending is a problematic history of drug use, commencing with use of amphetamine from his teenage years to early twenties.  At 25, the applicant was able to cease amphetamine use due to undergoing a methadone program, but later commenced use of methylamphetamine.

The applicant has a chequered history of compliance with previous supervision orders, having offended while on parole in NSW, in addition to poor compliance with two separate probation orders, although it is noted those orders were quite historical occurring in 2002 and 2008.

During his current sentence, the applicant has demonstrated good compliance within the custodial setting. He has attained a minimum classification, has no recorded internal offending in the last twelve months and has held employment positions as a wardsman and currently as a general hand in the prison bakehouse.

Clearly, the major concern regarding the applicant’s suitability for parole relates to his ability to remain drug free in the community and associated risk of re-offending. Due to the length of his sentence and operational restrictions, the applicant has not been able to access any therapeutic intervention during incarceration.  Unfortunately, the applicant has also been recently diagnosed with significant heart failure, a condition that has been linked to his continuous drug use and the lack of ability to access any programs to address this substance use had added to this concern.

However, it is reported he recently commenced individual alcohol and drug counselling and has now been placed on the suboxone program in prison to assist him to mitigate his risk of re-engaging in substance use if released to parole.  At interview the applicant reported that this has helped him to become more stable and believed it would assist him to avoid relapse in the community.

The applicant had outstanding family violence related charges which led to his initial application for parole being adjourned November 2021. These matters have now been finalised and the applicant will be subject to a community corrections order, home detention order and an order to complete the FVOIP program on release.

There are some additional protective factors to be considered regarding the applicant’s suitability for parole. His nominated accommodation has been assessed as suitable and supportive, and the Board was provided with a letter of support from the applicant’s family outlining the extent of support and employment options they plan to provide to assist him to address his addiction.

Considering the applicant’s engagement with therapeutic intervention, his commencement on the suboxone program prior to release, and the outcome of the finalisation of charges, Community Corrections have now assessed the applicant as suitable for a parole order.

On balance, the Board concurs with that assessment. Accordingly, the application for parole is approved.

The Board’s determination:

Parole Granted

Paroled from 24 January 2022 - 24 July 2022