Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Margaret Anne Otto

13 May 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background::

Margaret Anne OTTO (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon her conviction for Accessory after the fact of murder.

The applicant became eligible for a parole order from the 29/05/2020.  Given that her application was made late it did not come before the Board until March 2022. At that time the matter was adjourned due to the absence of suitable accommodation.

The applicant next appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 13/05/2022.  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 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 no criminal record.  This is accordingly her first ever custodial sentence.  Her offending was however significantly serious.  The victim was her husband who was killed at the hand of his “friend” apparently motivated by the desire to remove him from the applicant’s life.  The applicant was active in assisting cover up the crime and when she came to the attention of police she lied over the course of some days frustrating their investigation.  To have been embroiled in this event, actively assist to hide and deflect from its occurrence and then lie to the police to avoid responsibility all on the background of knowing of her husband’s death suggest a callousness of character.

The applicant has, however, served her sentence to date productively and compliantly.  She is classified at minimum security, has good behavioural and work reports, and has no record of internal rule breaches.  Indeed, at times her conduct and actions within the prison have been described as reflecting a pro social attitude.  She has been productive working as leading hand of the store and undertaking several vocational courses.  There appears reasonable prospect of her obtaining employment upon her release from custody.

The applicant has available to her suitable and pro social accommodation and has identified a large support network who will be available to her to support her transition back into the community.  It is also her intention to engage in psychological therapy on release and she is supported by the Beyond the Wire Program.  She is not considered to pose a risk to the community upon her return.

The death of the victim in this matter has left a family traumatised not only by his absence but also by the complicity of his wife, a person who had become a family member to them, in the cover up of his death.  They feel aggrieved by her conviction for accessory and not murder and view her as manipulative.  These feelings are understandable from those that have been so directly affected and betrayed by the applicant’s actions.  The Board are grateful for and have reflected on the statements that the victim’s father and sister have provided.

The applicant has, over the period of her incarceration demonstrated consistently the capacity and intent to comply with the rules and regulations of the penal environment and has used her time productively to work and train.  She has been assessed by Community Corrections as suitable for a parole order.  She has proactively prepared for her release arranging supports including Beyond the Wire, counselling and her family and friends and demonstrates motivation to resume a pro social lifestyle.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Excluded from defined areas
• Electronic monitoring
• Mental health plan
• No contact with the victims

Paroled from 30 May 2022 - 29 May 2023