Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by P P R

29 April 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

PPR (‘the applicant’) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for maintaining a sexual relationship with a young person.

The applicant has previously had the benefit of a parole order granted on 27 November 2020, but due to ongoing non-compliance regarding remaining in the presence of persons under 16, the order was revoked on 6 August 2021.

The applicant made a further application for parole and appeared before the Board in respect of this application at the hearing on 29 April 2022.  The applicant was invited to provide any information he had in support of his application and made himself available for questioning by the Board at the hearing.

A pre-parole report prepared on behalf of the Board had been read to the applicant prior to his appearance before the Board.

Registered victim:

There is a registered victim

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’s offending involved a significant breach of trust with his victim being the young son of the applicant’s partner at the time. The offending occurred over a period of 5 years, when the victim was aged between 3 and 8 years old, and took place at several locations, including in the victim’s home and car. The Court noted at sentencing the significant gravity and breach of trust involved in the crime, outlining the serious physical and psychological effects on the victim as described by the victim’s mother in a victim impact statement provided to the Court.

The applicant has no prior convictions for sexual offending. While in custody the applicant has undergone the New Directions program, cognitive behavioural therapy directed at participants gaining insight and understanding into the emotional and behavioural responses to environmental factors linked to their offending.

In a report provided to the Board, the applicant’s offending was described as resulting from a deviant sexual attraction that grew when paired with feelings of loneliness and low self-worth.  It was reported the applicant actively engaged to try and develop an understanding of the basis of his offending and demonstrated an understanding of the impact of his behaviour on his victim.

In a psychological report prepared for the Board by Mr Damien Minehan in 2020, prior to the applicant’s last period of parole, the applicant’s risks for re-offending were rated as moderate to high due to limited acceptance by the applicant of risks and at the time a lack of appropriate management strategies.

The applicant was first granted a parole order on 27 November 2020.  Due to ongoing non-compliance with strict parole conditions and an acknowledged failure to be open and honest and engage appropriately with supervision, the order was revoked in July 2021.

Since returning to custody, the applicant appears to have improved his attitude and understanding of the importance of compliance, with no record of further internal offending.  He has achieved a minimum-security rating and accommodation in the minimum-security O’Hara Units. Case notes reflect a positive pattern of behaviour, and the applicant is currently employed in as a prison maintenance worker which is considered a trusted position in addition to involvement as editor/publisher of the prisoner magazine.

The applicant did commence alcohol and drug counselling on his return to custody, but delivery of these services has been limited due to operational issues within the prison. He expressed a willingness to engage in this support if released to the community, despite his previous lack of engagement.

The applicant has suitable accommodation which has also been assessed as suitable for electronic monitoring.

Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as requiring a high level of supervision. When challenged during his interview about his previous poor engagement and attitude on parole, the applicant acknowledged he had taken his previous parole order for granted.  He expressed a recognition of parole as a privilege and viewed his previous poor compliance as a lack of willingness to ask for help and support for his substance abuse.

The applicant’s offending is of an extremely serious nature, and is it is important that he continues to engage in therapeutic intervention to address the risk factors for his reoffending, including those associated with his substance abuse.  The applicant appears motivated to change his previous poor attitude and has demonstrated an ability to adhere to rules and regulations in the prison environment since returning to custody.

The Board is satisfied that strict parole conditions including electronic monitoring can be imposed to assist in the supervision and management of the identified risks for this applicant and protection of the community and support him to maintain compliance with his parole order.

The Board’s determination:

Parole Granted

Special conditions applied:

• Must submit to electronic monitoring of parole conditions
• Must not contact the registered victim directly or indirectly
• To be excluded from entering an identified municipality
• Submit to appropriate alcohol and drug counselling and programs as recommended by Community Corrections

Paroled from 10 May 2022 - 10 December 2023