Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Jay Allan Charles Reed

25 February 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Jay Allan Charles REED(“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Drive Whilst Disqualified x2, Injure Property, Attempted Motor Vehicle Stealing x2, Trespass, Breach of Police Family Violence Order x2, Burglary x2, Stealing x2, Possess a controlled drug, Destroy Property, Breach of Family Violence Order x3, Breach of bail conditions, Aggravated Assault, Make off without payment and Motor Vehicle Stealing.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for a parole order on the 06/03/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 25/02/2022.  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:

The applicant has a lengthy criminal history including for matters of civil disobedience, drug offences, dishonesty, and violence.  He has been engaging in committing crime since he was 16 years of age.  His past engagement with Community Corrections raises the question as to his willingness and/or capacity to comply with supervision withing the community given his past breaches of Community Service and Probation orders.  Most recently, 2021, and perhaps most concerningly the applicant failed to comply with a Drug Treatment Order despite the considerable resources expended on him to support him through the Order and assist him succeed.

The applicant’s explanation for this is that he wasn’t “ready” at the time to cease drug use and his offending behaviour.  What has changed now is the birth of his son which he points to as his “wake up call” and as a source of motivation for him to change his path in life.

It is also concerning that whilst serving his custodial sentence the applicant has engaged in behaviour that has resulted in him being disciplined for rule breaches including fighting with other inmates, smoking in his cell and misuse of the telephone system. In November of 2021 the applicant’s partner was banned from in person visits with the applicant due to her attempts to bring contraband into the prison using magnets hidden under her clothing. That her intent was to supply the applicant with contraband is denied by both him and her.  This incident does, however, represent the last occasion on which there is a recorded concern regarding the applicant’s behaviour within the prison.  Since that time the he has been able to demonstrate good and compliant behaviour.

The applicant has moved through the system achieving a medium security classification and has worked as a barber being described in that capacity as self-motivated, reliable, and consistently performing his tasks to a high standard.  Efforts he has made to access therapeutic programs addressing his criminogenic risks have unfortunately been unsuccessful to date. He has been waitlisted for the Equips Foundation, Addiction and Aggression groups, the Family Violence Offender Intervention Program and Alcohol and Drug Counselling.

The applicant’s success upon his release will centre in large part upon his ability to maintain good mental health and abstain from drug use.  He appears well supported to achieve this through counselling with Catholic Care, supportive family members.  It will also be a condition of any parole order that he obtain and comply with a mental health care plan allowing for psychological counselling and support.  At the hearing before the Board the applicant spoke of intent to change for himself and his child.  He talked of the strength he feels in himself to achieve this.  He pointed to his aunt as a source of significant pro social support.

Despite past failures on community supervision Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as suitable for a parole order noting his newfound resolve for change motivated by the birth of his son and the benefits that may be achieved were he able to access community based supports.  The Board agree with this assessment.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Mental health care plan
• Excluded from specified areas
• Electronic monitoring

Paroled from 7 March 2022 - 4 January 2023