Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by J T T

13 May 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

JT (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Rape.

The applicant became eligible for a parole order from the 06/02/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 13/05/2022 after the application had been adjourned from January 2022 due to the lack of suitable accommodation.  The applicant was present at the hearing of his application and was invited to provide any information he had in support of it 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 no relevant criminal history and this is his first episode of imprisonment.  At sentencing Her Honour Justice Wood considered him to be someone “unlikely to reoffend” and with “sound prospects of leading a constructive life in terms of his work, family and making a positive contribution to his community”.  He has previously been the subject of a Community Service Order in 2017 and was described as having a good attendance and completing all the hours required of him.

There is no doubt that the applicant’s offending has irrevocably damaged his victim.  The Board has carefully considered the statements she has bravely provided.  She describes eloquently the impact that the applicant’s actions have had on all aspects of her life.  It has interrupted her education and impeded her social life.  She has suffered Depression, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety and Insomnia directly due to his actions.

The applicant was convicted of rape.  He maintains a denial of the having committed the crime.  He claims to have entered into a friendship with his 15 year old victim, giving her “life advice”.  The attitude of denial and the blame he places on the victim is a concern when considering his suitability for parole.  It is clear that the applicant’s conduct in raping his victim, the young daughter of his mate, waking her from sleep and without regard to her clear refusal of his attentions represent a significant betrayal of the trust she and her family had in him and a complete violation of her.

Looking forward, however, it is the role of the Parole Board to consider not only the nature and gravity of the crime that applicant committed and his response to it  but to also consider his prospects for reform, the risks that he may pose to the community on his release and the likely compliance with conditions if granted a parole order.

In considering these matters the applicant has engaged well during his custodial term.  He has achieved a minimum classification and been accommodated in the external O’Hara units.  He has had the opportunity to engage in resocialisation sections spending time in the community to re-establish his connection to his family.  There have been no issues of concern or noncompliance during the leave taken.

The applicant has a solid pro social support base in the community consisting of family and friends.  Letters in support of him have been provided from a friend, his partner and her father the latter describing the applicant as truthful, hardworking dedicated and reliable.  He also has the potential for employment.

The applicant has undertaken the Sex Offender Treatment Program whilst in custody and his engagement in that program has been described as being to a good standard and the comment made that he should be proud of the work he undertook in the program.

The Board find that the applicant presents little risk to the community if returned to it.  He has demonstrated the capacity and willingness to comply with the regulations operating in the custodial environment, engaged well in the Sex Offender Treatment Program and has undertaken resocialisation leave without incident.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Excluded from certain specified areas
• No contact directly or indirectly with the victim of his offence
• Obtain a mental health care plan
• Electronic monitoring

Paroled from 24 May 2022 - 6 February 2024