Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Christopher John Watt

29 April 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Christopher John Watt (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 32 years with a non-parole period of 17 years imposed upon conviction for the crimes of murder, arson, aggravated burglary and stealing.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 3 May 2022.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 29 April 2022.

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.

Registered victim:

There are registered victims

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:

This applicant was one of three men involved in the brutal killing of a 79-year-old victim during a home invasion by the men whose intent was to rob the victim at gunpoint for the purposes of stealing ammunition.

All three men were significantly intoxicated and after invading the victim’s home, the victim was beaten and shot at least twice with one of his own rifles, ultimately causing death, and the house was set on fire. The seemingly senseless crimes took the life of an innocent victim, and the Board has been provided with victim impact statements from extended family members outlining the long-lasting effect of the loss of a loved and respected member of their family.

At the time of committing these crimes the applicant was 27 years of age and had a long history of offending for crimes of violence, having served numerous prison sentences relating to his offending.  At the time of sentencing the Court noted the applicant had a history of problems with alcohol linked to his prior history of offending.

This is the applicant’s first application for parole. By his own description, the applicant had a “very good” upbringing, with a relatively stable home. He is the only member of his family with a criminal record and acknowledges the shame and grief his family have experienced because of his offending.

He has served his sentence in an exemplary manner and has attained a minimum classification. He has a history of employment during his custodial sentence, much of those in positions of trust.  He is currently employed as a Team Leader of grounds maintenance which allows him to work unsupervised around the prison grounds operating machinery and performing maintenance as required.

The applicant has also actively engaged in education, employment, and other rehabilitative programs throughout his sentence, having completed the Equips Aggression program, Making Choices, Getting Smart and Anger Management targeting criminogenic needs. Information provided indicates the applicant has actively distanced himself from other inmates that he perceives are not willing or ready to change their behaviour and fully accepts responsibility for his offending.  Notably, the applicant has also completed numerous educational and vocational courses including Certificate IV in horticulture, completed off-site at the Clarence TAFE campus.

The applicant has significant pro-social supports in the community. He maintains contact with his parents, and adult children from a previous relationship and met his current partner during his custodial sentence while studying horticulture at TAFE. He has continued regular contact with his family through daily phone calls, visits and s42 reintegration leave to spend time with his partner and family. His nominated accommodation has been assessed as suitable and prosocial.

It is clear the applicant has good prospects for rehabilitation, having made significant efforts throughout his custodial sentence to address his offending and put his previously pro-criminal lifestyle behind him.

Community Corrections have assessed the applicant has suitable for a parole order and the Board agrees with this assessment.

The Board’s determination:

Parole Granted

Special conditions applied:

• Must submit to electronic monitoring
• Must not contact directly or indirectly named registered victims

Paroled from 10 May 2022 - 3 May 2037