Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Clinton Charles Wilson

14 October 2022

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Clinton Charles WILSON (“the applicant”) is serving a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his conviction for Aggravated armed robbery, Unlawful act intended to cause bodily harm, Breach of Suspended Sentence, Parole Revocation and Contempt of Court.

The applicant became eligible for a parole order from the 10/06/2022.

The applicant appeared before the Parole Board at its hearing on the 27/05/2022.  At that time the hearing was adjourned to enable the Board to obtain a psychological report regarding the applicant.  The application then came before the Board on the 16/09/2022 but was again adjourned to obtain an updated pre parole report and to assess the applicant for electronic monitoring.  The application was then heard by the Board on the 14/10/2022.  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 previously had a Parole Order in respect of this sentence.  The applicant was released on that Order on the 24/05/2021. The Order was, however, revoked on the 22/12/2021 as a result of the applicant’s noncompliance with the conditions of the Order, specifically the requirement to not use drugs.  The failure of the applicant to comply with the previous Order raises concerns as to whether he will be able to comply with a future Order of Parole.  The applicant has an extensive and concerning criminal history.  He has engaged in offences of violence and dishonesty since he was a youth.  His abuse of drugs has been identified as contributory to his offending behaviour. Indeed, upon the revocation of his Parole Order in December 2022 he presented for return to the prison environment in possession of cannabis and methylamphetamine.

Despite this and other prison offences of assaulting an inmate in January 2021 and damaging prison property in September 2022 he has otherwise been a compliant inmate.  He has received positive comments on his behaviour in case notes and held employment as a wardsman.

Dr O’Donnell assessed the applicant on behalf of the Board.  She noted his extensive history of drug addiction as having played a significant role in his offending behaviour.  She notes the existence of some protective factors against further offending which consist primarily of his support system however his drug addiction, anti-social personality traits and is propensity to sensation seeking when bored and impulsivity need to be considered when formulating a risk management plan for him.  That plan she suggests should include electronic monitoring, abstinence from drug and alcohol use, continuance of the suboxone program, grief therapy and expert intervention focused on his attentional deficits.

The applicant asserted that he had effected changes in life which he wished to continue.  He stated that he had disencumbered himself of friendships and associations that had not been positive for him in the past and had been clean of drugs and alcohol over the past 10months.  He notes that he came to drug use and then abuse in response to his grief at the death of his mother when he was a teen and consequent estrangement from his father.  He remains on the suboxone program which he will continue on returning to the community. He has supportive accommodation available and intends to contact TAC and utilise counselling services through that organisation.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved.

• Special conditions applied:
• Electronic monitoring
• Mental health care plan

Paroled from 24 October 2022 - 28 September 2025