Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Garry Lindsay Armstrong

31 March 2023

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Garry Lindsay Armstrong (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 10 months imposed upon conviction on charges of aggravated burglary, burglary, stealing, driving with a prescribed illicit drug in his system and possession of a controlled plant.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 3 April 2023.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 31 March 2023. 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.

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:

At 58 years of age, the applicant has had a protracted and varied history of offending. His prior history includes a significant list of dishonesty, violence and driving and drug related offences committed predominantly in Tasmania. The applicant has also offended in several other states and has served many custodial sentences of varying lengths in relation to his offending.

The applicant enjoyed a relatively stable upbringing, with close family connections in a blended family, and strong relationships with his mother, stepfather and step siblings, who have all continued to provide support during his incarceration.  However, in his late teenage years, he spent time in youth detention, labelled as an “uncontrollable child” where he reports experiencing abuse for which he is seeking support through the national redress scheme.  His offending appears to have commenced around this time and continued consistently over the next three decades, alongside periods of substance abuse, although the applicant reports a period of over 10 years when he was abstinent, engaged with family life and enjoyed full time work.

There are indications the applicant has capacity to change his past behaviour and commence a road to rehabilitation.  During his current custodial sentence, the applicant has maintained compliance within the prison environment.  He has attained a minimum classification, with case notes reflecting the applicant is quiet, compliant and has engaged well with services to assist him in understanding his offending. There is no record of any internal offending.

Both in his application and during his interview by the Board, the applicant acknowledged his extensive history of offending and the impact of this offending throughout his adult life. He admitted he knew what he was doing was wrong and stated he should have sought help and support to address his offending during previous periods of incarceration but had not done so.  The applicant noted however that this time he had sought and engaged with supports including counselling in relation his reported past trauma. The applicant has significant physical health issues because of past work-related injuries and has a critical brain condition that will affect his functioning and cognition. As a result, the applicant has recently been assessed as eligible for assistance through NDIS and is engaging with JustACE, a program that has been established to support those in the criminal justice system with cognitive impairment to reintegrate and connect with appropriate community-based services.

The applicant has suitable accommodation and has good family support, in addition to the support he will receive in the community as outlined. Community Corrections have assessed the applicant as presenting with a medium level of criminogenic risk and needs but determine a period of parole with structured case management would assist the applicant to re-integrate into the community.

The applicant reported on interview that while on bail prior to commencing his current custodial sentence, he had started to make positive changes in his behaviour, which led him to seek the support he had engaged in whilst in prison.  While risks remain for this applicant given the nature of his long history of offending, the structure and support provided by a parole order will assist the applicant to build on the positive steps he has taken to date.

Based on the factors outlined, the applicant is assessed as suitable for parole.

The Board’s determination:

Parole Granted

Paroled from 12 April 2023 - 12 October 2023