Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Jie Lawrence Rainbird

6 January 2023

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Jie Lawrence Rainbird (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of two years imposed upon conviction on charges of assault and unlawfully injuring property.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 8 September 2022. The applicant has previously had the benefit of a parole order granted at the Board’s meeting on 10 December 2021, but this was revoked due to new offending in September 2022 and the applicant returned to custody. The current application was adjourned on 9 December 2022 due to lack of suitable accommodation.

The applicant then appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 6 January 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:

This applicant has a long history of offending, commencing when he was 17 years of age, and includes several periods of imprisonment related to violent offending including family violence related offending. The applicant’s current offending was also family violence related. It involved an assault on the applicant’s then pregnant partner after a dispute, where the applicant punched his partner to the head on several occasions, knocking her to the floor and then left her injured in the house alone, causing her to seek help from neighbours.

On sentencing the Court referenced the applicant as having “perpetrated a brutal and cruel assault” and “family violence  of the most serious kind”. As is unfortunately often the case, as a perpetrator of violence, the applicant himself suffered abuse and neglect in his childhood and became exposed to and involved in the use of illicit drugs at a young age, leading to an ongoing drug problem as an adult.

Since his return to custody after revocation of the previous parole order, despite the applicant’s past struggles maintain compliance in a custodial setting, recent case notes reflect a maturing in his attitude and behaviour.  The applicant has reportedly engaged with counselling relating to past complex trauma and is linked with Beyond the Wire who have continued to support him to secure appropriate accommodation. He will also be supported in the community to engage in appropriate programs to address his offending behaviour.

While the applicant’s current security classification is maximum, and he is housed in maximum security, there are no internal offences recorded since his return to custody and case notes reflect him as interacting politely with staff and other inmates, maintaining calm and compliant behaviour.

On interview by the Board the applicant appeared motivated to build on his recent change in attitude and behaviour, acknowledging the need for him to “change his ways” and avoid previous pro- criminal associations whose influence has been a factor in his offending. He outlined realistic goals, particularly including reconnecting with his young children, and engaging in counselling with a psychologist to assist him to better manage past violent behaviour.

When assessing the applicant’s suitability, the Board must balance the risk of the applicant reoffending or relapsing given his poor history of compliance against any pro-social or protective factors that exist to assist the applicant to successfully reintegrate into the community.

The applicant does have suitable accommodation and strong family support from his partner and extended family, all who reside close to his accommodation. He has continued to engage with services he had connected with on the previous parole order, including Beyond the Wire, and has been engaging with an external counselling service regarding strategies to deal with his past trauma and management of his emotions.

Prior to the revocation of the previous parole order, the applicant was due to commence programs to address his family violence offending history.  Access to these programs is limited in the current custodial setting and if released into the community he can be supported to continue to pursue participation in appropriate programs.  He is continuing to work on reconnecting with his children from previous relationships through Relationships Australia and gaining the support of his ex-partners to facilitate this.

These factors suggest that the applicant is someone who has the capacity and motivation build on the changes he has started to make, despite challenges he may face regarding risk of relapse into drug use and further offending. The support and structure provided by a parole order will assist the applicant to access services to help manage these risks and the strict conditions of a parole order, including electronic monitoring would provide additional supervision and management of identified risks.

On balancing all factors, the Board has assessed the applicant as suitable for a further opportunity for parole.

The Board’s determination:

Parole Approved

Special conditions applied:

• Must submit to electronic monitoring.

Paroled from 16 January 2023 - 20 December 2023