Parole Board Decision

In the Matter of Corrections Act 1997

and

In the Matter of an application for Parole by Joshua James Strange

26 May 2023

Reasons for Decision

The Background:

Joshua James Strange (‘the applicant’) is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment of 7 months for a range of offences including use of a controlled drug, burglary x4, attempted stealing x2 and stealing x2.

The applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 26^th April 2023.

The applicant appeared before the Board in respect of his application at the hearing on 26^th May 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:

The applicant reports an escalating use of drugs since age 16, commencing with marijuana and intensifying through to the use of hallucinogenics, amphetamines and methamphetamines. In addition, the applicant described the abuse of non-prescribed buprenorphine and benzodiazepines. It appears this drug use commenced secondary to mental health issues and always being a “troubled kid”. He does also experience some ongoing leg pain, post-injury and surgery which complicates his drug use. As a result of this drug use, his lifestyle became characterised by stealing to support his use. The applicant agreed this became his way of life. However, also stated he was adamant he wanted to change.

Previous attempts to support the applicant through community orders have failed. The applicant breached a community correction order by re-offending. Similarly, he was sentenced to a drug treatment order which was also cancelled due to ongoing drug use and re-offending. These failures indicate difficulty supervising the applicant in the community due to his ongoing drug use.

Upon interview and when questioned about his commitment to previous orders, the applicant stated that at the time he wasn’t “too interested” in changing his life. He said back then he had nothing to live for and therefore no motivation to change. He further reported he has outgrown this lifestyle and is now more interested in working and strengthening his relationship with his children. He has the opportunity for an increased role in their care, and wants to put a “roof over their heads” and be a “good role model”.  The applicant now has his driver’s licence which opens up more work opportunities. He reported being out of an unhealthy relationship and has cut ties with his anti-social associates.  The applicant thought he needed the strict conditions of parole where relapse wasn’t necessarily expected and accepted in the same way he saw a drug treatment order. For this reason, he considered he had “no chances” on parole and was committed to adhering to imposed conditions.

The applicant has had no urinary drug screens while in prison, so there is no objective evidence of his cessation of drug use. However, the applicant highlighted this is out of his control.

While in prison, the applicant was willing to undergo alcohol and drug treatment and was placed on the wait-list. However, due to his sentence length, he was unable to commence this.  He did have the opportunity to complete a relapse prevention plan and also completed the resilience program while on remand.   Prison case notes are characterised by positive comments and the applicant’s demonstration of a strong work ethic.

If released, arrangements have been made to re-engage with his community alcohol and drug counsellor. In addition, connections have been made with Men’s Resources and has plans for therapeutic intervention with a psychologist. His treatment for his leg injury will be ongoing. Appropriate accommodation with the applicant’s mother has been approved.

The Board considered the applicant to exhibit strong prospects for change, being noticeably more forward-thinking and positive about his future.

The Board’s determination:

Parole is approved

Special conditions applied:

• Mental Health Care Plan
• Electronic Monitoring
• Not to engage with any members of an outlaw motorcycle club.

Paroled from 5 June 2023 - 5 December 2023