Parole Board Decision

In the matter of the Corrections Act 1997

and

In the matter of an Application for Parole by Shane RUDMAN

28 September 2007

Reason for Decision

On 28 February 1996 the Applicant was convicted of one count of assault contrary to s.184 of the Criminal Code. In relation to that crime the applicant was sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 12 months to date from 21 November 1995. The Applicant was ineligible to be considered for parole until serving 6 months of that sentence.

On 1 July 1996 the Applicant was convicted of one count of murder contrary to s.158 of the Criminal Code. The Applicant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 20 years. That sentence of imprisonment was to run concurrently with the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him in relation to the assault. As the sentencing judge made no order in relation to parole, the Applicant became eligible to be considered for parole after serving one half of the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him for the crime of murder.

In relation to both crimes the Applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 21 November 2005.

The Board has been provided with the comments on passing sentence made by Justice Wright when sentencing the Applicant on 1 July 1996. The Board has carefully considered the comments on passing sentence made by Justice Wright and has taken them into consideration when considering the Applicant’s application for parole.

The comments on passing sentence fully outline the factual circumstances in relation to the murder committed by the Applicant.

The Board has also been provided with the comments on passing sentence made by the sentencing judge when the Applicant was sentenced in relation to the assault.

The Board has been advised that initially three victims were registered in relation to the crimes committed by the Applicant. At present there is only one victim registered in relation to the crimes committed by the Applicant. That victim was invited to provide a victim impact statement to the Board. The Board has been advised that the remaining victim of the Applicant’s crime declined to provide a statement to the Board. As such the statutory criteria in that regard has been met.

This is not the Applicant’s first application for parole.

The Applicant first made an application for parole on 8 November 2005. On that date the Applicant’s application for parole was refused.

On 14 February 2006 the Applicant made a further application for parole. On 10April 2006 the Applicant’s application for parole was determined and the Applicant was granted a period of parole.

The Board provided detailed reasons at that time as to why the Applicant was granted parole (see Reasons for Decision dated 24 April 2006). At the time that the Applicant was granted parole the Board had interviewed the Applicant’s wife. The Applicant intended residing with his wife upon his release from prison. At that time the Board was of the view that the Applicant’s wife would have a positive influence upon him and that he would be returning to a supportive environment.

Unfortunately for the Applicant and his wife their marriage encountered difficulties upon his release from prison. The Applicant indicated to the Board that he had difficulties in assimilating back into the wider community.

The Applicant began to suffer from depression and, on a number of occasions, used cannabis.

The Applicant was, interviewed by the Board on 13 October 2006. He admitted using cannabis and on 24 November 2006 his parole was revoked. The Applicant’s parole was revoked due to the following factors:

1. the Applicant’s use of illicit substances,

2. the fact that the Applicant’s relationship with his wife at that period of time was less than satisfactory, and

3. the fact that the Applicant had been diagnosed and was suffering from severe depression.

On 11 May 2006 the Applicant made a further Application for parole. On 25 May 2006 the Board refused the Applicant’s application for parole.

The Applicant is once again eligible to be considered for parole and has made a further Application for parole.

In considering the Applicant’s application for parole the Board has taken into account the statutory criteria which it is required to do so pursuant to the Corrections Act 1997.

In particular the Board has taken into account the following matters:

1. the extensive file maintained by the Parole Board in relation to the Applicant,

2. a number of pre-parole reports prepared by the Applicant’s probation officer,

3. a number of psychiatric reports which have previously been commissioned in relation to the Applicant,

4. a number of references which the Applicant relies upon in support of his application,

5. the Applicant’s prison record which can be described as satisfactory, and

6. the fact that the Applicant has undertaken a number of courses whilst in prison.

The Applicant when interviewed by the Board in relation to his present application for parole quite candidly admitted that he found it difficult to assimilate back into the community whilst on parole on the last occasion. The Applicant indicated that he had attached significant weight to his reintegration back into the community upon he and his wife successfully resuming their relationship after his release from prison.

The Applicant was candid that when the relationship with his wife foundered he suffered a number of personal difficulties and began to suffer from extreme depression.

The Applicant and his wife do not intend to reside with each other upon his release from prison. During his most recent period of incarceration the Applicant has taken steps to lessen his reliance upon his relationship with his wife should he be granted a further period of parole.

The Applicant has sought counselling from the Salvation Army. The Applicant has also made arrangements with Colony 47 in relation to employment.

The Applicant has strong prospects of employment upon his release from prison.

The Applicant intends residing in housing which has been made available to him by the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army will also provide extensive support to the Applicant upon his release from prison.

Whilst incarcerated the Applicant has also completed a ten week alcohol and other drugs course and has had one-on-one counselling with a representative of the Salvation Army.

The Board is satisfied that the Applicant has put significant support structures in place to assist him into reintegrating back into the wider community. He will not be reliant upon his relationship with his wife to provide the support he needs. Such support will be provided by external third parties.

Taking all matters into consideration the Board is of the view that the Applicant meets the statutory criteria to be granted parole.

Paroled 16/10/07 – 20/04/16