Parole Board Decision

In the matter of the Corrections Act 1997

and

In the matter of an Application for Parole by Gregory Terrence Hutt

23 May 2008

Reason for Decision

On 6 September 1988 the Applicant was convicted of one (1) count of Murder contrary to Section 158 of the Criminal Code. The Applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for the term of his natural life.

On 14 September 1988 the Applicant lodged an appeal against his conviction for Murder. On 1 June 1989 the Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the appeal filed by the Applicant and ordered that the conviction be quashed and that the Applicant be retried on the indictment.

On 21 February 1990 after his retrial the Applicant was convicted of one (1) count of Murder contrary to Section 158 of the Criminal Code. The Applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for the term of his natural life.

On 6 March 1990 the Applicant lodged an appeal against his conviction. On 25 August 1992 the Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal filed by the Applicant.

On 12 October 2001 the Applicant applied to be re-sentenced pursuant to Section 8(1) of the Criminal Code Amendment (Life Prisoners and Dangerous Criminals) Act 1994.

The Applicant was re-sentenced to a period of imprisonment of 24 years and it was ordered that he not be eligible to be considered for parole until serving 14 years of that sentence. The sentence of imprisonment was ordered to date from 19 January 1998.

As such the Applicant became eligible to be considered for parole on 14 January 2002.

The Board has been provided with the Comments on Passing Sentence made by Justice Underwood (as he was then) when resentencing the Applicant. The Comments on Passing Sentence fully outline the factual circumstances surrounding the crime committed by the Applicant.

The Board has been provided with Victim Impact Statements prepared by the victims of the Applicants crime. The Board has carefully considered the Victim Impact Statements.

The Board notes that the crime committed by the Applicant has had a lasting impact upon the members of the deceased’s family. That impact is ongoing and has not diminished with the passing of time.

The Board notes that this is not the Applicant’s first application for parole. The Applicant was previously granted parole on 29 August 2003.

Whilst on parole the Applicant reappeared before the Board on a number of occasions in relation to breaches of the Applicant’s parole. On previous occasions the Applicant’s parole had been confirmed.

In December of 2006 a notice was issued to the Applicant directing him to appear before the Board. The Applicant failed to appear before the Board and as a result a warrant was issued for his arrest.

The warrant was not executed until 12 October 2007 and the Applicant’s parole was ultimately revoked. As a result of the Applicant’s parole being revoked he once again became eligible to be considered for parole on 11 January 2008.

The Applicant’s parole was revoked on the basis that the Applicant should have known that a warrant would have been issued for his arrest and he made no attempt to facilitate his appearance before the Board or to surrender to Tasmania Police.

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

The Board has taken into account the following specific matters when assessing the Applicant’s application for parole :

a. An updated pre-parole report prepared by the Applicant’s probation officer.

b. A number of pre-parole reports which have been prepared in relation to the Applicant.

c. The Applicant’s prison record which can be described as satisfactory.

d. The Applicant’s prior convictions.

e. A report prepared by Dr Ian Sale dated 9 August 2002.

f. A number of reports prepared by Custodial Officers.

g. The fact that the Applicant has undergone a number of educational courses whilst in prison.

h. The fact that the Applicant has completed the Parole Awareness Course.

In his present application for parole the Applicant was questioned at length by the Board as to why he failed to present himself to Tasmania Police when he should have been aware that a warrant would have been issued for his arrest. The Applicant indicated to the Board that he had undergone a number of personal difficulties as a result of the death of his mother. The Applicant indicated that he had sought counselling in relation to the difficulties he had undergone as a result of his mother’s death.

The Board has perused the Reasons for Decision of the Board as then constituted when the Applicant was released on parole on 19 September 2003.

The reasons advanced by the Board as then constituted as to why the Applicant met the statutory criteria to be granted a period of parole remain valid in relation to the Applicant’s present application for parole.

The Board has clearly indicated to the Applicant that it will not tolerate any further breaches of the Applicant’s parole. The Applicant has been advised that should there be any further breaches of his parole then his parole will be revoked.

The Board notes that the Applicant will have stable accommodation upon his release from prison and has prospects of obtaining employment.

The Board is of the view that the Applicant meets the statutory criteria to be granted a further period of parole.

Paroled 10/06/2008 – 11/01/2016