BAILEY - Paul David - 31/08/10
Hearing for Postponement Order
27(4)(b) of the Parole Act 2002
27(4)(b) of the Parole Act 2002
Paul David BAILEY
Hearing:
31 August 2010
at (Withheld) Prison
Members of the Board:
Judge DJ Carruthers
Judge RM Kean
Judge M Lee
Dr J Skipworth
Mr R Lewis
Ms J Donaldson
Observer:
Mr S Berry
DECISION OF THE BOARD
Paul David Bailey is serving a sentence of life imprisonment for murder with appalling sexual offending associated with it. This is a very well known, high profile prisoner. He was involved in a horrendous rape and murder of a young girl in 1991.
Today he is scheduled to appear before us for the matter of a postponement order under section 27 of the Parole Act 2002 to be considered.
He has been given very recent notice of his rights about that. He was told he was entitled to appear and/or be represented by counsel to obtain legal advice and to make written submissions.
He has done what he has done in the past. He has signed a waiver. He has elected not to appear before us today.
We are satisfied that his rights have been correctly made known to him. He has elected as he has in the past simply to take no action.
Our obligation under section 27 is to be satisfied that in the absence of a significant change he will not be suitable for release at the time when he is next due to be considered for parole. If we are so satisfied we may make a postponement order and that order may be made for a period of up to three years.
Mr Bailey’s position can be briefly stated.
He is assessed as being at high risk of reoffending. For some time it has been recommended that he attend the Kia Marama Child Sex Offenders Programme. He has declined to do that. He has declined to take part in the processes involved in compiling and reporting to the Board. We notice that on the most recent occasion he again declined to take part. He refuses to attend the Kia Marama Sex Offenders Programme. In short, he has done nothing to reduce his risk of reoffending and remains at high risk.
He has so much work to do to reduce his risk that we are satisfied it is appropriate in this case to make a postponement order. We are satisfied that there has been no significant change in his circumstances and there is unlikely to be significant change for a foreseeable period. A postponement order will be made. We think it should be made for the maximum period available. There is a great deal of work for Mr Bailey to do in the light of his horrendous offending. It is unlikely that over a period of three years he will have the time both to attend and complete the Kia Marama Programme which we have referred to and also to take the usual rehabilitative or reintegrative steps.
In the absence, therefore, of any of those things happening and of any change at all a postponement order is made. We will see him again just prior to the expiry of three years from today’s date.
Order accordingly.
(signed)
Judge DJ Carruthers
Panel Convenor
Review
• You may apply for a review of the Board’s decision under section 67(1). The only grounds under which you may make an application for review are that the Board, in making its decision:
a) Failed to comply with procedures in the Parole Act 2002; or
b) Made an error of law; or
c) Failed to comply with Board policy resulting in unfairness to the offender; or
d) Based its decision on erroneous or irrelevant information that was material to the decision reached; or
e) Acted without jurisdiction.
• To apply for a review you must write to the Board within 28 days of its decision stating which of the above ground(s) you consider to be relevant in your case and giving reasons why you believe that ground(s) applies.
• Reviews are considered on the papers only. There is no hearing in respect of your Review Application.