Under Section 21(1) of the Parole Act 2002
Hearing: 20 April 2009 at (Withheld) Prison
Members of the Board:
Judge J E Macdonald – Panel Convenor
Mr J Thomson
Mr R Lewis
Counsel: (Withheld)
Support Persons: (Names Withheld)
Mr Stewart is serving a sentence of three and a half years’ imprisonment for sexual offending that took place between 1967 and 1974. It involved the rape, sodomy and indecent assault of one victim. His sentence commenced on 12 February 2008 and he became eligible for parole on 13 April 2009. His statutory release date is 11 August 2011.
Mr Stewart is now 63 years of age. He has had no other criminal convictions. He has been a model prisoner and is described as compliant and polite. Mr Stewart still maintains his innocence. He was convicted at trial. A subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on 22 October 2008. There was some suggestion that Mr Stewart wanted to pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court but that has now been abandoned. It seems as a consequence that one outstanding rape charge, a charge on which the jury had been unable to reach a verdict, is to be withdrawn.
The Board has met with the victim earlier today. She underlined the matters that she had set out in a written letter to the Board. In summary, her main concern is the lack of acknowledgement of guilty by Mr Stewart and hence a failure to show any remorse. Her view was that he should not be released until such a time as he was prepared to acknowledge his offending.
In speaking with the victim and her two supporters, as well as speaking at the Parole Hearing with the offender and his supporters (Names Withheld), it is obvious that the revelation of Mr Stewart’s offending, his subsequent trial and unsuccessful appeal has torn this family apart. The Board has heard allegations of harassment from both sides. The Board is concerned to hear all this but can do little about it. At the same time we do not see that it adds to Mr Stewart’s risk of reoffending.
In terms of assessing whether or not Mr Stewart might pose an undue risk to the safety of the community, there are a number of factors that are relevant here. The first is that this is historical offending and he has not had any convictions since the offending ended. That is some 35 years. That is a strong indicator in his favour.
The Board also has the benefit of two psychological assessments – one from the Psychological Service and the other from (Name Withheld), a psychologist. Both assess Mr Stewart as being at low risk of reoffending against children sexually. Those opinions also happen to coincide with a view expressed at sentencing by the trial judge who suggested that Mr Stewart would not be a risk to anybody in the future. We have also taken into account that Mr Stewart has strong family support which in itself should act as a further protective factor.
We assess that Mr Stewart does not pose any undue risk to the victim and the same applies to the public at large. If there is any risk that can be managed by release conditions. The Board has reached the view, against that background, that he would not be an undue risk to the safety of the community if released on parole.
Parole is granted, commencing (Withheld) on standard conditions and the following special conditions commencing the day of release until the sentence end date:
_________________________
J E Macdonald
Panel Convenor
Acted without jurisdiction.