TAKA - Aaron Henry - 12/04/2011
Parole hearing
Under section 21(1) of the Parole Act 2002
Aaron Henry TAKA
Hearing:
12 April 2011
at [Withheld] Prison
Members of the Board:
Judge B Lovegrove - Panel Convenor
Mr A Ritchie
Ms R Pritchard
Supporters:
[Withheld]
[Withheld]
DECISION OF THE BOARD
Mr Taka appears for further consideration of parole having been declined about this time last year on account of his undue risk to the safety of the community without completing a suitable process of reintegration and producing a consistent series of negative drug tests. He is serving a sentence of 5 years imprisonment for aggravated robbery. While he may have completed the punitive phase of that sentence, he cannot be released before his statutory release date on 19 April 2012 without the Board having reasonable grounds to be satisfied he poses no undue risk to the safety of the community within the roughly 12 month period remaining on his sentence taking account of the nature of any likely further offending, any support and supervision available to him in the community, and the virtue of him getting back into the community as a law-abiding citizen.
Mr Taka, at 33 years of age, is in prison for about the seventh time on this occasion for his involvement in an aggravated robbery on 19 April 2007 resulting in the death of one of the victims following other offending going back over the period to 1994 centred round being where he was not supposed to be, taking what was not his to take, robbery, burglary, irresponsible driving, assault, disorderly behaviour, escaping from custody, and non-compliance. Unless the Board is persuaded he understands what has brought him to offend from time to time, and also understands the seriousness of his offending and the extent to which it will not be tolerated by a community entitled to protect itself, and unless he takes effective steps to deal with that or shows the Board how he intends to do so safely in the future, there is good reason to suppose he will continue to offend in a familiar way.
Against that background, Mr Taka has spent the past 4 years or so in prison affording some small measure of justice to his victims and absorbing the consequences of his offending. He is Low Medium Security. He keeps himself busy. He is well behaved in the structured prison environment where he has resided in the Maori Focus Unit since June last year. He is regarded as an excellent worker. He has completed a Parenting Skills course as well as a Living Skills course. His PCO speaks well of him.
Mr Taka's Roc*RoI of 0.57110 puts him at medium risk of reoffending which may well have him pose an undue risk to the safety of the community while his offending issues centred round violence, substance abuse, choice of peers, and antisocial attitudes remain insufficiently addressed without effective intervention either in prison or, under suitable stringency, in the community. At earlier points on sentence, the violent nature of his offending, history of offending, insufficiently addressed risk of reoffending, and deficient release plans all counted against early release. He has been sentence planned for the Medium Intensity Rehabilitation Programme [MIRP] and the Maori Therapeutic Programme [MTP] and, to his credit, completed both programmes with good reports in April 2009 and September 2009 respectively. No further intervention will be offered in prison but is available in the area of his intended release where he intends to live with [Withheld] and [Withheld] at [Withheld]. He has other pro-social support in the community. [Withheld] attends today's hearing while [Withheld] is at work. [Withheld] also attends today's hearing. He has travelled from Australia for the occasion.
At the outset of the hearing, Mr Taka was informed that the Board had met with some of his victims earlier in the day. They remained hugely affected by the events of 19 April 2007 and hoped the Board would help them live out their lives without him intruding in any way upon their geographical and emotional domain. Mr Taka confirmed he was profoundly sorry for his offending and had no intention of intruding upon their lives or do other than commit himself to a fully pro-social future with the help of his partner and whanau. He had met with another of his victims personally at a Restorative Justice Conference on 12 June 2009. At that time, he expressed remorse and shame, explained the detail of the offending, accepted the consequences of the offending, confirmed his pro-social ambitions, and asked for forgiveness.
The Board has been at pains to ensure that the concerns of all victims have fallen within its compass and, in those circumstances (notwithstanding the concerns of some), is satisfied that [Withheld] is a suitable place for his release insofar as that is where his primary pro-social support is located (and where the best prospect of his successful reintegration lies) and no victim resident in that area has raised any issue in respect of the prospect of him living there.
Mr Taka unreservedly accepts all conditions he knows will apply in the event of his release. He is also well aware of the consequences of breach.
Since last seen, Mr Taka has consistently returned negative drug tests and has been drug free now since February last year. He has an approved address for release in the first instance where he will necessarily reside for a short period before attending and completing the [Withheld] Programme before returning to his approved address where he will be subject to continuing conditions of release for the longest possible period of time.
As things stand, with important work done and a sound release plan in place, the Board is satisfied, on the assumption of full compliance with conditions of release, Mr Taka poses no undue risk to the safety of the community. Accordingly, the Board directs his release on parole on 19 April 2011. From that date until 6 months past his statutory release date, he will be on standard conditions and the following special conditions:
- To reside at the approved address at [Withheld], and not move from that address without the prior written approval of the Probation Officer.
- Pending attendance at the [Withheld] Programme, to observe a curfew at the approved address between the hours of 9:00pm and 7:00am daily unless otherwise approved by the Probation Officer.
- To attend and complete the [Withheld] Programme and abide by the rules of the programme as from 2 May 2011 to the satisfaction of the Probation Officer and programme providers.
- To attend for psychological assessment and thereafter such counselling, (including referral to any anger management/violence prevention counselling/treatment/programme), as directed by the Probation Officer in consultation with the psychologist.
- To attend for alcohol and drug abuse assessment and thereafter such counselling as directed by the Probation Officer in consultation with the counsellor.
- To attend a pre-programme interview for the Tikanga Maori Programme, and, if suitable, attend and complete the programme to the satisfaction of the programme facilitators.
- To attend the Departmental Maintenance Group run by Programme Delivery as directed by the Probation Officer.
- To undertake such vocational or employment related training as directed by the Probation Officer.
- Not to possess or consume alcohol or illicit drugs.
- Not to contact or associate with any victim(s) of the offending, directly or indirectly, without the prior written approval of the Probation Officer.
- Not to contact or associate with any co-offender, directly or indirectly, without the prior written approval of the Probation Officer.
- Not to enter the town of Paraparaumu at any time unless in transit on State Highway 1.
Judge B Lovegrove
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.