Alfred VINCENT - 19/08/2019
Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002
Alfred Thomas VINCENT
Hearing: 19 August 2019
at Rimutaka Prison
Members of the Board:
- Sir Ron Young – Chairperson
- Ms P Rose
- Dr J Skipworth
- Ms S Shone
- Mr A Spierling – NZPB Manager
- Ms C Van Leuven – Department Of Corrections
DECISION OF THE BOARD
- Mr Vincent was sentenced to preventive detention for indecent assaults in 1968. He had a history of such offending prior to that time. We last saw him in May 2019. He then had [withheld] and other health problems. There was a possibility of release to [withheld] but the Board noted then that he still had inappropriate sexualised conduct.
- As to the current position, Mr Vincent’s [withheld] has progressed. He is deteriorating both physically and mentally. He continues poor conduct, invading personal space, some sexualised conduct, all of which may simply be disinhibited conduct arising from [withheld]. It was noted that he might be able to be released to nursing home care but there were significant dangers in his sexualised conduct.
- The position to us seems to be summarised in the parole assessment report where it said, “It is recommended if Mr Vincent were to gain residency in a suitable psychogeriatric care facility, the staff may need to be trained to manage his sexualised behaviour and the facility will need to be able to guarantee appropriate levels of observation and understanding of and response to Mr Vincent’s tendency to seek out sexual contact with others.”
- Currently, there is no such care facility available. Nor is there any that could be identified. In the circumstances therefore, given Mr Vincent’s continued conduct, we are satisfied he remains an undue risk.
- We have made significant efforts since November 2018 to try and identify appropriate care facilities without success. None can now be identified. We think the appropriate course now is a rather longer period. We will see Mr Vincent again in just under two years time, by the end of July 2021. If further enquiries as to appropriate care facilities prove fruitful then Mr Vincent can always come back before the Board pursuant to section 26 for a further reconsideration of parole.
- We note that in 2015 the Board suggested that an application under the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act might be made. We understand no such application has been made. We draw it to the attention of both Corrections and his lawyer.
Sir Ron Young