Jordan YOUNG - 12/08/2019

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Jordan Mitchell YOUNG   

Hearing: 12 August 2019

at Hawkes Bay Prison by AVL from Rimutaka Prison

Members of the Board:

  • Ms K Snook – Panel Convenor
  • Ms S Driver
  • Mr P Elenio


  • Mr J Rainger

Support Persons:

  • [withheld]


  1. Jordan Mitchell Young, 38, appeared for the further consideration of parole in relation to a sentence of four years one month imprisonment for burglary, receiving, and obstructing the course of justice.
  2. Mr Young was released on parole to [withheld] supported accommodation on 14 January 2019. He incurred two further convictions on parole relating to a breach of a special condition of parole on 15 March 2019 and being found in possession of methamphetamine when arrested on the interim recall order on 4 May 2019.
  3. Mr Young’s engagement and compliance on parole was poor and at times, duplicitous.  The detail of that is set out in the application for recall.  Some of the conduct that is of concern included not turning up to report to his probation officer almost immediately he was released on parole and his failure to attend appointments with the psychologist or other professionals as well as a failure to continue engaging with his support.  Those were matters that formed the central planks of Mr Young’s release proposal when he was granted the privilege of parole.
  4. We note too that the interim recall order was made about two months after Mr Young’s release and he was not arrested and taken into custody until 4 May 2019.  He told the Board today that during that time effectively “on the run” he was residing at [withheld] with his ex-partner.  He said he knew he was expected to be reporting into Community Corrections but was scared to do so.
  5. Mr Young is on a high prison security classification, he has a RoC*Rol of 0.71834, and a sentence expiry date of 17 June 2020.
  6. Mr Rainger appeared today for Mr Young.  He filed written submissions in advance of the hearing supporting the Board releasing Mr Young on parole.  Mr Young now has an approved address with [withheld] and knows that he must comply with her house rules.  The Board accepts that [withheld] is likely to provide strong and prosocial support for him.  She works as a counsellor full-time.
  7. We talked with Mr Young in some detail today.  He said that on release last time he struggled to attend appointments.  He said he felt overwhelmed.  He said he is now set up better including establishing a bank account and setting up a doctor for release.  He has reconnected with [withheld] and has a new counsellor whom he will commence work with once he is released into the community.  He said he has updated his release and safety plan.  Mr Young told the Board there is no need for guided releases if he remains in prison because of the work he has done connecting with those on the outside this time around.
  8. Mr Young says that he has [withheld].  He says that he is now off all medication and feels much better for this.
  9. Although Mr Young told the Board that he has been signed off working with a psychologist in prison if he remains in prison we had not seen this in any of the material before us. He then read from a document during the hearing which actually states that Mr Young is signed off unless the Board recommends further one‑to‑one treatment.
  10. We have considered the position carefully today.  However given the issues that arose for Mr Young immediately on his release on parole we are of the view that risk remains undue at this time.  These issues include a large scale failure to engage with those who were intended to be providing support to him, including a psychologist, and being found in possession of methamphetamine.  Even if the methamphetamine was not Mr Young’s (as he continues to maintain) being found with it indicates poor decision making regarding his associations on parole.  Parole is declined.
  11. In our view the psychological assessment dated 15 November 2018 is clear that Mr Young had treatment needs that were intended to be completed with the psychologist. In fact the psychologist clearly says that she had not really challenged him prior to his release.  He did not participate in any psychological treatment following his release and in our view that work remains outstanding.  We think that working further with a psychologist in prison will assist Mr Young in developing strategies to ensure that he is not overwhelmed when he is released. As recommended by the psychologist it will also focus on the “thoughts, attitudes and beliefs which underlie Mr Young’s offending behaviours”. Guided releases can occur if necessary although Mr Young does not see the benefit of those.
  12. Given the work that is required we are scheduling Mr Young to be seen again by a Board in six months’ time, that is February 2020.  For that next hearing we ask for a brief updating addendum report from the psychologist which sets out the work that Mr Young has completed with the treating psychologist in the time between now and that next hearing and assesses his risk and release plan.

Ms K Snook
Panel Convenor