New Zealand Parole Board -

Application for recall

Under section 60(1) of the Parole Act 2002

between

Alison Rei
Delegate for the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Applicant

and

Gail Denise MANEY
Respondent

Hearing date: 21 April 2020

By teleconference to Auckland Region Women’s Corrections Facility

Date of reserved decision: 23 April 2020

Members of the Board:

• Sir Ron Young (Chairperson)
• Ms S Driver

Counsel:

• Ms J A Kincade QC and Ms A Shenell for Respondent
• Mr B Tantrum and Mr D Becker for Applicant

In Attendance:

• Ms A Williams (Probation Officer)
• Ms P Ma’ilei (Probation Officer)
• Mr R Storrar (Probation Officer)
• Mr T McKinnel (Private Investigator)

RESERVED DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. This decision has been issued following consideration of parole in accordance with the provisions of an epidemic management notice issued by the Government on 30 March 2020 and in accordance with section 13A of the Parole Act 2002.  There has been a hearing conducted by a Panel Convenor and a Board member.  All of the usual material has been considered and there has been a telephone discussion involving the Board, the offender, counsel and the Principal Corrections Officer.
2. Ms Maney is 52 years of age.  In 2000, she was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder.  The murder occurred in 1989.  She has had a number of interim recall orders, in 2012 and in 2016 and another in 2017.  She was released relevant to the current application for recall in June 2016.
3. The grounds of this application for recall involve complaints that Ms Maney was involved in the use of drugs and antisocial conduct, she failed to attend a series of drug tests in late 2019,  that she failed to give a urine sample when required, and  that she provided a diluted sample which gave a negative test in early December last year.  Finally on 24 January she tested positive for methamphetamine.
4. There have been a number of recent problems about Ms Maney’s accommodation.  She was living with [withheld] at the time of the interim recall but they had fallen out.   Further Ms Maney had made a number of what one can only call very strange complaints to the police about someone interfering with her clothes, her glasses and a motor vehicle.  Community Corrections suggested those complaints were essentially paranoid and indicative of possible methamphetamine use.
5. We received extensive submissions and a number of affidavits particularly on behalf of Ms Maney. Essentially other than the one positive test Ms Maney did not accept she had been acting inappropriately on parole.  After discussion with counsel and Ms Maney we did not think it necessary to resolve many of the issues relating to Ms Maney and her relationship with Community Corrections.
6. It is clear at least from Community Corrections’ perspective that Ms Maney was a very difficult person to manage.  There is a similarity between the current difficulties and the past difficulties that Community Corrections have had with Ms Maney.  The difficulty was also illustrated in our discussions with Ms Maney.  Ms Maney told us repetitively that she took ownership of her inappropriate conduct. However, in fact, Ms Maney spent considerable time trying to shift responsibility to others for many of the complaints about her conduct raised by Community Corrections. We accept Ms Maney is likely to be a very difficult offender to manage on parole.
7. However, when we look back on Ms Maney’s record since her release on parole and recalls there has been one only breach of special conditions prosecuted.  She has committed no other crime since her release. We do not support her drug use but we do not consider that her difficult behaviour and her drug use adds up to her being an undue risk to the safety of the community.
8. As we have noted, Ms Maney was living with [withheld] when recalled.  She had originally been in [withheld] but had shifted back to [withheld] to be with [withheld] just over a year ago.  It is clear now given the volatile relationship between Ms Maney and [withheld] it is not possible for her to be returned to that residence.  Previously Ms Maney has resided for a period with [withheld].  That accommodation is available again and recommended.  It is apparently a very isolated area. In questioning with Ms Maney it is clear that she sees it only as a short-term measure to get her back into the community.  We appreciate that it is unlikely that Ms Maney will want to stay with [withheld] long-term.  She says she has other accommodation available in [withheld].  That accommodation seems to have been suitable and worked well for her two years after her release back in 2016.  It may well be that the [withheld] address is a suitable release residence to go to.
9. We asked Community Corrections what, if any further, parole conditions might be imposed on Ms Maney to try to support her. Community Corrections said they could think of none.  Their view was, understandably, that Ms Maney simply needs to work with her probation officer and her support people to keep out of trouble.  We agree with that approach.  We have tried to stress to Ms Maney that Community Corrections and the Parole Board are not in the business of trying to get people back to prison, they are in the business of trying to support people while they are on parole.  If Ms Maney can change her attitude towards Community Corrections, cooperate with them, work with them cooperatively, and use them in times of stress, then we are sure she will have a much easier road.
10. We therefore refuse the application for recall and Ms Maney can now be released.  We will change one of her conditions, which is she should now reside at [withheld].
11. The standard conditions will continue for life.  The special conditions will continue for 3 years from the date of this reserved decision.
12. The special conditions are:

    (1) To reside at [withheld] or any other address approved in writing by a Probation Officer, and not to move from that address unless you have the prior written approval of a Probation Officer.

    (2) To attend and complete any assessment, programme, counselling or treatment as may be directed by your probation officer to the satisfaction of your probation officer and any service provider.

    (3) To disclose to a probation officer, at the earliest opportunity, details of any intimate relationship which commences, resumes, or terminates.

    (4) Not to undertake any type of employment, paid or voluntary work, education or training, without prior written approval of a Probation Officer.

    (5) Not to contact or otherwise associate with the family of the victim of your offending, directly or indirectly, without prior written approval of a Probation Officer.

    (6) Not to possess, use, or consume alcohol, controlled drugs or psychoactive substances except controlled drugs prescribed for you ·by a health professional.

    (7) Not to contact, or otherwise associate with the Crown witnesses from your murder trial including [withheld] unless you have the prior written consent of a Probation Officer. Contact includes communicating, or attempting to communicate, with a person by any means, such as by telephone or via the Internet, or through a third party.