Mateo NIXON 12/1/2022

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

NIXON, Mateo

Hearing:                                            12 January 2022

At Otago Corrections Facility via MS Teams

Members of the Board: Judge M Crosbie

Ms F Pimm

Ms M Dodd

Counsel:                                            M Bott

In Attendance:                                  [withheld] - Case Manager

Support Persons:                             [withheld]


  1. Mr Nixon is aged 36 and serving a sentence for sexual offending against multiple victims.
  2. Mr Nixon’s parole eligibility date was 9 January 2022 and his statutory release date is 8 July 2028. It follows this is Mr Nixon's first Parole Board hearing.
  3. Mr Nixon was represented by counsel, Mr Bott, who along with [withheld] travelled to Otago Correction Facility to support him.
  4. The Board has taken into account a wide range of information, including Mr Bott’s oral and written submissions, the written submissions of [withheld] and other supporters, together with formal Board and specialist reports. The Board had opportunity to peruse all this information prior to the hearing. The Board’s decision is based on a combination of both what occurred at the hearing and the written information before it.
  5. At the outset, Mr Bott submitted that there were two options for the Board. The first was to grant Mr Nixon early release on parole to reside with [withheld] on the Kapiti Coast on the grounds that he does not present and undue risk to the safety of the community. Alternatively, if the Board declines early release on parole, then Mr Nixon could transfer to the self-care units.
  6. Dealing first with the issue of transfer to self-care, the Board understands that it may be seen as desirable for transfer to the self-care units. Ultimately, however, that is a matter of prison management for the Department of Corrections. The Board does note that one of the Department’s psychologists has made such a recommendation. The Board is unaware of the basis for the Department declining to transfer Mr Nixon as no explanation has been provided.
  7. The Board has had regard to all of the relevant provisions of the Parole Act in terms of the granting of parole and the Board’s jurisdiction. Essentially the Board’s role is to make an assessment of risk with a key provision being that the Board ought not to release an inmate unless satisfied that the inmate does not pose an undue risk to the safety of the community. There will invariably be a risk. The key is whether any such risk is “undue”.
  8. The Board accepts that a prosocial and supportive environment exists for Mr Nixon at [withheld] address. The Board was impressed by the level of support provided both at the hearing and through the submissions.
  9. The Board is also pleased that, despite some early negative incidents and misconducts, Mr Nixon’s behaviour in prison has improved, evidencing perhaps some maturity as far as his sentence is concerned.
  10. The Board also notes that Mr Nixon [withheld].
  11. The Board has had the benefit of a full psychological assessment from a Department of Corrections’ psychologist. The Board notes that there have been some 12 one-on-one psychological sessions with, as noted above, self-care being regarded as the next practical step. The Board also notes that this treatment is said to be continuing and will need to continue for a significant period of time. The psychological report does not support release at this time.
  12. The Board took an opportunity to speak with Mr Nixon about his offending. One of the aspects of the questioning was around Mr Nixon’s view of his offending, there being a reference in the parole report to “preconceived ideas around his offending”. On more than one occasion, Mr Nixon referred to the “permissive” environment that surrounded his offending. More than one Board member questioned him about this. In the Board’s view, Mr Nixon’s responses evidence why further psychological treatment is necessary and is likely to be ongoing for some time. In the Board’s view, several of Mr Nixon’s responses evidence a continued lack of insight into his offending, particularly around issues of consent.
  13. The Board received written submissions from several of Mr Nixon’s victims. Those submissions were withheld from Mr Nixon. The tenor of the submissions was shared with him, being that they do not support Mr Nixon’s release on parole at this time.
  14. The Board notes in addition to the above comments that the tenor of the psychological report is that following further treatment there needs to be slow reintegration. The combination of the Board’s observations and the content of the psychological report leads the Board to the conclusion that Mr Nixon is only partially treated, that further work needs to be undertaken by him, and that his risk at this time is undue.
  15. It follows from the above that at this time the Board cannot be satisfied that Mr Nixon does not pose an undue risk to the safety of the community and declines his release on parole.

Judge Crosbie

Panel Convenor