Application to consider the setting of special conditions for Emended Supervision Order Under section of the Parole Act 2002 between li'olalrlon Applicant and Tony Douglas ROBERTSON Respondent Hearing: 13 June 2014 at Members of the Board: Judge Bidois (Panel Convener) Mr Burns Ms Nathan Counsel for Applicant: I in Attendance: DECISION OF THE BOARD 1. Tony Robertson is before the Board today for consideration of, the irnposition of special conditions sought by Community Probation Service on an ESO granted in the High Court on 19 February for 10 years to commence on Sunday 15 June. 3. Mr Robertson seeks an adjournment as his counsel is not available. PO Box 939, Wellington Telephone (04) 495 0400 Facsimile (04) 495 0401 0800 PAROLE 0000 727 653 10. 2 This matter was first called on this matter on Wednesday 11 June. The Board had received a memorandum from his counsel seeking for an adjournment as counsel was in the Court of Appeal and could not attend the hearing. There was an error in the memorandum in that counsel believed that the matter was to be called on Thursday 12 June and In fact it was Wednesday 11 June. An adjournment had been administratively granted with no date being fixad as the matter was going to be called on Wednesday 11 June at which time a new date was to be set. The Board rescheduled the matter for today because the ESO commences on Sunday, some two days away. and the Board was of the view that if any special conditions were to be imposed then they needed to attach to the BBQ on commencement data. On Wednesday Mr Robertson complained that he had not been served with this application and Community Probation Service were directed to serve him. Mr Robertson this morning acknowledges having received the papers yesterday. That is a totaliy unsatisfactory position. The Probation Service have been aware of this application, it being filed on their behalf, which is dated 4 April but filed with the Parole Board office on 6 May. As we understand the position ounsel for Robertson, was in a trial earlier this week and was in the Court of Appeal yesterday. Messages have been left with his office advising of today?s hearing. Mr Robertson himself has tried to contac- but to no avail. We have not receIVed any notification as to whether-knOWs about today?s appearance or was not going to attend for some other reason. The Board has determined to proceed with the application. Mr Robertson is clearly prejudiced by the absence of counsel and his inability to discuss the apptication with his counsel prior to today?s hearing, he having only been served yesterday. Mr Robertson chose to disengage from the process today and left the hearing. The Board has an application to impose 9 special conditions. The Board is satisfied that the proposed special conditions are appropriate and they?are accordingly imposed as follows: (1) To reside at an address approved by a Probation Officer and not move from that or any other subsequently approved address without the prior written permission of a Probation Officer. (2) Not to stay away overnight or move from that address or subsequent approvad address without the priorwritten approval of the Probation Officer. (3) To comply with the requirements of residential restrictions, submit to electronic monitoring as directed by the Probation Officer and to adhere to the conditions (5) 3 and requirements of such monitoring. a) To be present at your address from Monday to Friday, exoept school holidays and public holidays, between the hours of 08.15am to 9.30am and from 2.30pm to 4.30pm, unless you have the approval from a Probation Officer to be away from the address, Not to enter any school, playground, park/reserve or place where children are likely to congregate, unless under the direct supervision of an adult approved in writing by the Probation Officer. To submit to electronic monitoring as directed by the Probation Officer in order to monitor your compliance with any condition(s) relating to whereabouts and, if issued a mobile device by the Department, to carry it and keep it charged and turned on at all times and to answer it when called, for the purpose of communicating with the Probation Officer. To comply with the requirements of electronic monitoring and provide access to the approved residence to the Probation Officer and representatives of the monitoring company, for the purpose of maintaining the electronic monitoring equipment as directed by the Probation Officer. Not to engage in any employment, including unpaid or voluntary work, without the prior written approval of a Probation Officer. Not use or possess alcohol, intoxicating spirits, prescription medications (unless prescribed by a licensed health care practitioner) or illicit drugs (including legal highs) for the duration of your Extended Supervision Order. Not to attend or participate in any community and or sporting group including Church services unless you have the prior written approval of a Probation Officer. Jutgzg Bidois Panel ConVenor NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BOARD Conditions hearing Under section 18(2) (8RD) of the Parole Act 2002 Tony Douglas ROBERTSON Hearing: Cir 013 Judge Saunders (Panel Convener) Ms Hughes Mr Christensen Members of the Board: OF THE BOARD 1. Mr Robertson is appearing before the Board for final release conditions to be considered. 2. Mr Robertson still maintains that he has been wrongly convicted of the offences for which he was sentenced to a total of eight years? imprisonment. 3. Mr Robertson?s final release date is shown as 15 December 2013. We understand that that is iikely to come back into an earlier date in December, particularly in relation to Christmas remission. 4. Mr Robertson has announced to the Board that it is now- not - that he intends to return to live in when he is released. His parents, namely - is apparently arriving in New Zealand on 15 November and intends to source accommodation for him in- 5. Mr Robertson has been through the conditions with the Board and apart from indicating that he was uncomfortable about the idea of the GPS monitoring system and having to undergo a drug and alcohol programme, he was in general agreement with the conditions. PO Box 939, Weilington Telephone (04) 495 8400 Facsimile (04) 495 8401 0800 PAROLE 0800 727 653 2 The Board has been told that he does not consider that he has an issue with drugs and alcohol and believes that it is not necessary for him to undergo a full programme. The Board has amended that condition to require him to undertake an assessment for alcohol and drug treatment and thereafter to undertake such treatment or counseiling as may be determined from that assessment. The other condition which we amend is condition number 11. He is simpiy not to possess alcohol or illicit drugs, including cannabis. The other conditions will be imposed as recommended and these will be for six months beyond his statutory release date. The following Special Conditions are imposed: (1) To attend and complete an appropriate alcohol and drug treatment programme to the satisfaction of your Probation Officer and programme provider. Details of the appropriate programme to be determined by your Probation Officer. (2) To undertake and complete appropriate treatment/counselling to the satisfaction of your Probation Officer and treatment provider. The details of the counselling or treatment to be determined by your Probation Officer. (3) To attend for a assessment. Attend and complete any treatment/counselling as recommended by the assessment to the satisfaction of your Probation Officer and treatment provider. (4) To reside at an address approved by a Probation Officer and not to move from that address without the prior written approval of a Probation Officer. (5) Not to stay away overnight, between the hours of 8.00pm and 6.00am, from your residence without prior written approval of a Probation Officer. (6) Not to undertake any employment or training (paid or unpaid) without the prior written approval of your Probation Officer. (7) Youare not to have contact or otherwise associate with the victim{s) of your offending, directly or indirectly, unless you have the prior written consent of your Probation Officer. (8) Not to enter any school, playground, park/reserve or place where children area are likely to congregate, unless under the direct supervision of an adult approved in writing by your Probation Officer. (9) (10) (ii) (12) (13) - dge Saunders nel Convenor 3 You are not to associate or otherwise have contact with any person under 16 years of age unless under the direct supervision of an informed adult who has been approved by your Probation Officer. An informed adult is a person over the age of 20 years who is fully aware of your previous offending and high risk situations, and in the opinion of your Probation Officer will not support or collude with any further offending. To only engage in any community or sporting clubs/groups with the prior written approval of your Probation Officer. Not use or possess alcohol, prescription medications (unless prescribed by a licensed health care practitioner) or illicit drugs including cannabis. To submit to electronic monitoring in the form of Global Positioning System GPS) technology as directed by a Probation Officer in order to monitor your compliance with any condition(s) relating to your whereabouts and, if issued a mobiie cell phone device by the Department or if using your own device, to carry and keep it charged at all times for the purpose of communications with the Probation Officer. To comply with the requirements of electronic monitoring, and provide access to the approved residence to a Probation Officer and representatives of the monitoring company, for the purpose of maintaining the electronic monitoring equipment as directed by a Probation Officer. Review a You may appiy 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: Failed to comply with procedures in the Parole Act 2002; or Made an error of law; or Failed to comply with Board policy resulting in unfairness to the offender; or Based its decision on erroneous or Irrelevant information that was material to the decision reached; or Acted without jurisdiction. - To apply for a review you must write to the Board within 28 days of Its decision stating which of the abova ground(s) you consider to be relevant in your case and giving reasons why you believe that ground(s) applies. a Reviews are considered on the papers only. There is no hearing in respect of your Review Application. NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BOARD Parole hearing Under section 21 (1) of the Parole Act 2002 Tony Douglas ROBERTSON Hearing: 1 Februar 2013 at Members of the Board: Judge Mather (Panel Convenor) Pritchard Mr Bailey DECISION OF THE BOARD 1. Mr Robertson waived his appearance before the Board. 2. He is nearing the end of a sentence of eight years. This was imposed for a range of quite serious offending including abduction of a girl under the age of 12 for sex, indecent assault, robbery and kidnapping. A cumulative sentence of six months was added for assault with intent to injure. 3. Mr Robertson has completed no programmes in prison. The only intervention has been counselling of which he had seven cne?to-one sessions last year. He appears to have gained something from that. 4. He is rated maximum security and is currently in bloc'k'f He is not working. 5. He earlier indicated he expected to serve his full sentence and that will, indeed, be the case. 6. The sentencing notes refer to predatory approaches to children in the street which could have resulted in a sentence of preventive detention. He has not admitted his offending and shown no remorse. He remains at high risk. 7. The Probation Service should consider whether an application should be made for an Extended Supervision Order. Errori Unknown document property name. PO Box 939, Wellington Telephone (04) 495 8400 Facsimile (04) 495 8401 0800 PAROLE 0800 727 653 2 8. Parole is declined. Mr Robertson is to appear before the Board in October 2013 for the fixing of release conditions. Judge Mather Panel Convener 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: 0 a) Failed to comply with procedures in the Parole Act 2002; or 13) Made an error of iaw;-or 0) Failed to compiy 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 Appiicatlon. Hearing: 23 Members of the Board: NEW ZEAIAND PAROLE BOARD Parole hearing Under section 21 (1) of the Parole Act 2002 Tony Douglas ROBERTSON Ferar 212 Judge Macdonaid (Panel Convener) Mr A Ritchie Mr Christensen DECISION OF THE BOARD Mr Robertson is serving an eight year prison sentence for abduction and related offences. A minimum non~paroie period of five years, six months was imposed. His sentence commenced in October 2006. He became eligible for parole in December 2010 and he has a statutory release date in December 2013. Mr Robertson is aged 24, with a three page list of convictions. His RoO*Roi is 0.77. He first appeared before the Board in March 2011 when parole was declined. Since then there have been two misconducts, one of which was possession of a weapon in his cell in October 2011. We note that he refused to participate in the preparation of the parole assessment report and he went so far as to say that he would go out on his statutory release date. As for rehabilitative programmes, he has not attended any to date and he specifically refused to undertake the Kia Marama Programme. He has a high security rating. He has no release proposal. We also take into account that he has signed a waiver indicating that he did not wish to appear before the Board. Having regard to all those-circumstances, we take the view that he poses an undus risk to the safety of the community and parole is declined. Judge Macdonaid Panel Convanor PO Box 939, Wellington Telephone_{p_4_) 3938109 facsimile 10:1) 495 8401 Review You may apply for a revlew 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 ofiaw; or o) Failed to comply with Board policy resulting in unfairness to the offender; or d) Based its decision on erroneoua or Irrelevant Information that was material to the decision reached; or e) Aoted 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. Hearing: Members of the card: NEW ZEAIAND PAROLE BOARD Parole hearing Under section 21 (1) of the Parole Act 2002 ROBERTSON Tony Douglas Judge E. Paul Panel Convener Ms Ft Pritchard Ms Pakura DECISION OF THE BOARD Tony Douglas Robertson appears before the Board today for a parole hearing. Mr Robertson responded well and was courteous during the course of our discussions in this hearing today. Having said that, in terms of the matters that this Board must consider Mr Robertson has yet to complete any programmes, in particular, programmes recommended for him such as the Kia Marama Programme. He has no appropriate accommodation at this time. He is serving a sentence for serious offending and has a high RoC*Ftol. He has recently reduced his security classification to high/medium. This Board would encourage Mr Robertson to continue to behave in a manner which will go towards the reduction of his security classifications for the future. At this time, however, given the matters that the Board has referred to, in particular, the lack of programmes or any accommodation we are satisfied Mr Robertson still presents an undUe risk to the safety of the community and accordingly we must decline parole for Mr Robertson today. PO Box 939, Wellington Telephone (04) 495 8400 Facsimlle (04) 495 8401 0800 PAROLE 0000 727 653 4. That is the Board?s decision. Mc? Judge Paul Panel Converter ?eview 9 You may apply for a review of the Board's decision under section 67(1). The only grounds under which you may make an applicatidn for review are that the Board. in making its decision: a) Felted to comply with procedures in the Parole Act 2002; or 13) Made an error of law; or 0) Failed to comply with Board policy resulting in unfairness to the offender; or d) Based its decisidn on erroneous or Irrelevant information that Was material is the decision reached; or e) Aoted without Jurisdiction. To apply for a review you must write fo the Board within 28 days of its decision stating which of the some gr0und(s) you consider to be relevant in your case and giving reasons why you beiiraVe that groundis) appilss. Reviews are considered on the papers only. There is no hearing in respeoi of your Review Appiication. {ref NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BGARD Parole hearing Under section 21 (1) of the Parole Act 2002 Teny Douglas Hearing: 14. December 2010 . At Members of the Board: Judge Ft Callander - Panel Convenor Mr Haklaha Ms Hughes DECISION OF THE BOARD We had quite a detailed discussion with Mr Robertson. He tells us that his bad behaviour in prison is as a result of him being frustrated and angry at having been convicted of an offence which he did not commit. While he accepts that he has committed offences of violence, he quite simply says he did not commit the significant index offence of abduction for the purpose of sex. That was the offence for which he received a seven year, six month sentence. He tells us that the evidence at Court was that DNA that was taken from the victim was shown to not be his DNA. He also says that the victim identified another man as being the offender. Unfortunately, we are gradually hampered by the absence of the Judge?s sentencing notes or any of the appeal decisions. He tells us that he has been to the Appeal Court twice and has been rejected twice but we do not know why that was the case. He does say that as a result of his Whanganui Queen?s Counsel withdrawing at the last moment, he actually had to make submissions to the Court of Appeal on his own behalf. That would not have been an impressive appearance given our assessment of his ability to communicate. PO Box 939, Wellington Telephone (04) 495 3400 Facsimile (04) 495 8401 0800 PAROLE 0800 727 653 2 Of interest to the Board was the report we received at the Board today from the Principal Corrections Officer. She says there has been a very major change in his behaviour and attitude. She says he has stopped further incidents. There have been no misconducts in the last several months. Prior to that his behaviour was appalling and he was getting into all sorts of trouble with the prison. He was understandably considered to be an young man with both bad behaviour and nonwoompiiant attitudes and was a clear major risk to the safety of the community. The Board is mindful that his risk assessment is 0.77495. We ask for the Judge?s sentencing notes and details of his appeals be prepared and presented to the Board when we will see him in March 2011. Currently he is clearly an undue risk to the safety of the community. We do however need a lot more information to determine whether there is any merit at all in what he tells us about his sexual offending. aw Judge Fi Caliander Panel Convener 0 Review You may apply tor 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) Felted to ccmpiy with procedures In the Parote Act 2002; or bi Made an error of law; or 0) Failed to comply with Board policy resulting in to the offender; or cl) Based its decision on erroneous or irrelevant inicrmation 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 oi the above ground(s) you consider to be releVant in your case and giving reasons why you belieVe that groundis) applies. Reviews are considered on the papers only. There is no hearing in respect of your Review Application.