ANGLEM - Simon Anthony - 20/09/10
Parole hearingUnder section 21(1) of the Parole Act 2002
Simon Antony ANGLEM
20 September 2010
at [Withheld] Prison
Members of the Board:
Judge D Saunders (Panel Convenor)
Mr J Thomson
Ms J Donaldson
DECISION OF THE BOARD
Simon Antony Anglem is appearing before the Board having just reached his parole eligibility date of 5 September 2010. The Board saw Mr Anglem at [Withheld] Prison as he was transferred here after the Christchurch earthquake of 4 September 2010.
Prior to meeting with Mr Anglem the Board had met with the victims of his offending and, in the course of the Board interview, he was given a summary of the views of the victims about the prospect of his release at this stage of his sentence. The Board recognises that his sentence was reviewed by the Court of Appeal and is now one of seven years, five months with a final release date of 13 August 2015.
Mr Anglem has not yet been able to undertake a programme within the prison although he says he is scheduled to start one in January at [Withheld] Prison. The Board has no information about that at this stage and, in any event, is of the view that Mr Anglem is not yet ready for release.
The Board acknowledged his letter in which he said he took full responsibility for his actions on the night which he described as cowardly and selfish and which he would always regret. He does express in the letter a degree of remorse for what he has done, not only to his own family but to the victims’ family. Mr Anglem is aware that there may in due course be a vehicle for him to express that apology to the victims but that, at this stage, they are not interested in seeing or meeting with him.
Mr Anglem is aware that any release in the future may need to involve an accommodation proposal which has him living away from the immediate South Canterbury/Timaru area. He has been made aware of the depth of concern about this particular offence in the Timaru community and that his proposal contained in the letter whereby he undertake a polytech course at another city and obtain an apprenticeship there would be a more meaningful response to a release on parole, than to be seeking to return to the Timaru area.
Mr Anglem at this stage has still not addressed fully the causes of his offending. The Board is aware of the psychological report that was prepared and it is clear that there is substantial work still to be done before he will have reduced the risk which is described in the report.
Accordingly, parole is declined today. Mr Anglem will be seen again in the usual 12-month cycle with no doubt an update as to what programmes have been addressed. He is made aware though that simply completing a programme is not in itself an answer to a release on parole.
Judge D Saunders
• 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:
a) Failed to comply with procedures in the Parole Act 2002; or
b) Made an error of law; or
c) Failed to comply 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 Application.