skip to content Goto Site Search List of available accesskeys Goto Homepage - New Zealand Parole Board

DALLY - Paul Joseph - 07/12/2015

 

Parole hearing

Under section 21(1) of the Parole Act 2002

 

Paul Joseph DALLY


Hearing: 7 December 2015 at [Withheld] (on papers)

Members of the Board: 
        Hon. M A Frater – Panel Convenor
        Dr J Skipworth
        Ms K Snook
        Mr B McMurray

In attendance:  [Withheld] (Corrections)

Lawyer:  [Withheld]


DECISION OF THE BOARD


1. 54 year old Paul Joseph Dally has spent 26 years in custody, having pleaded guilty to murdering a 13 year old girl in Lower Hutt in May 1989.  There is no dispute that although he was not convicted of other offences, he also abducted, brutally assaulted and sexually violated his young victim Karla Cardno. 

2. In custody Mr Dally has undertaken extensive one to one psychological counselling and, in 2013, completed the Child Sex Offender Treatment Programme run at [Withheld].  He completed that programme on 21 October 2013 and has remained in the unit ever since.  He has maintained a minimum security classification since 2010, has not been mentioned in any misconduct reports, and has an IDU free status. 

3. When he appeared before the Board in January this year, Mr Dally sought “an indication of the way forward.”  However, the Board made it quite clear that that is not the Board’s responsibility.  How an offender is managed in custody is a matter for the prison authorities.  The Board said that Mr Dally required “slow gradual reintegration.” They expected this would involve a transfer [Withheld] into a mainstream unit. 

4. And that continues to be the recommended pathway for Mr Dally. 

5. In July this year a [Withheld] psychologist, [Withheld], was engaged to review Mr Dally’s risk of re-offending and to make recommendations for his future management.  We have the benefit of his comprehensive report.  In it [Withheld] discusses in some detail Mr Dally’s offending and his explanations for it.  He reports that Mr Dally still thought of his offending as a random act of violence and did not acknowledge the obvious premeditation involved. 

6. Today, Mr Dally acknowledged that his offending was primary sexually motivated, but denied that there was any sadism involved, and again tended to minimise the nature of the sexual offending. 

7. On his behalf, [Withheld] acknowledged that her client would have to move from [Withheld] but asked for the Board’s support for a deferment until after March next year, when he anticipates completing his [Withheld] qualifications. While Mr Dally purports to accept the proposed move, and said that he will do whatever he has to, and is looking forward to returning to society one day, in practice he is clearly reluctant to leave the comfort of his present unit.

8. [Withheld] submitted that all the psychologists have said that no further treatment is required for Mr Dally.  That is not quite correct.  While [Withheld] did not recommend any further individual treatment, that is not because he did not think all risk factors have been addressed.  To the contrary, he considered that Mr Dally has displayed very limited insight into some aspects of his offending, but that he has significant personality traits which are unlikely to change in a genuine manner with further treatment. 

9. We leave it to the prison authorities to implement the recommendations of [Withheld]’s report. 

10. There is no question of parole today or in the foreseeable future.

11. Parole is declined.  Mr Dally’s next hearing will be in November 2017.  We gave him notice that if the Board declines to release him on parole at that stage they will also consider whether or not to make a postponement order of up to 5 years duration.  He will be given formal notice of his rights in relation to that matter prior to the next hearing. 

 


Hon. M A Frater
Panel Convenor