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

FENTON - Natalie Roselyn - 23/01/2013

FENTON, Natalie Roselyn - 23/01/2013


Parole hearing

Under Section 21 (1) of the Parole Act 2002


Natalie Roselyn FENTON

23 January 2013 at (withheld)

Members of the Board
Hon. J M Frater - Panel Convenor
Assoc. Professor Brindle
Mr N Trendle
Mr T Paul


Decision of the Board

1.                  Natalie Roselyn Fenton was scheduled to be seen today in connection with parole.  However, she elected not to do so.  She signed a waiver.  The difficulty for the Board is that she did not give any reason why she chose not to appear, nor do we have any explanation for her recent lack of co-operation. 

2.                  Although she completed a Level 2 National Certificate in Mechanical Engineering, has maintained a minimum security classification and cleared her IDU status, there have obviously been some issues for and with Ms Fenton in recent months.  This is reflected in reports of variable behaviour and attitude and her expressed wish to stay in the low/medium security unit where she feels comfortable.

3.                  Prior to the hearing, we met with members of the victim’s family.  They told us, as they have so often, of the ongoing hurt caused by the tragic loss of (witheld). They are concerned by the reports of Ms Fenton’s behaviour and wonder whether, as a consequence, she really is ready or wishes to reintegrate into society.  As a consequence, they urged the Board to consider the issue of postponement.

4.                  The Board has the power under section 27 of the Parole Act 2002 to defer the hearing of an offender who is subject to an indefinite sentence, for up to three years from the date on which they were last declined parole, if they are unlikely to be granted parole at their next scheduled Board hearing.

5.                  On the basis of the information we have, Ms Fenton is certainly not seeking parole and it seems that she does not want to move forward.  Nor does she have a release plan.  If these circumstances continue, a postponement order may well be appropriate.

6.                  In the absence of information, we are left to speculate.  That is inappropriate.  We need up-to-date and relevant information.

7.                  Parole is declined.  We give Ms Fenton notice that the issue of postponement will be considered at her next scheduled hearing in 12 months time.  She has the right to consult with and be represented by a lawyer at the hearing and for that person to make oral and/or written submissions on behalf. 

8.                  The Board requests an updated psychological assessment report for the next hearing, recording Ms Fenton’s progress, assessing her risk and her release plan, and making recommendations for her future.  We would also be assisted by meeting with her, or at least receiving a letter from her, setting out her position in relation to the issues before the Board.

Hon M Frater
Panel Convenor

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.