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

MALSEN - Allen ( aka Alan Gilbert Wilson) - 17/07/15

 

Application to vary condition(s) of Extended Supervision Order

 

Under section 107O(1) of the Parole Act 2002

 

 

 

Offender :                                          Allen MALSEN

 

 

Hearing:                                            14 July 2015

                                                           Via Video Conference between [withheld]

 

Decision Issued:                             17 July 2015   

 

Members of the Board:                Alan Ritchie (Panel Convenor)

                                                           Ms S Pakura

                                                           Mr M Christensen

 

In Atendance:                                 [withheld]

                                                          

 

 

DECISION OF THE BOARD

 

 

1.            This decision is issued on 17 July 2015 following the Board?s consideration (on 14 July ) of an application under section 107 of the Parole Act 2002 to vary the special conditions of an extended supervision order (the ESO) relating to Allen Malsen (also known as Alan Gilbert Wilson).

2.            The index offending was rape and more than 20 other serious instances of sexual offending against children both male and female.

3.            On 16 March 2005 Mr Malsen became subject to the ESO for 10 years, it having been made by the Christchurch District Court on 9 November 2004.

4.            Since then Mr Malsen has been convicted for various other offences including fraud, robbery and property offending along with convictions for the breach of the ESO.

5.            He is currently serving a sentence of one year six months for various breaches of the ESO committed in 2013, 2014 and 2015.  The sentence was imposed on 6 June 2015.

6.            The ESO has been subject to a number of suspensions pursuant to section 107P(1)(a), 107Q(2) and reactivation under section 107P(2)(a).  The ESO is currently suspended given the recent imprisonment.

7.            We are told that the imprisonment will expire on 14 October 2015 and that the expiry date of the ESO will be some time in August 2019.  Those dates are subject to checking.

8.            In the application the Department has made reference to Mr Malsen's behaviour and compliance with the ESO as extremely concerning.  It says that he has failed to acknowledge risk factors and is becoming increasingly resistant and evasive when dealing with the Department.  We are told that he continues to disregard his special conditions and places himself in high-risk situations.  He exhibits an incapacity to manage his own risk.

9.            The Department says that Mr Malsen has accessed children by forming relationships with their caregivers as outlined in his previous history and current non-compliance.  A condition for Mr Malsen not to enter into or continue any romantic intimate sexual relationship without written approval was sought to try to counter a pattern of deception and a failure to disclose relationship status to the Probation Officer.

10.         The Department pointed, in particular, to significant concern over the formation of a relationship with a woman who managed the childcare centre and a condition preventing Mr Malsen from entering or loitering around childcare centres was sought.

11.         Also sought was a requirement that Mr Malsen submit to electronic monitoring under GPS.  The Department says this would provide a greater level of oversight of Mr Malsen?s whereabouts and the system management of his risk.  For the same reason there is a curfew suggested as well.

12.         In addition the Department has asked for a condition requiring Mr Malsen to surrender any Internet capable device for the purpose of analysis.  This is supplementary to a current condition which restricts his possession of Internet capable devices.

13.         Mr Malsen was represented by [withheld].  There was opposition to the proposal for electronic monitoring.  [withheld] said it would not be effective in the mitigation of risk.  Mr Malsen had not sexually offended since the age of 15.  Furthermore the offending was with children known to him or close to him.  [withheld] acknowledged that the Department was right to have concern about proximity with children but there was a separate condition to deal with that.

14.         [withheld] believed that the some of the Department?s proposals were punitive rather than protective as far as the community is concerned.  It was apparent from our files and from our discussion with Mr Malsen and the Department today that there is a somewhat strained relationship.  Mr Malsen has his own explanations for all of that and yet he does acknowledge that he pleaded guilty to the recent charges which does illustrate a propensity to place himself in risky situations.

15.         [withheld] was concerned that the condition about intimate relationships was intolerably vague and needed to be reworded.

16.         [withheld] also had concern about the question of Internet capable devices given the development of technology over the years since the restriction on having such devices was imposed by the Board in 2010.

17.         We have no doubt at all that Mr Malsen has been something of a handful for Community Corrections.  On the other hand if the Department is able to provide a different platform for the management of the situation then so much the better.

18.         Our task is to assess the proposals and make reasonable sense of them in accordance with our view of the particular risk attaching to Mr Malsen.

19.         In that regard we are not satisfied that the circumstances of the index offending are such as to justify the imposition of electronic monitoring.  We are satisfied that the risk can be adequately managed through the whereabouts condition to which Mr Malsen has not raised objection and with reworded conditions relating to intimate relationships.  We also believe that the issue of Internet capable devices is sufficiently covered by the requirement to surrender any devices for the purpose of analysis and we will not be continuing with the condition restricting the possession of such devices.

20.         We record that in coming to our decision we have had regard to an Intelligence Report, a copy of which was supplied to [withheld].

21.         We have also had regard to [withheld]?s firm submissions in relation to Mr Malsen?s deceptive and difficult behaviour evidenced by his history of breaches and offending since the imposition of the ESO.

22.         Nevertheless we are satisfied that the conditions we are now resetting will be sufficient to contain the risk in an appropriate manner.  If the Department has any further cause for concern then it is open to it to apply for a further variation.  Likewise it is open to Mr Malsen to apply.

23.         Mr Malsen will continue to be subject to the standard conditions set out in section 107JA of the Parole Act 2002 and the following special conditions which we impose in accordance with section 107K of the Act with all conditions continuing for the duration of the order.

(1)          To reside at an address as approved by the Probation Officer and not to move from that address without the prior written approval of the Probation Officer.

(2)          Not to stay away overnight from your approved address between 10.00 pm and 6.00am daily except with the prior written approval of your Probation Officer.

(3)          Not to enter or loiter nearby any day-care centre, kindergarten, pre-school or school, excluding tertiary Institutions.

(4)          Not to associate or otherwise have contact with, directly or indirectly, any person under the age of 16 years unless another adult, over the age of 18 years who has the prior written approval of your Probation Officer, is present.

(5)          Not to associate or otherwise have contact with the victims of your offending, directly or indirectly, unless you have the prior written consent of your Probation Officer

(6)          To surrender any internet capable device in your possession or control to a Probation Officer or their agent (Police) for the purpose of analysing it.

(7)          To advise the Probation Officer should you enter into any intimate relationship likely or intended to be enduring in nature.

(8)          To undertake and complete treatment with the Department of Corrections Psychological Services to the satisfaction of the Probation Officer and Psychologist. To attend every appointment at the time and location given.

(9)          To attend, participate in and adhere to the rules of the [withheld] relapse prevention group to the satisfaction of the Probation Officer and the Group Facilitator(s).

(10)        To attend an assessment for the [withheld] programme to the satisfaction of the [withheld] programme facilitator and the Probation Officer.

(11)        Not to engage in any vocational training/employment (paid or unpaid) without , the prior written approval of the Probation Officer (not to be unreasonably withheld).

 

 

Alan Ritchie

Panel Convenor