New Zealand Parole Board -

 

Parole hearing

Under section 21(1) of the Parole Act 2002

 

Stacy Dean HOLLYMAN

Hearing: 15 March 2016  via AVL from NZPB Head Office, (withheld)  to  (withheld)  Prison

Members of the Board: 

      Hon. JW Gendall QC – Panel Convenor
      Assoc. Prof P Brinded
      Mr P Elenio
      Ms M Coleman

Lawyer:  (withheld) 

In attendance:  (withheld)  (Corrections Psychologist)

Support People:  (withheld)

 

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Stacy Dean Hollyman is serving a life sentence imposed on 10 April 1992 for the crime of murder when as a 15 year old he murdered his remedial reading teacher.  He also raped her but was not charged with that and indeed the defence advanced at trial was one of provocation. 

2. He now acknowledges that he raped the victim and there is information before us that two weeks prior to the murder he had a teenage fantasy of being involved in rape.

3. Mr Hollyman was released on parole on 10 January 2005 to be recalled 11 months later on 19 December 2005, because of his use of cannabis and alcohol as well as being involved in sexual activity when at (withheld). 

4. He was released on parole again on 29 November 2011 but recalled on 14 June 2012 because of violent behaviour and access to pornographic material in (withheld).

5. When last seen by the Board, on 28 April 2015, it expressed a view that it was essential that Mr Hollyman recommence reintegrative activities.  He was admitted to Self Care and engaged in Release to Work at (withheld).  But he has had significant setbacks. These include being involved in September 2015 at an attempt to bring contraband into prison. He says this arose at the instigation of gang members with whom he associated in Self Care and he had declined involvement. His explanation was implausible. Secondly he was involved in misconducts in November 2015 and February 2016. These showed, at the least, inconsistent and erratic behaviour. 

6. He and his counsel frankly admit that these setbacks have hindered his reintegrative progress. That is obvious as he has been removed from Self Care and is no longer involved in Release to Work.

7. The psychologist reports that Mr Hollyman has inconsistent behaviour and
“Violence propensity remains a factor of concern as suggested by his recent aggressive behaviour, his overall inconsistent emotional and impulse control, the presence of cognitive distortions, and a lack of insight into triggers. It appears that Mr Hollyman has relied primarily on external sources of control for his management, which he had at times blamed when it lacked efficiency”.
and
“Despite extensive treatment work over two decades….Mr Hollyman still displayed a difficulty in self management and some entrenched anti-social systems of response.  This suggests that Mr Hollyman’s functioning and subsequent difficulties in implementing and maintaining change could be related to his personality structure.  In this case, further treatment may need to be oriented towards modifying his unhelpful personality traits and strengthening traits supportive of prosocial behaviours and attitudes”.
Mr Hollyman demonstrated a propensity for engaging in inappropriate sexual contact with relevant others and it appears paramount that he shows his capacity to maintain social professional and personal boundaries specifically with women, he could seek an intimate interest with.”

and  “the changes that were expected after he completed treatment have not been significantly demonstrated across settings yet.”

8. We agree that Mr Hollyman’s pathway forward should be to return to the reintegrative measures, such as Self Care if possible home leaves and Release to Work when he is eligible.  He needs however to make up the ground that he has lost by ensuring that he faithfully complies with prison rules and reduces his security classification, so as to be afforded the privileges of such reintegrative activities. It is solely the prerogative of prison management to decide whether such are afforded to him. 

9. There is much for Mr Hollyman to do and parole must be declined, as he does not meet the statutory criteria for release.  He will be seen again in the week commencing 7 August 2017, or as soon thereafter as is possible. 

 

Hon. JW Gendall QC
Panel Convenor