New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing
Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Stayz Te Atamira RAUKAWA

Hearing: 20 April 2017 At [withheld]

Members of the Board:

• Judge L Bidois – Panel Convenor
• Ms M More
• Mr P Elenio

Support Persons:

• [withheld]

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Stayz Raukawa is for reconsideration of parole.  He is serving three and a half years for multiple sexual offending.  His SED was 20 October 2015, his PED was 9 November 2016, his SRD is 19 December 2018.  Mr Raukawa is today supported by his [withheld].

2. Mr Raukawa came before the Board in November last year.  The Board had met with the victim who opposed parole.  [Withheld].  At that time he was untreated.  Parole was declined but he was rescheduled for this sitting of the Board with a psychological report being called for.

3. A psychological report has now been obtained.  It assesses Mr Raukawa as a low risk reoffender but recommended that he engage in the [withheld] Programme to address his sexual offending.

4. Mr Raukawa is motivated to do the [withheld] Programme.  He has previously completed [withheld] Programme which he found very helpful.  It has motivated him to address issues and increased his insight.  Mr Raukawa has previously completed the [withheld] and [withheld] programmes but was not assessed as needing [withheld].  His PCO described a well mannered, polite inmate who was the number [withheld] worker and has excellent [withheld] support.  Both his [withheld] and the PCO described Mr Raukawa as growing as a person and who has been very humbled by his offending.

5. Mr Raukawa does not have a suitable address to go to.  His [withheld] address in [withheld] was assessed as being unsuitable because of the composition of occupants, principally being [withheld] who is now living [withheld].  Mr Raukawa’s [withheld] has an address in [withheld] which is available but was not assessed.  The family are at the present time looking for other suitable accommodation.

6. There is 20 months to go on Mr Raukawa’s sentence.  His PCO was unable to tell us when Mr Raukawa would be transferred to [withheld] to undertake the [withheld] Programme.  Two inmates left yesterday for that programme and so one assumes that Mr Raukawa is not on the next or current intake.  That is going to cause issues downstream as to the availability of the programme.

7. Mr Raukawa has reflected on his behaviour and accepts that what he did was wrong.  [Withheld]

8. At the present time Mr Raukawa does not have a suitable address so poses an undue risk to the community.  Mr Raukawa will be rescheduled to the week commencing 19 June, preferably 21 to 23 June 2017.

9. At that hearing there will be 2 main issues. Firstly a timeframe as to whether Mr Raukawa will be able to do the [withheld]. If so he accepts responsibility to do the programme. If not, the second issue is whether he has approved accommodation. If so a consideration of parole can be undertaken on merit.

10. Mr Raukawa’s [withheld] will also work with [withheld] to arrange sex offending treatment in the community if unable to complete in prison.

Judge L Bidois
Panel Convenor