New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Luke Frederick SIBLEY

Hearing: 23 February 2017
At (withheld) Prison by AVL to (withheld) Prison

Members of the Board:

• Hon. JW Gendall QC (Panel Convenor)
• Judge L Bidois
• Mr B McMurray
• Assoc. Prof. P Brinded

Counsel:

• (withheld)

Support Persons:

• (withheld)

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Luke Sibley is serving a life sentence imposed on 3 July 1997 for the murder of a three year old infant girl and the attempted murder of the child’s mother.  He was ordered to serve a minimum non-parole period of 13 years.

2. His parole eligibility date was 7 February 2010 and he has been seen by the Board on several occasions since then, the last being on 22 January 2016.

3. Mr Sibley has a RoC*RoI of .75438 and committed these dreadful crimes when aged 17, that is, 21 years ago.  He has had anxiety and mood difficulties and, the psychologist reports, possible depressive episodes.  He completed the (withheld) core Child Sex Offender Treatment Programme in February 2013 and ended his time with the graduates group in February 2016.  He subsequently had further one-to-one counselling until August 2016. It is pleasing to note that he has recommenced one-to-one psychological counselling in (withheld) Prison from January 2017.  It is envisaged that this will continue for an extended period.

4. Mr Sibley through his counsel realistically does not seek parole today.  His release plan and proposals has now focused on a pathway into the (withheld) area, rather than (withheld).  That is because of the reintegration services available there through (withheld), with the supported accommodation, programmes and facilities that could assist him if and when he was suitable for release.

5. He is just commencing the reintegration phase of his sentence. Although he has done a rehabilitation treatment programme he is yet to have tested the skills that he should have acquired.  He needs an opportunity to do this. A guided release application for temporary leaves has been submitted to the Advisory Committee and, depending on its determination, he may commence reintegration in early March through accompanied releases to (withheld) in (withheld). We would support that happening.

6. He would like the opportunity of transitioning to inner and outer self-care units at (withheld)  and those are matters which will remain for determination by the Advisory Committee but we also endorse them.  He is keen to remain at (withheld)  Prison and to continue with the psychological counselling. He clearly needs assistance for his emotional anxiety and obvious distress over his dreadful crimes.

7. The views of his adult victim and the mother of the child he murdered, were communicated to him in summary form.

8. Release on parole is obviously premature and not sought. When or if it occurs it would not be anywhere in the (withheld) and, of course, that is not his plan.

9. The reintegration activities will unquestionably take quite some time.  As well, the development of a strong prosocial support network in the (withheld)  area will need to be carefully developed Mr Sibley is fortunate to the have the good support of counsel, (withheld)  and others to assist him in what will be a relatively lengthy reintegration process.

10. Accordingly, parole is declined and he will be seen again in 18 months’ time, that is, in the month of August 2018, namely before 31 August of that year.

Hon. JW Gendall QC
Panel Convenor