New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

William Maaky OJ HINES

Hearing: 6 November 2019

at Manawatu Prison

Members of the Board:

• Mr J Thomson – Panel Convenor
• Dr S Davis
• Mr G Crowley

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. William Maaky OJ Hines is serving a sentence of four years’ imprisonment and was scheduled to appear today for the consideration of release on parole.  He has provided us with a written waiver stating that he does not wish to appear because, “I believe the New Zealand Parole Board will fail me at my next appearance”.
2. Mr Hines’ sentence was imposed for drug-related matters and also the possession of a firearm and ammunition.  He pleaded guilty after the Court provided a sentence indication.
3. Mr Hines has a RoC*Rol score of 0.450.  The list of convictions is four pages long with sentences of imprisonment being imposed on him since 2004.  There are two previous convictions for drug-related matters including one for the supply of methamphetamine.
4. The last appearance before the Board was on 5 November 2018.  Again, Mr Hines chose not to appear.  He indicated that he had been charged with murder and that this needed to be resolved before he could appear before the Board.  The Board noted that the charge had been withdrawn, and that Mr Hines was scheduled to undertake the Medium Intensity Rehabilitation Programme and the Alcohol and Other Drug Intensive Programme.
5. Since then Mr Hines has completed both these programmes and seems to have done reasonably well.  The most recent of the programmes was completed in July this year.
6. Mr Hines was to have taken part in a reintegration meeting with [withheld] on 14 October this year.  However, the application was declined by the Department of Corrections due to recent events in [withheld] where the meeting was to take place and gang activity in the area.  It was felt by those making the decision that it was inadvisable for the outing to take place.
7. In the written material we have the proposal for release is that Mr Hines would live with [withheld].  This is the family home where he spent much of his childhood.  The family believe that Mr Hines is respectful to [withheld] who is the sole occupant of the address at present.  The parole assessment report describes the police concerns and also an email outlining the concerns.  Unfortunately, the email which is described has not been provided to the Board.
8. Mr Hines is frustrated at the attitude taken by police, noting that they do not take into account the things that he has learned on the programmes that he has undertaken in prison.  However, the attitude of the police to the address has been sufficient to change the attitude of Community Corrections to the suitability of the address and they now believe that it is not appropriate for him to live there.
9. The Board is aware that Mr Hines has now completed appropriate rehabilitative intervention while in prison.  He has proposed accommodation which has been found unsuitable by the police, but we have not been provided with the full information as to why they have taken this view.  It is unfortunate that Mr Hines has chosen not to attend the Board today to make his case as to why this might be a suitable address.
10. Without Mr Hines’ input there remains a degree of uncertainty about the address and therefore the Board cannot be satisfied that he no longer poses an undue risk to the safety of the community.
11. Parole is declined and Mr Hines will be scheduled to be seen again by the Board in March next year and no later than 31 March 2020.  This will be either for the setting of final conditions or a short period on parole.