New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Gustav Otto SANFT

Hearing: 7 April 2020

via teleconference to Auckland Prison

Members of the Board:

• Ms K Snook – Panel Convenor
• Mr P Elenio

Counsel:

• Mr P Hamlin

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. This decision has been issued following consideration of parole in accordance with the provisions of an epidemic management notice issued by the Government on 30 March 2020 and in accordance with section 13A of the Parole Act 2002.  There has been a hearing conducted by a panel convenor and a Board member.  All of the usual material has been considered and there has been a telephone discussion involving the Board, the offender, counsel and the principal corrections officer.
2. Gustav Otto Sanft, 29, appeared for further consideration of parole on a sentence of four years 10 months’ imprisonment for manslaughter, unlawful possession of a rifle and cannabis supply.
3. Mr Sanft has a RoC*RoI of 0.47925, he is on a minimum prison security classification, and has a statutory release date of 30 April 2022.
4. Mr Sanft returned to the Board having now completed all of the rehabilitation that was on his plan including the Medium Intensity Rehabilitation Programme (MIRP) and the Drug Treatment Programme (DTP).  He appears to have done well.
5. Mr Hamlin filed written submissions in advance of the hearing and appeared by telephone as counsel for Mr Sanft.  He referred to the positive features of Mr Sanft’s case but was seeking a stand down of two to three months for Mr Sanft as there is no approved address at this time.
6. Mr Sanft spoke about his high risk situations. They include negative associates and the area that he stays in.  It is clear that South Auckland is a risk for him.  He said that he has matured and has thought a lot about how it was that he put himself into the situation that led to the very tragic death of his daughter.  He said he focused on all the wrong things at that time and not on the dangers including the danger of having a gun in the house.
7. The issue of an address is a difficult one for Mr Sanft given the nature of the offending.  There was a family group conference on 9 December 2019 which went well.  [withheld].
8. Unfortunately although Mr Sanft has had two guided releases, a third that was planned [withheld] was cancelled due to the COVID-19 lockdown.  As noted by Mr Hamlin in his written submissions, this means that [withheld] have not yet been able to provide further input regarding [withheld].  This would also need to be sanctioned by the Family Court.
9. Mr Hamlin referred to an alternative address that has been proposed by Mr Sanft.  That address is [withheld].  However this would meant that Mr Sanft would return, albeit on a temporary basis, to his high risk area of [withheld].  That address has not yet been canvassed by Community Corrections.
10. Mr Hamlin and Mr Sanft conceded that it would be far better for Mr Sanft to reside in [withheld].  Family are looking for support from [withheld] which may be able to provide accommodation.  There is also extra support being provided by the [withheld] reintegration service.
11. Mr Sanft has done well on his sentence however risk remains undue in the absence of a robust release proposal given the nature of Mr Sanft’s offending.  Parole is declined.
12. We will schedule Mr Sanft to be seen again by a Board in August 2020 and no later than the end of that month.  We hope that a further reintegration meeting can be organised where all of those who are providing support can attend and a robust release plan, preferably in [withheld], can be developed for Mr Sanft.