New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Peter James LINTON

Hearing: 7 April 2022

at Rolleston Prison via MS Teams

Members of the Board: Ms K Snook – Panel Convenor

Major C Roberts

Mr A Hackney

Counsel:                                            Anselm Williams

In Attendance:                                  [withheld] - Case Manager

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Peter James Linton, 76, appeared for further consideration of parole in relation to a sentence of eight years three months’ imprisonment for serious sexual offending.  The most recent offending was in 2007.
2. Mr Linton is on a minimum prison security classification and has a statutory release date of 16 June 2022.  He has completed work with a psychologist on his offending.  There are three booster sessions recommended with a psychologist.  One of those will occur prior to release and two in the community.  Mr Linton spoke today about what he has learned from his work with a psychologist and said it has been of benefit to him.
3. The key issue is the question of appropriate accommodation.  As we understand it Mr Linton has now been accepted into the [withheld].  There is no confirmed bed available today but there is one that is likely in the very near future.
4. Mr Williams appeared for Mr Linton.  He said his instructions were that Mr Linton does not want parole.  He wants to remain in prison because he wants the stability of the health care that he is currently being provided with via the prison.
5. The concern with that is that when Mr Linton reaches his statutory release date there may not be a bed available for him [withheld].  He is assessed now as requiring [withheld].
6. We spent a lot of the hearing talking with Mr Linton about what his key concerns are.  He said that he is worried about security at the [withheld].  He has had threats to his life and is worried that it is not a secure enough facility.  He also is concerned that he is not able to have his dog live with him there.  The dog has been looked after in the community by [withheld].
7. The Case Manager also spent some time talking to Mr Linton about what is planned to alleviate his concerns.  Now that there is a potential bed available at the [withheld], she said that she would get the prison doctor to speak to Mr Linton.  The plan would be that there would be a reintegration meeting so that there is a clear handover arranged for medical care for Mr Linton.  A representative from the [withheld] can also attend that meeting so that Mr Linton could talk through his concerns.  The psychologist could also attend as well as other supporters including [withheld].
8. For today, in the absence of a confirmed release address, parole is declined. Risk remains undue.  However, we are concerned that Mr Linton may reach his statutory release date without an appropriate [withheld] being available for him.  We will schedule him to be seen again by a Board in May 2022 and no later than the end of that month.
9. In the period between now and that next hearing, we ask that further work be undertaken with Mr Linton by his Case Manager and the prison health team to ensure that his concerns are addressed.  He indicated that he would be making enquiries to see if another [withheld] may be available.  We ask that he be given assistance to do this.
10. There should also be the reintegration meeting referred to above between now and that next Board date so that the matters referred to in this decision can be discussed and hopefully resolved.  A guided release to the [withheld] may also be possible and is supported.
11. If the reintegration meeting has been held, and Mr Linton is motivated to reside at the [withheld] that has been identified for him, and there is a bed available between now and the next scheduled Board hearing, the question of a release for a short period of time on parole for Mr Linton can be referred to this same Board on the papers.
12. Otherwise the Board will see Mr Linton for the further consideration of parole in May 2022.