New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Graham John PHILIP

Hearing: 18 June 2024

at Tongariro Prison

Members of the Board:

Ms M Coleman – Panel Convenor

Mr L Tawera

Ms M Kleist

In Attendance: [withheld] - Case Manager

Support Persons: [withheld]

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Graham John Philip, who is 63, appeared before the Board today for further consideration of parole on a three year one-month sentence for sabotage (x6), enters onto agricultural land with intent to commit an offence, and failing to carry out obligations in relation to a computer search.
2. The sabotage was of Transpower infrastructure with the cost of repairing the damage likely to have exceeded $1.25 million.  According to the Judge, Mr Philip offended in order to create a discussion about the Pfizer vaccine which he believes was detrimental.
3. Mr Philip’ statutory release date is 8 January 2025.
4. Mr Philip was last before the Board in December in 2023.  Mr Philip told the Board that he had not read [withheld] psychological report that the Board had before it and also outlined his personal reasons for distrusting professionals from government agencies.  The Board said that it was disappointing that Mr Philip had not read the report and urged him to do so.  It further said that if he does read it, he would have a better understanding of the sorts of matters the Board would expect to be addressed in an effective safety plan.
5. Mr Philip asked the Board if he could engage a private psychologist and was advised that he could.  The Board also advised Mr Philip that any report that he provided would be taken into account by the Board, although it would not replace [withheld] report but rather sit alongside it.  The last Board did not consider that the second version of Mr Philip’s safety plan remedied the deficiencies in the original plan.
6. The last Board understood that Mr Philip has a strong concern that obtaining a psychological report seemed to indicate that he has been labelled “mentally unwell”.  The Board said that was not its view and that was not what [withheld] said.  That was an issue that was raised again today by Mr Philip, as was the issue of his distrust of people employed by, or working for, the Department of Corrections.
7. It is fair to say that matters do not seem to have progressed from where they were at the time that Mr Philip last appeared before the Board in December 2023.  We, like the last Board, are concerned at the description of Mr Philip’s risk which was are summarised at [40] of [withheld] report in the following terms:

[withheld] It is the writer’s opinion that the likelihood of Mr Philip to engage in direct violent offending in future is low (though not totally excluded), but there is a reasonable and significant risk that firstly Mr Philip could take further disruptive action to force others to listen to his views (especially when he feels unheard voicing his ideas amid rules and regulations, which he disagrees with, being imposed by authorities/governments), and secondly that he could attempt to influence others to extreme action by spreading his extremist/fundamentalist views, including possible misinformation. [withheld]

8. Unsurprisingly, that view of his risk leaves the Board far short of being satisfied that Mr Philip’s risk is not undue.  We urged Mr Philip to consider presenting his own psychological report to the Board that might present a different picture.  Whether he does so is a matter for him and his supporters.
9. We asked Mr Philip why the Board should release him on parole today and his answer was as follows.  First, he said that he is not a violent extremist or a terrorist and secondly, he said that the Board is exclusively dependent for his views on what he described as a mental health report, and for that reason the current hearing was a farce.  Mr Philip also said that since he has been in jail he has not done anything like that which he is said to pose a risk of.  He said that he walks past significant electrical infrastructure within the prison on a daily basis and has not attempted to sabotage it in any way, and nor has he encouraged others or taught others within the prison environment to do so.  Mr Philip said that the fact he has not taken advantage of the significant opportunities he is presented with demonstrates the risk is not real.  Finally, Mr Philip said that the Board is blind to what the courts have deemed unlawful in terms of the COVID restrictions.
10. Mr Philip was supported at today’s hearing by three friends.  They stressed that they are law abiding and would not support him in any further breaches of the law.  [withheld].
11. While we accept that these are relevant all factors, there is no independent professional corroboration that the risks articulated by [withheld] would not eventuate.  Given the harm that would undoubtedly follow any similar action by him or any followers, without an alternate professional view to that of [withheld], the Board cannot be satisfied that Mr Philip’s risk is other than undue.
12. We asked Mr Philip whether he wished to return to the Board for further consideration of parole or whether the Board should simply schedule him to be seen again in December for the seeking of final release conditions.  Mr Philip said he had not really given any thought to that as he expected that he would simply serve out his sentence.
13. We have scheduled Mr Philip to be seen again in December 2024.  We discussed with him that he may wish to be represented by legal counsel at that hearing as he voiced particular views about some of the proposed special conditions that will apply on release.  For example, it is his view that it would be unlawful for him to be required to wear a bracelet that would electronically monitor a whereabouts condition.  We also advised him that should he wish to engage with his own psychologist to prepare a risk assessment and assist him with safety planning, that on completion of that work he could seek an earlier hearing.  We leave that matter with him.
14. Mr Philip will be seen in December 2024.  Parole today is declined.