New Zealand Parole Board -

Parole Hearing

Under section 21(2) of the Parole Act 2002

Tony TIUMALU

Hearing: 9 April 2024

at Manawatu Prison via MS Teams

Members of the Board:

Sir Ron Young – Chairperson

Ms W Taumaunu

Dr J Skipworth

Counsel:  Ms J Fyfe

In Attendance:

[withheld] - Case Manager

[withheld] – Principal Case Manager

[withheld] – Probation Officer

[withheld] – Probation Officer

Support Persons: [withheld]

DECISION OF THE BOARD

1. Mr Tiumalu, who is 52 years of age, was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder in 2006.  The murder was of his former partner whom he stabbed to death.  There was a 14-year minimum non-parole period.  The murder occurred after a period of time when there was conflict between Mr Tiumalu and his partner.  It was a particularly brutal murder.
2. Mr Tiumalu was then released on parole in March 2021 after the 14-year minimum non‑parole period expired in 2019.
3. In January 2024, an application for recall was made.  The application for recall and the circumstances under which it was granted is set out in an extensive decision of 23 February 2024 by the Parole Board.  It is not the intention of this Board to summarise or go through again the circumstances of the facts behind the recall.  It is sufficient to say that Mr Tiumalu was in a relationship with a woman called [withheld].  She had become pregnant and gave birth.  [withheld].  The relationship became volatile, members of both her family and Mr Tiumalu’s family expressed their concern about the volatility of the relationship with angry confrontations. The Parole Board had access to a number of texts which showed a very concerning situation with respect to the relationship and Mr Tiumalu’s conduct. There were, on one view of the facts, similarities between the circumstances here and the circumstances that began and ultimately led to Mr Tiumalu killing his previous partner.
4. At the end of the Parole Board decision from February 2024, the Parole Board indicated that significant further work needed to be done in relation to the custody and access of the child that Mr Tiumalu and his partner had and what arrangements might suitably be made to ensure that Mr Tiumalu might safely have access to the child.
5. At the beginning of the hearing, we told counsel that our tentative view was that we should seek a full psychological report relating to the circumstances of the recall and assessment of risk.  Mr Tiumalu spent some time talking to us about the circumstances that gave rise to the recall.  The Board’s impression was that he rather reconstructed a number of the facts that the Parole Board found and downplayed the seriousness of the issues between himself and [withheld] and downplayed his lack of openness with his Probation Officer and others at the time.
6. So, without giving any further view of our assessment of risk of Mr Tiumalu including his risk in relation to his relationship with [withheld] and how that might be managed in the future, together with their child, we remain of the view that the best way forward now is for a full psychological report.
7. We do that for the reasons that we have previously identified: that we think there are worrying aspects of the circumstances under which Mr Tiumalu acted toward his partner and some similarities to the circumstances under which Mr Tiumalu killed his partner.  We see the situation with his partner therefore, as a very dangerous situation that needs to be addressed in terms of his risk.
8. So, we ask for a full psychological report dealing firstly with his risk; secondly, what rehabilitation might be appropriate to address that risk; thirdly, what reintegrative testing may be appropriate and finally, commenting on any release plan he may have.
9. We will see him again in September 2024.