SA Footy

The Parole Board issue is heating up. First Redmond and the Von Einem gaff, now Atkinson is letting rip at the Board over the bloke who made a habit of police seiges. What are people's opinions?

I haven't heard about any of these issues - where can I read about them.

He you go Psyber. CLICK HERE

Morons the lot of 'em....

Government Boards are notoriously filled by mates and political affiliates as rewards for service to a powerful individual or to a political party, rather than by real experts in the field.
This works similarly to the system whereby MPs or their mates go overseas on "fact finding missions" rather than send technical people who know what they are looking at.

In the case of the Parole Board and legal system it appears Mr Atkinson has questions to answer:

Solicitor Tim Bourne accepted a position on the Parole Board after he provided free legal advice to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson.

At the time, Mr Atkinson made a declaration under the MPs' Register of Interests Act that he had received free legal advice from the solicitor and former QC Chris Kourakis – who was subsequently appointed Solicitor-General and then to the bench of the Supreme Court.

The closure of much of the long-stay accommodation in the old mental health institutions to facilitate selling the land has resulted in a number of long stay patients who could be unstable enough to be a danger in the community being dumped in boarding houses etc. In particular the capacity for such individuals to be held in secure but comfortable environments has been much reduced.
[The state government has plans to sell more of the Glenside Hospital land to commercial mates for development soon - I've seen the plans.]

Ms Nelson and the Government have clashed over a series of law and order issues, including in March when Ms Nelson took the Government to task for not toughening mental health laws after a mentally ill Davoren Park man murdered his son and stabbed his partner and daughter before killing himself.

Prison occupation costs money too, and governments tend to favour early release as a cost saving measure.
After all, they can later blame the board members if anything goes wrong...
[It is a calculated risk, and the MP's families don't live near where the released will be anyway.]

BobbyNeil wrote:The Parole Board issue is heating up. First Redmond and the Von Einem gaff, now Atkinson is letting rip at the Board over the bloke who made a habit of police seiges. What are people's opinions?

I don't believe Redmond made a "gaff" on the Von Einem issue, her response was a typical lawyers response that his parole would depend on the circumstances a response without SPIN(say Mr VE is 90 years old in a wheelchair, do we keep him in prison at great expense, say Mr VE offers to give up his accomplices in return for release at a later late?). As a lawyer Redmond probably believes the government should not interfere in the judical/legal process. However mediocre Mike and mates see grandstanding (tough on crime) and spin in this area is popular with the electorate. The head of the parole board Frances Nelson was on the radio this morning discusssing this issue, her responses were logical, measured and without emotion, this is vast contast to the crap and spin that issues from the mouths of our political leaders. God help us we are in for another 4 years of this crap

The worst decision we ever made was to close Hillcrest hospital and I do feel the closure of this facility has led to the above incidents. Time it was re-opened, along with supervised boarding houses for people who are unsuitable for housing trust accomodation, sure it costs money but it would go a long way towards making the community a much safer place once again.

mick wrote:

BobbyNeil wrote:The Parole Board issue is heating up. First Redmond and the Von Einem gaff, now Atkinson is letting rip at the Board over the bloke who made a habit of police seiges. What are people's opinions?

I don't believe Redmond made a "gaff" on the Von Einem issue, her response was a typical lawyers response that his parole would depend on the circumstances a response without SPIN(say Mr VE is 90 years old in a wheelchair, do we keep him in prison at great expense, say Mr VE offers to give up his accomplices in return for release at a later late?). As a lawyer Redmond probably believes the government should not interfere in the judical/legal process. However mediocre Mike and mates see grandstanding (tough on crime) and spin in this area is popular with the electorate. The head of the parole board Frances Nelson was on the radio this morning discusssing this issue, her responses were logical, measured and without emotion, this is vast contast to the crap and spin that issues from the mouths of our political leaders. God help us we are in for another 4 years of this crap

It was a gaff Mick. Unfortunately the general public are not all lawyers and don't understand the issues. As a politician, not a lawyer, she should have known better.

BobbyNeil wrote:

mick wrote:

BobbyNeil wrote:The Parole Board issue is heating up. First Redmond and the Von Einem gaff, now Atkinson is letting rip at the Board over the bloke who made a habit of police seiges. What are people's opinions?

I don't believe Redmond made a "gaff" on the Von Einem issue, her response was a typical lawyers response that his parole would depend on the circumstances a response without SPIN(say Mr VE is 90 years old in a wheelchair, do we keep him in prison at great expense, say Mr VE offers to give up his accomplices in return for release at a later late?). As a lawyer Redmond probably believes the government should not interfere in the judical/legal process. However mediocre Mike and mates see grandstanding (tough on crime) and spin in this area is popular with the electorate. The head of the parole board Frances Nelson was on the radio this morning discusssing this issue, her responses were logical, measured and without emotion, this is vast contast to the crap and spin that issues from the mouths of our political leaders. God help us we are in for another 4 years of this crap

It was a gaff Mick. Unfortunately the general public are not all lawyers and don't understand the issues. As a politician, not a lawyer, she should have known better.

By her own admission, she said that she is still learning the spin game. I found it refreshing that something that vaguely resembled sincerity issued from a politicians mouth in SA. So do you believe the use of spin to bamboozle and mislead the public is desirable? I was somewhat amazed at the vigour Redmond was attacked over this by the government ( more spin on spin) given that they have an unbeatable lead in all opinion polls.

I agree with you Mick, it was an honest answer and probably a correct one. Just a major gaff from a politician though. As much as I despise Atkinson, his simplistic rubbish probably appeals to most.

Dont you just love the blame going on between between the SAPOL, Ministers and the Parole board.

Just shoot the worst offenders ... win-win for all.

There a 200 more on the loose http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

IIRC the current govt reappointed Frances Nelson QC as head of the Parole Board.

The Parole Board makes decisions based on the facts put before it. It doesn't make decisions based on what it thinks the govt of the day would think of its decision. This is in contrast to heads of govt depts.

The govt is also responsible for passing legislation. If the legislation doesn't match the intent of the govt's desires, then they can only blame themselves.

When things go wrong or the heat comes on, the easiest way to get around it is to point the finger somewhere else and go on the front foot. In this case, the Parole Board - with its arms length distance from a Ministerial portfolio (and therefore not Police, Corrections, or Acts of Parliament committed to Ministers) - is a much easier target.

The Parole Board of South Australia

http://www.voc.sa.gov.au/Information/Assistance/Parole_Board.doc

The Parole Board is an independent statutory body constituted under the provisions of the Correctional Services Act (SA). It consists of six members appointed by Governor. Certain positions on the Board are defined by statute. The Presiding Member is required to be either, a judge of the Supreme Court or District Court or a person who has extensive knowledge and experience in the science of criminology, penology or any related science. One member must be a qualified medical practitioner who has extensive knowledge and experience in psychiatry. One member must a qualified social worker or sociologist and one member must be a person of Aboriginal descent.

The Board:

• Considers applications for release on parole from prisoners serving sentences of five years or more and determines whether or not to grant release.
• Makes orders for the release of all prisoners serving a term of 12 months or more, but less than 5 years.
• Makes recommendations to the Governor for the release of those prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment.
• Considers and sets the terms and conditions for the release of all prisoners who have a non-parole period fixed by the court. (i.e. those serving a sentence of 12 months or more)
• Reviews the progress and performance of parolees.
• Determines the appropriate penalty when a breach of parole is proved.
• Amends the terms and conditions of existing parole orders, where appropriate.
• Annually reviews the circumstances of all prisoners sentenced to a term of life imprisonment and those serving indeterminate sentences.
• Makes recommendations to the Prisoner Assessment Committee in relation to proposed pre-release case management plans for long term prisoners.

Victims of crime

Written submissions from the Victims of Crime are considered when setting conditions for the release of an offender. Victims may request that the Board set particular conditions in relation to where an offender resides, or places the offender should not attend, i.e. towns, shopping centres, educational facilities etc.

Breaches of parole

Parolees who breach their parole conditions are either summonsed to appear before the Board in relation to breaches of parole conditions, or they are escorted from prison where they find themselves as a result of the issue of a warrant of apprehension by the Board. The penalties for a breach of parole conditions include, the cancellation of parole, imprisonment for a specified period, a community service order, or a reprimand and warning.

http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/San/public/%7BC979C333-F1CC-45B9-A931-B9AA7908E51C%7D/StatementofInterestsJune2002/StatementofInterestsJune2002/html/StatementofInterestsJune2002_5.htm

Since September, 2000, I have received thousands of dollars worth of gratis legal work from an Adelaide Queen’s Counsel and an Adelaide solicitor. I am grateful for their help in litigation initiated by Mr Ralph Clarke and I am too shy to ask them for the notional bill. However, my guess is that I have received $9000 in advice and representation from Mr Chris Kourakis and $7000 in preparation, correspondence, filing and representation from Mr Tim Bourne, of Bourne Lawyers.


http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25772818-2682,00.html
Meanwhile, AdelaideNow has exlusively revealed that the man who chaired the Parole Board meeting that approved the release of siege gunman Shane Andrew Robinson was appointed by the State Government.

Solicitor Tim Bourne accepted a position on the Parole Board after he provided free legal advice to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson.

Mr Bourne, the Parole Board's deputy chief, chaired the October 2007 meeting that approved Robinson's release because chairwoman Frances Nelson, QC, was on leave.
Mr Atkinson has been spearheading the Government attack on the Parole Board's "spectacular mistake" and yesterday foreshadowed possible changes to the board as a result.

In an interview on ABC Radio yesterday, Mr Atkinson said the Government needed to work out who made what he called the "awful decision" to release Robinson.

But The Advertiser can reveal Mr Atkinson considered his relationship with Mr Bourne to be significant enough to excuse himself from Cabinet discussions about the solicitor's appointment to the Parole Boardin 2004.

He received pro bono advice from Mr Bourne during the Randall Ashbourne affair.

The Attorney-General last week led the Government's attack on new Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond, seeking to portray her as soft on crime, in contrast to Labor's "tough" position.

After last Thursday's violent rampage, Mr Atkinson criticised the courts, the Opposition and Parole Board chief Frances Nelson, QC, who he said should get down "off her high horse" to explain the decision to release Robinson in late 2007.

Ms Nelson last night told The Advertiser she was not at the Parole Board meeting in which the decision was made to release Robinson because she was on holiday and had only handled his file when revoking his parole last month.

"I was not a member of the board that sat that day. I was on leave," she said.

Mr Atkinson yesterday branded the decision a terrible mistake with "catastrophic consequences".

"Well I think it might be time for some new members of the Parole Board," Mr Atkinson said.

"I understand that the work of a parole board is difficult, I understand that sometimes things will go wrong, and that prisoners who appear suitable for release will reoffend upon release . . . but this appears to be a spectacular mistake, given this man's history."

But Ms Nelson said the Parole Board members "were all appointed by the Government because they were people in whom the Government had confidence".

Thiele wrote:There a 200 more on the loose http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

Because generally, police dont go actively looking for people who have outstanding warrants, whether issued by the Bench (failure to appear in court), those on Home D who dont check in, the Parole Board or whomever. They typically wait for these people to bring police attention to themselves ( a characteristic of most!) and then pick them up, eg a high speed chase, or they become a suspect in another serious crime. The reality is in all fairness, the police dont have time to track them all down all day every day. Add up the number of warrants and compare it to the number of 'vacancies' in Correctional Institutions and there is a problem on the supply side shall we say, even with the 'rack em, pack em and stack em' policy.

Ha ha, Kourakis was probably charging $9000 a day.

Don't worry all you rackers and stackers, with the latest interpretation of the Sentencing Act non parole periods will soon be longer than the head sentences!

I've often wondered what Police do with all these warrants. Seems like they arrest a lot of people for silly warrants like forgetting to rock up to court on a Friday night so they spend the weekend locked up.

I just hope this dishonest government doesn't spin its way out of this and shift the blame to a board that has been acting entirely appropriately.

Gozu is very quiet...........

Jimmy_041 wrote:Gozu is very quiet...........

Now you've done it! ... was quiet for a while but wait for the comeback