DOCSLIB.ORG

Update Report by Robyn Milera

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Update Report by Robyn Milera Networked Knowledge Media Briefing Networked Knowledge Derek Bromley Homepage: http://netk.net.au/BromleyHome.asp Robyn Milera. 13th June 2013 At present Derek Bromley is housed at the Cadell Training Centre having been transferred there from Port Augusta prison late in 2012. The situation has many benefits. However, in the present circumstances as a whole, it is inadequate in terms of real preparation for release. A placement at the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre (APC) is urgently overdue. Derek was eligible for release on parole on 12 December 2006. He submitted an application for parole on 16th July 2007. As a part of the annual review process in October of that year, Derek was interviewed by the Parole Board and it was recommended that Bromley be considered at the earliest opportunity for transfer to the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre. Derek was subsequently transferred from Pt Augusta to the APC on 6 November 2007. The board communicated concern to the manager of the Prisoner Assessment Unit (PAU) that Derek was still not getting the re-socialisation he vitally needed in order to gain work and opportunities to develop personal and community links for any future release. He was required to complete an extensive range of programs and courses implemented by the department to help prisoners to address and overcome offending behaviours. For a period of time, as one who maintained his innocence, Derek refused to participate. According to advice from the former CEO of the Department of Corrections to Derek’s counsel,1 Derek was only hindered at that time in his endeavours to achieve release on parole, because of the uncompleted courses. Clearly, it was a requirement that a prisoner demonstrate remorse or admission of the type of crime addressed in these courses before they are considered candidates for release. Eventually, Derek decided to participate without compromising his claim of innocence. He completed every program required. He received excellent reports as to his accomplishments, participation and leadership. Years have passed. To this point it has made NO difference to his progress whatsoever. On 4 November 2008, Derek was transferred OUT of the APC on the basis that he may have committed an offence. He was cleared of any wrong doing. All charges were dropped as the result of a confession by the actual offender. Institutional reports concerning him continued to be positive. Despite this he was removed from the APC, and the Manager of the PAU, without providing reasons, disapproved of Derek’s return to the APC and advised that the Director wouldn’t vary his decision. Reasons were not provided. He was sent back to Port Augusta Prison in June 2009. This meant that his previously approved re- socialisation efforts were discontinued. He went from positive preparation for release, having done everything else that was required of him, to six months incarceration in the Yatala Labour Prison and 1 Letter from Peter Severin, CEO of Department for Correctional Services. then return to Port Augusta Prison with no communication as to reasons. This was cruel punishment and without justification. During at least some of this his period back in Port Augusta, there was no apparent case management plan in place for Derek. He did have time in the Mulga cottages at PAP but this afforded him no re-socialisation of the kind that would satisfy the requirements of the Parole Board. He followed every process open to him at that facility but there were no further reintegration programs available that could satisfy the requirements of the Parole Board. On 14 July 2009, the Parole Board refused Derek’s application for release on Parole yet again, still waiting for him to receive appropriate, sustained and effective re-socialisation. In May of 2012 he applied again for release on Parole. Again he was refused because the DCS had not provided the kind of re-socialisation opportunities that had been consistently recommended and requested. Once again there was nothing he could do to improve his position. He was never informed of anything that he might do to positively affect it. He was never informed of issues that he should correct. He has been obstructed despite his best efforts and his own insistence that he needs, ‘to be taken away from the prison mentality because it’s completely different to the mentality of society and I need to get used to society again...I need to be put back into society gradually.’ Every refusal of parole meant another entire year of incarceration before he could apply again, and if the DCS provided no progressive, adequate reintegration in the mean time, it unavoidably meant another year and another year. Derek had no power to substantively improve his prospects of recommendation. Appeals of loved ones to various government Ministers and departmental officials have been met with dismissive, illogical responses which failed to address reasonable concerns. Usually the parole board’s refusal to recommend parole is cited in letters as the problem. But the real stalemate has been the obstructive management of the re-socialisation process – this was not Derek’s fault. The former Minister of Correctional Services, Jennifer Rankine, indicated in a letter to me that the Department does not require a confession of guilt.2 However, Derek’s co-accused was released on parole years ago. The then Minister went on the say that adequate re-socialisation and release was possible from Correctional facilities other than the Adelaide Pre-Release Centre. This was clearly not the reality, at least in Derek’s case. As already mentioned, Mr Bromley was transferred to Cadell Training Centre late in 2012. Since at Cadell Mr Bromley has been encouraged twice to apply for inclusion in off Centre activities. He applied as invited. On the morning of 7 February he was notified that his application had been refused and that he would not be able to apply again until three full months had passed. He was duly invited to apply again recently and immediately denied. The Statutes Amendment (Appeals) Bill was passed by the lower house on the same day. He has recently applied again for parole despite the fact that he has very little expectation that this government has any intention of assisting him. He still has not received any sustained off centre experience and we only hope that the Board will finally recommend him and he can make progress. 2 Letter from Hon. Jennifer Rankine, dated 20/12/11. Similar responses have been received from the preceding Minister for Correctional Services and Attorneys-General. Even if they do recommend him, however, the decision effectively lies with the Executive Council. It is a discretionary matter. The process does not have to involve consideration of the parole board’s advice, is not open to review and there is no requirement to provide reasons in the case of refusal. Our hope, it goes without saying, is that the court will set Derek free this year. But we still believe that it is wrong for him to have to face release without the kind of re-socialisation he himself would like to benefit from. The latest refusal of application for off centre work has raised in our minds the question as to reasons. Is it a continuation of punishment? He needs assistance to prepare, regardless of whether release comes via the parole process or through a successful appeal. It is completely unreasonable to have Derek or any other long term prisoner abandoned to the highest imaginable stress upon a sudden release when appropriate assistance has been unavailable. He could have been working honestly at a job, learning skills and preparing to live an independent and connected life in the mainstream. There may be no legislated obligation for the government to assist but in the interest of reasonableness, decency and basic human rights I believe that there is a compelling obligation to assist Mr Bromley. The issue of re-socialisation/rehabilitation, I think is ignored in legislation. It takes only a relatively short prison sentence for people to become institutionalised and potentially face overwhelming challenges upon release. Mr Bromley’s application for funding for appeal was lodged immediately when the new law came into operation, on the 6th of May 2013. That is nearly six weeks ago. He has called at least 4 times to make enquiries about its progress, each time instructed to call again on a given a day. On the last call, as of today, 13th of June, he was told that the person in whose hands it presently rests is busy and will get around to it when he can. Obviously, we know there is a process and that Derek’s matter is not the only business for the LSC to consider. But 29 years of patience and suffering warrants going to the head of the queue, surely, especially in light of the fact that the SA Government has just passed drought breaking new legislation. One would have thought that it was a matter of highest priority. The other states and the Attorneys-General are observing how SA will back up its word. Is it all going to be form and no substance? Politicking with no reasonable good will and commitment to the basic human right to liberty and access to the justice system? This government has maintained a policy that amounts to pack ‘em, rack ‘em and stack ‘em when it comes to so called correctional services and the decisions about the management, re-socialisation and parole of prisoners is ultimately a secret and, on my observation an arrogant, stagnating business. It is true, as I have heard the premier say, that the public does not want dangerous criminals on the street.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Towards Safer and More Congruent Prison Environments for Male Aboriginal Prisoners a Southaustralian Study
    ({{ Iqlo, \ ''": ,'/ / ,':;r\'\' ., ..' Towards Safer and more Congruent Prison Environments for Male Aboriginal Prisoners A SouthAustralian Study Elizabeth Grant A thesis submitted to the University of Adelaide in fulfilment of the requirernents of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design June2008 A Suulh Alisrra!iarl Table of Contents List of Figures .....................................................................................................................................................xi List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................................... xv Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................................. xvii Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................................................................ xix Abstract .......................................................................................................................... , ................................. xxi Declaration ..................................................................................................................................................... xxiii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Health of Australia's Prisoners 2009
    The health of Australia’s prisoners 2009 The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare is Australia’s national health and welfare statistics and information agency. The Institute’s mission is better information and statistics for better health and wellbeing. © Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2010 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under theCopyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be directed to the Head, Media and Communications Unit, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, GPO Box 570, Canberra ACT 2601. A complete list of the Institute’s publications is available from the Institute’s website <www.aihw.gov.au>. ISBN 978-1-74249-011-3 Suggested citation Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2010. The health of Australia’s prisoners 2009. Cat. no. PHE 123. Canberra: AIHW. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Board Chair Hon. Peter Collins, AM, QC Director Penny Allbon Any enquiries about or comments on this publication should be directed to: Ingrid Johnston Australian Institute of Health and Welfare GPO Box 570 Canberra ACT 2601 Phone: (02) 6244 1211 Email: [email protected] Published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Design and typesetting by Sam Highley Printed by Union Offset Printers Cover art by an Indigenous offender Please note that there is the potential for minor revisions of data in this report. Please check the online version at <www.aihw.gov.au> for any amendments. Foreword Foreword An estimated 50,000 people are released from prison each year in Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Nnual Report
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. WITH THE COMPLIMENTS OF THE ::/)iJ'ec/ol' ADELAIDE nnual Report Director, Department of Correctional Services 1973-74 r - SOUTH AUSTRALIA ANNUAL REPORT OF THE South Australian Departlnent OF Correctional Services For the Year 1973-74 " By AUTHORITY: A. B. JAMES, Government Printer, South Australia 1975 rl r [p.P.38 Report on the Activities of the Department of Correctional Services for the Year 1973-74 The Honourable the Chief Secretary. Sir-t have the honour to pre~ent my report on the activities of the Dep<lrtment llf Corre~tional S~f\ ke~ for the year ended 30th June, J 974. The mo~t ~igniiicant feature for the year \\-as undoubtedly the publkation of the hr~t Repllft of the Criminal Law and Penal Methods Reform Committee. Whiht there are many ueLi"ions yet required on the sections to be implementeu and the priorities to be ob~er.,eu, we ha\e had. for the fir"t time ~in(e the early J 900\ (-,0 far as l can ascertain) an inuepenuent re\ie\~ of the whole "y,tem. \VlIiI..,t a number of the recommendation" have been departmental policy for .,ome time. the review of legislation , .. ill formalise much or what b being uone, and the other change,> emi~aged are at present hein,!! u'i,>e..,..,ed and reported on. Probably the most intere'>ting aspect of the Fir..,t Report wa.., it-. re(llmmelhlation that the department shoulu continue to lIe\c1op a.., an integrateu unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Sentence Reports
    Department for Correctional Services Information for Professionals Visiting Prisoners in South Australian Prisons Version 9 – May 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................................... 1 PRIVACY AND YOUR INFORMATION .................................................................................................................................. 3 VISITS INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS OF ENTRY ........................................................................................................... 4 THE BIOMETRIC ENROLMENT SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................................ 5 SCREENING PRIOR TO ENTRY ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 YOUR SAFETY IN PRISONS ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 DUTY OF CARE ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6 COMPLAINTS MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 INSTITUTIONS ...................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Department for Correctional Services (DCS) - Offering Career Opportunities That Are Challenging, Demanding and Rewarding
    The Department for Correctional Services (DCS) - Offering career opportunities that are challenging, demanding and rewarding ABOUT DCS DCS employs more than 1900 people and is a part of the South Australian Government’s Justice System. DCS contributes to the administration of justice and community protection through management of prisoners in the prison system, and the management of offenders in the community. DCS provides for safe, secure and humane containment of prisoners, whilst providing opportunities for prisoners and offenders to rehabilitate and become law-abiding citizens. DCS aims to be recognised as a leader in building a safe, just and fair society where the supervision and rehabilitation of offenders is humane and the rights of the victims are respected. DCS VALUES DCS employees work to a key set of values, which consist of; ❑ Honesty and integrity ❑ Professionalism and accountability ❑ Being socially responsible ❑ Ethical and respectful behaviours ❑ Equity, diversity and cultural inclusion ❑ Courage and tenacity ❑ Service http://www.corrections.sa.gov.au/about/our-values PERSONAL TRAITS WHICH DEMONSTRATE BEST POTENTIAL FOR SUCCESS IN THE JOB Please - honestly assess yourself. If you can place a tick in all of these categories, we urge you to lodge an application. ❑ Maturity and self-confidence ❑ Socially responsible with personal honesty and integrity ❑ Interpersonal skills and emotional stability which enable supportive and constructive relationships with work colleagues and with prisoners alike ❑ Able to model and foster
    [Show full text]
  • EXH 0009 Department for Correctional Services Overview 2020
    Department for Correctional Services Overview 31/01/2020 Prepared by the Office for Correctional Services Review OFFICIAL: Sensitive Contents Department for Correctional Services Overview ............................................................................. 5 Chief Executive Welcome ................................................................................................................... 5 Strategic Overview ............................................................................................................................... 6 Mission, Vision and Values ............................................................................................................. 6 Outcomes .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Strategic Plan .................................................................................................................................... 7 Business Plan ................................................................................................................................... 8 Shaping Corrections ........................................................................................................................ 8 Safety and Security ........................................................................................................................ 10 Serious Offender Committee .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • HCV Infection in South Australian Prisoners
    HCV Infection in South Australian Prisoners: Prevalence, Transmission, Risk Factors and Prospects for Harm Reduction Emma Ruth Miller (MPH) Discipline of Public Health, School of Population Health and Clinical Practice Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Adelaide September 2006 Contents Papers published, submitted or presented during candidature..............................i Abstract..............................................................................................................ii Declaration........................................................................................................ iv Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ v Introduction........................................................................................................ 1 1 HCV: a brief overview................................................................................. 3 1.1 Infection with HCV.................................................................................................4 1.1.1 The virus .........................................................................................................5 1.1.2 The test............................................................................................................6 1.1.3 The natural history..........................................................................................7 1.1.4 The available treatment...................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Caring for Prisoners
    SA Prison Health Services Caring for Prisoners Shaping the future of health with world-class care and world-class research . We acknowledge and respect the Traditional Custodians whose ancestral land the Central Adelaide Local Health Network (CALHN) provides services on. We acknowledge the deep feelings of attachment and relationship of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to country. >Central Adelaide Local Health Network (CALHN) came into effect on 1 July 2011 as a directorate of SA Health. >South Australian Prison Health Service >The SAPHS Director of Nursing reports directly to the CALHN Executive Director of Mental Health / Prison Health. 3 Primary Health Care Within Prison SAPHS Model of Care •Aim Community Equivalence •Detection, assessment and intervention •Prompt and effective treatment •Community standard of care •Prevention measures •Health education •Continuity of care in the community via collaboration with local health care providers 4 Reducing Health Ineqaulities “Access to health is a basic human right not a privilege” —Recognise impact of economic and social policies and conditions on health. —Physical, social and economic environs impact on health and wellbeing of individuals. —Socioeconomic status a key social determinant of health explaining the inequality between the rich and the poor 5 Yatala Labour Prison Health Centre Adelaide Remand Health Port Augusta Prison Health Clinic (24hr 12 Inpatient beds) Centre 576 Prisoners (24 hr 10 inpatientAdelaide Remand HealthCentre beds) 592 Male Prisoners 274 Prisoners
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2011 – 2012
    ANNUAL REPORT 2011 – 2012 Level 2, 400 King William Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 Telephone: 08 8226 9000 www.corrections.sa.gov.au Office of the Chief Executive CEN/12/0753 Level 2 400 King William Street DX 147 GPO Box 1747 ADELAIDE SA 5001 Tel: 08 8226 9120 Fax: 08 8226 9226 31 October 2012 www.corrections.sa.gov.au The Honourable Jennifer Rankine MP Minister for Correctional Services Level 2, 45 Pirie Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 Dear Minister It is with great pleasure that I present to you the 2011-12 Annual Report for the Department for Correctional Services. The Annual Report not only provides an overview of the highlights and achievements of this year, it also serves as a means of demonstrating the contribution made by the Department in supporting the government’s commitment to providing for a safer South Australian community. This report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Public Services Act 2009 , the Finance and Audit Act 1987 and the Correctional Services Act 1982 (the Act). It also adheres to the guidelines provided in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet’s ‘Circular 13’ document. As per Section 9(1) of the Act, I have provided this report to you no later than 31 October (of this year). I hereby commend this Annual Report to you. Yours sincerely DAVID BROWN CHIEF EXECUTIVE [email protected] CONTENTS HIGHLIGHTS IN 2011–12 .................................................................................................................................... 7 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ombudsman South Australia
    Redacted Final Report Full investigation - Ombudsman Act 1972 Complainant [The complainant] Department Department for Correctional Services Ombudsman reference 2017/01854 Department reference SEC/17/0053 Date complaint received 20 February 2017 Issues 1. Whether the department’s failure to document confidential intelligence information and an operational risk assessment was unreasonable 2. Whether the department’s direction that a prisoner be kept separately and apart from all other prisoners was unjust 3 Whether the department’s failure to provide the Minister with a report as soon as reasonably practicable after giving a direction that a prisoner be kept separately and apart from all other prisoners was contrary to law 4. Whether the department failed to comply with clause 3.7.A of SOP 012 in reviewing the appropriateness of a prisoner’s continued separation from all other prisoners 5. Whether the department’s failure to revoke a direction that a prisoner be kept separately and apart from all other prisoners for a period of 66 days was oppressive 6. Whether the prolonged separation of a prisoner from all other prisoners was in accordance with a rule of law that is oppressive Jurisdiction The investigation arises from a complaint from a prisoner, [the complainant]. The complaint is within the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman under the Ombudsman Act 1972. Level 9 PO Box 3651 Telephone 08 8226 8699 [email protected] 55 Currie Street Rundle Mall SA 5000 Facsimile 08 8226 8602 www.ombudsman.sa.gov.au Adelaide SA 5000 Toll free 1800 182 150 Page 2 The complaint concerns, generally, the determination of the Department for Correctional Services (the department) to transfer the complainant from the general population of Port Augusta Prison to G Division of Yatala Labour Prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Model of Care for Aboriginal Prisoner Health and Wellbeing for South Australia
    South Australian Prison Health Service MODEL OF CARE FOR ABORIGINAL PRISONER HEALTH AND WELLBEING FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA November 2017 Final Report Prepared by Wardliparingga Aboriginal Health Research Unit1 for – The South Australian Prison Health Service – Central Adelaide Local Health Network – SA Health 1 Wardliparingga is a Unit within the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI) 1 This Report has been prepared for the SA Prison Health Services during 2017 by Wardliparingga Aboriginal Research Unit, SAHMRI. The full report and an Executive Summary is available at https://www.sahmriresearch.org/Aboriginal-Prisoner-Health-Report © SAHMRI 2017 Suggested citation: Sivak, L., Cantley, L., Kelly, J., Reilly, R., Hawke, K., Mott, K., Stewart, H., Mckivett, A., Rankine, S., Coulthard, A., Miller, W. and Brown, A. 2017. Model of Care for Aboriginal Prisoner Health and Wellbeing for South Australia – Final Report, Wardliparingga Aboriginal Health Research Unit: SAHMRI Adelaide, South Australia For further information on access or reproduction of this report, contact: South Australian Prison Health Service Ms Tricia Cash [email protected] SAHMRI Ms Kathy Mott [email protected] Ph +61 8 8128 4205 www.sahmri.org ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY The key stakeholders of this project would like to preface this report with an acknowledgement of Country. The Key Stakeholders of this project acknowledge the Kaurna people as the custodians of the Adelaide region and that their culture and heritage beliefs are still as important to the living Karna people today. The key stakeholders of this project would also like to pay respects to the cultural authority of Aboriginal People from other areas of South Australia and Australia who have contributed to the development of this report and who will be involved in, or impacted by, the delivery of its recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Australian Collection
    MICROFORM GUIDE A GUIDE TO RECORDS ON MICROFORM IN THE LIBRARY OF THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN GENEALOGY AND HERALDRY SOCIETY INC. Part 1 – Australian Microfiche Current to 31 January 2020 Compiled by Robert D Blair, 2020 INDEX TO CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Page 5 WORLDWIDE 7 AUSTRALASIA 8 Australia 8 Australian States & Territories Australian Capital Territory 11 New South Wales 12 Northern Territory 21 Queensland 23 South Australia 28 Almanacs, Directories & Gazetteers 28 Births, Deaths & Marriages 28 Church Records 43 including: Anglican 43 Catholic 47 Civil Registration 28 District BDM Records 29 Books 33 Business Records 33 Burial & Cemetery Records 34 incl Undertakers Records 42 Census Records 42 Church Records 43 Clubs 52 Defence 52 Divorce 53 Electoral Rolls 53 Freemasons 53 Gaol Records 53 Government (Local) 54 Government (State) Enterprises 54 Hospital Records 55 Inquests 55 Land Records 56 Legal Records 56 Miscellaneous Records 57 Naturalizations 57 Newspapers 58 Police Records 61 Probate Records 61 Research Directories 61 School Records 62 Shipping 78 Tasmania 81 Victoria 83 Western Australia 90 APPENDIX 1 BDM INDEX GUIDE 99 3 MICROFORMS This guide to the microform collection of the South Australian Genealogy & Heraldry Society Inc, is current to 31 October 2016. For acquisitions since this guide was compiled please consult the acquisitions section of the Society journal (The South Australian Genealogist) or check with Library staff at the Microforms Section Desks. The Society Library has a number of microfiche and microfilm (16mm and 35mm) viewers. Reader-printers are available for taking prints from the microform, both microfiche and 16mm and 35mm microfilm. Staff assistance will be required where microfilm is involved.
    [Show full text]