A separate study conducted by Jones, Hua, Donnelly, McHutchison & Heggie (2006) of parolees in New South Wales, investigated the patterns of reoffending of 2,793 prisoners released on parole between the 2001 - 2002 financial year. The results of this study showed that by September 2004, almost two-thirds of the prisoners had reappeared in court, 64 percent were convicted of a new offence, and 41 percent had received an additional prison sentence as a result of reoffending (Jones et al., 2006). Further analyses found that the offenders who had greater numbers of prior imprisonment sentences, those who had been convicted of drug offences, younger offenders and offenders identifying as indigenous were at a greater risk of reoffending (Jones
…show more content…
This is a six percent increase on the June quarter 2014. This same report shows 12,585 persons on parole, which is a two percent increase on the June quarter 2014 (ABS, 2015). The costs of corrective services is Australia is significant with approximately $3.6 billion dollars spent each year. The cost of housing a prisoner can range from $185 to $335 per day, depending on which state or territory the prisoner is in. These figures are significantly higher than the cost of supervising an offender in the community, which can range from $10 to $41 per day (Evans, 2013). With these costs in mind, it makes sense economically to utilise parole in an attempt to reduce priso numbers and corrections costs in …show more content…
However, as the decisions made by the parole boards in Australia are not made available to the public, their level of accountability to the community is reduced (Wicks, 2010). Figures from the Australian Bureau of statistics report that the primary reason for incarceration for both men (21%) and women (19.8%) is acts intending to cause injury (ABS, 2014). These figures are a reminder that should influence decision making when considering public safety at the time of assessing a parolee. The murder of Jill Meagher in Victoria is a case well known in Australia, with outrage from the public as to why Adrian Bailey was released on bail after serving eight years of his second term of imprisonment for raping five women. The decision to release Bailey on parole was questionable considering his previous criminal history, the fact that he had reoffended previously and posed a risk to the safety of members of the community (Evans, 2013). This is an example of a negative outcome resulting from an offender being released on parole; had this offender been denied parole, an innocent victim would not have been killed, as the offender would not have had the opportunity to reoffend if he had remained in custody. The parole boards have an extremely important task when making the decision whether to release an offender on parole, as the
This is a six percent increase on the June quarter 2014. This same report shows 12,585 persons on parole, which is a two percent increase on the June quarter 2014 (ABS, 2015). The costs of corrective services is Australia is significant with approximately $3.6 billion dollars spent each year. The cost of housing a prisoner can range from $185 to $335 per day, depending on which state or territory the prisoner is in. These figures are significantly higher than the cost of supervising an offender in the community, which can range from $10 to $41 per day (Evans, 2013). With these costs in mind, it makes sense economically to utilise parole in an attempt to reduce priso numbers and corrections costs in …show more content…
However, as the decisions made by the parole boards in Australia are not made available to the public, their level of accountability to the community is reduced (Wicks, 2010). Figures from the Australian Bureau of statistics report that the primary reason for incarceration for both men (21%) and women (19.8%) is acts intending to cause injury (ABS, 2014). These figures are a reminder that should influence decision making when considering public safety at the time of assessing a parolee. The murder of Jill Meagher in Victoria is a case well known in Australia, with outrage from the public as to why Adrian Bailey was released on bail after serving eight years of his second term of imprisonment for raping five women. The decision to release Bailey on parole was questionable considering his previous criminal history, the fact that he had reoffended previously and posed a risk to the safety of members of the community (Evans, 2013). This is an example of a negative outcome resulting from an offender being released on parole; had this offender been denied parole, an innocent victim would not have been killed, as the offender would not have had the opportunity to reoffend if he had remained in custody. The parole boards have an extremely important task when making the decision whether to release an offender on parole, as the