Diggety what would be of interest is the positions of influence of those 9 males and 8 females. Are the males all ex Judges Judges of the Supreme Court, Magistrates etc. and the 8 females part-timers? Also what is the criteria for assessments for release back into the community. Do they have a formulated guideline? etc. How are these assessments made? by whom? 'Skill set' in composition of the Parole Board needs to be reviewed IMO. Mr. Ari Freiberg from the Sentencing Advisory Council stated on Drive program with Derryn Hinch yesterday (
www.3AW.com.au) that the Parole Board deals with hundred of these applications for parole; about 70% of the time they get it right and parolees don't re-offend. Sometimes they get it wrong.
With all the different types/grades of crimes, are their different grades of Parole Board meetings? For example,
is there a specialist Parole Board meeting for serial and serious criminals (i.e rapists and murderers) and their 'risk' to women and girls? Or is it one size fits all, that is, one board decides all?
Should the Parole Board be accountable to a higher authority for their decisions? Being accountable outside of themselves and being open to review could help identify where decisions went wrong, what information was given undue weight, what information was taken into account/excluded etc.
IMO we could benefit from being informed about how the parole Board is structured and operationalised and any further information about this is welcome.