Wilson’s conditions

August 12th, 2012 at 12:19 pm by David Farrar

Adam Dunning writes in the SST:

The conditions of Wilson’s imminent release to a purpose-built house in the grounds of Whanganui Prison are extraordinarily stringent for a couple of reasons. The first, official, reason is that without them this unrepentant serial rapist would be all but guaranteed to find new victims to terrify and abuse.

The second – which the Parole Board is unlikely to admit to out loud – is that with so many conditions to meet, Wilson is bound to breach one of them, and sooner rather than later.

Some of Wilson’s 17 release conditions seem bizarre, but each has a sinister subtext. The ban on attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and church groups? That’s because it was at such gatherings that he trawled for vulnerable women he could take home and subjugate. The ban on placing or responding to classified advertisements? That’s how he found another victim. The more general bans on contact with females or anyone under the age of 16 speak for themselves.

But even if Wilson can resist seeking out alcohol, drugs, internet access, women, children, churches, classified ads, 12-step meetings, employment or a car, he is also obliged to attend sessions with a psychologist for the purpose of developing a safety plan, and to “abide by the rules” of a reintegration programme.

Basically it is inevitable he will break one or more of her conditions of release.

Giving a dangerous sex offender enough rope is a sloppy, scary way to keep the community safe, but in this case there are few alternatives. 

Yeah, and hopefully no one will be harmed in the process.

Tags:

46 Responses to “Wilson’s conditions”

  1. krazykiwi (9,186 comments) says:

    Giving a dangerous sex offender enough rope is a sloppy, scary way to keep the community safe

    The quantity of rope used in years gone by was both minimal and effective

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. jims_whare (403 comments) says:

    Sounds like someone needs to break both his legs and don’t give him any casts while they mend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (8,449 comments) says:

    But ,but, but he has rights too……..aren’t “human rights” great?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Ross Miller (1,704 comments) says:

    Was the latest offense for which Wilson was incarcerated committed before ‘preventative detention’ became a sentencing option …… just wondering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Harriet (4,969 comments) says:

    “………Giving a dangerous sex offender enough rope is a sloppy, scary way to keep the community safe…..”

    They are called ‘indicators’.

    Rather it’s about ‘keeping him on his toes’ so if does go down the path of having ‘women on his mind’ we can then immediatly see that.He will be given a warning if the breach is minor and returned to jail at the next breach.It’s a way of seeing past his public face and into his subconsious.

    ‘Jailing’ himself for the forseeable future -if he acts out TOWARDS his subconsious wishes- is a very humane form of justice and public safety.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    I hope the Police keep a very close eye on the Beast.

    One step out of line – back in the slammer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Ross Miller

    Question was asked & replied to by one of our legal eagles the other day. Preventative detention wasn’t an option for a first offender then but it is now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. David Garrett (7,271 comments) says:

    Sorry to be a pedant boys…blame my legal training…the word is PREVENTIVE not PrevenTATive…three syllables not four…

    And as for the statement in the original article “there are few alternatives”, there are in fact NO alternatives, until we as a society face up to the fact that a very small number of incorigible offenders need to be kept locked up even though they have “served their time”….it remains to be seen whether the new rules for eligibility to preventive detention will do that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    I don’t know whether I would take advice from David Garrett on matters related to criminal law.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Hamnida

    Few here would consider you worthy of his services. Now if you ever do need legal help you should go no further than your old mate ‘Mickey Savage’. Don’t know if he is much shakes with the law but poor old Greg could sure use the coin.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Ross Nixon (559 comments) says:

    I hope his conditions do not exclude his jumping from tall cliffs or bridges.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. MT_Tinman (3,186 comments) says:

    He breaches parole he goes back to jail.

    For how long?

    Until the end of his sentence or does the judge get the right to extend his time?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    a very small number of incorigible offenders

    What’s pissing me off about this, is that we don’t know if he is incorrigible or not – as in, we don’t know for sure if he WILL re-offend. All we know is that he’s refused to accept any treatment and basically told everyone he deals with in the system to get fucked.

    I’m not defending the prick, I’m saying that he’s done his time, so leave him alone, because he has in fact, served the sentence society required him to serve for the things he was found guilty of.

    If society: including the media, his new neighbours, the parole board, the courts and everyone whose just commented above doesn’t like the fact that an unrepentant individual is about to be released then by all means change the system so that all offenders must repent and attend “rehabilitation” and they won’t be released until they do, but meanwhile, until we have such a law, don’t blame him, because it’s not his fault. It’s not up to him to do anything other than serve the sentence, which he’s done.

    But the media and the parole board and the entire country it seems, have basically thrown those principles out the window. Well sorry, but that’s not justice.

    And BTW, to assume he wouldn’t re-offend if he had attended rehab, well that’s completely mental.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Reid

    I’ve expressed the opinion before that we are in serious danger if Wilson’s case encourages the powers we suffer under to enact retrospective legislation.

    The good that may come from keeping the pot well stirred will be cementing in peoples’ minds what happens when the “criminals need love & weren’t breastfed” idiots get the upper hand. In future the electorate may not be so accepting of legislation that endangers its members by diluting penalties.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman

    Breaches of parole are punishable by sentences of up to two years. The period of extended supervision is stopped when sentenced and restarted when paroled.

    Reid:

    What’s pissing me off about this, is that we don’t know if he is incorrigible or not

    He is incorrigible in all standard definitions of the word. He has NOT done his time, he is on parole for 13 years during which time he is not a free citizen. This condition was imposed lawfully in a court after due consideration of SMW’s prior bad behaviour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. kowtow (8,449 comments) says:

    hamnida nails it.

    “The police need to keep a close eye on him.”

    Why? If the fucker was in gaol where he belonged the police wouldn’t need to keep an eye on him. That’s what prison is for.

    And what of the lefts’ respect for his rights? Why should some one who is released from prison be monitored by the police?

    Oops ,I forgot, in the Marxist world police monitoring is a normal function of the state.

    That’s why Orwell wrote 1984,as a warning about what the Marxists are capable of and all too willing to engage in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. cubit (356 comments) says:

    The decision of the High Court that was sought by Corrections gives an excellent insight into what this creep is all about.

    The input from the psych probably goes some way to giving a hint to what he is caspable of. Make up your own minds as to how well he is able to live as a normal rehabilitated offender.
    It makes good reading

    http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases/chief-executive-of-the-department-of-corrections-v-stewart-murray-wilson/at_download/fileDecision

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    LOL – Orwell was a prophet of the Lord in your eyes, isn’t he Kowtow.

    And Animal Farm & 1984 are as-yet unrecognised apocalyptic books of the Bible.

    It shall all come to pass, exactly as he has forseen…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. F E Smith (3,305 comments) says:

    I see that kowtow is still going on about human rights when he doesn’t actually understand the concept.

    Wilson is subject to parole with conditions.  Those conditions do not breach his human rights.  Were he to be subject to indeterminate detention beyond the end date of his sentence, as has been suggested here, then that would breach his human rights.

    I hope the Police keep a very close eye on the Beast. 

    It is nothing to do with the Police.  The monitoring and enforcement of release conditions falls within the purview of Corrections.  If Wilson breaches his conditions then he will be subject to a recall application by his parole officer.  Any offences associated with his parole will likewise be prosecuted by Corrections, not Police

    If he re-offends, then the Police will become involved.  Obviously there will be some liason between Police and Corrections, but the responsibility rests with the latter of those.

    He breaches parole he goes back to jail.

    For how long?

    Until the end of his sentence or does the judge get the right to extend his time?

    End of sentence, unless he has also committed an offence.  

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. tom hunter (4,826 comments) says:

    Yeah, and hopefully no one will be harmed in the process.

    It seems to me that everything about his “conditions” and release are predicated on the notion that someone will be harmed. That’s how he’s going to end up back in jail.

    It’s like a mirror image of PowerBall: someone, somewhere has already been selected as the unlucky winner – all that’s left is to find out who.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    Hamnida says..

    ” I hope the Police keep a very close eye on the Beast.

    One step out of line – back in the slammer. “..

    NO !!…..

    Permission Granted to administer a lead tablet .. It may be one of yours next time..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    It’s like a mirror image of PowerBall: someone, somewhere has already been selected as the unlucky winner – all that’s left is to find out who.

    To me tom it’s more like the Truman Show where everyone is just waiting for something to happen and wham: then it does and it’s on national telly.

    But this time, Jim Carrey isn’t an actor and this time, he knows as much as the audience, who meanwhile, via the MSM, are salivating over him to make a mistake, just one….

    It’s fucking cruel. Seriously. If any of that analogy is incorrect in that, that’s not actually what we are really doing to this guy, then which bit is incorrect?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Reid

    What on earth is cruel about it? Parole is a condition of his release, therefore it is part of his sentence.

    If he wants to stay out of prison all he has to do is not offend…..apart from the fact that he is hated more than most for his crimes, his predicament is not really dissimilar to hundreds if not thousands of prisoners paroled every year.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    What on earth is cruel about it?

    The way the media have made it impossible for him to live a normal life by making him a federal case and the way the parole board have gone along with that, in their own legal (therefore it’s not cruel) way by setting so many conditions it’s like living in a house with tripwires all over the place.

    If he wants to stay out of prison all he has to do is not offend…

    Yeah.

    He won’t even be able to walk down the street without several dozen police cars, perhaps a helicopter and a newscopter reporting on his every step.

    Possibly this bastard will never attack anyone ever again, even if he hasn’t undergone rehabilitation. Possibly he might, I don’t know. But I think if society has punished him to the extent required by that society’s law, then that society should just leave him the fuck alone, whether or not the individual has undergone the “treatment” recommended by the society.

    And he has.

    If he does attack someone else in the future, then this is the fault of those people in the society who claim credit for designing systems and processes that would prevent that: i.e. the politicians. Talk to them, but leave this guy alone. That’s all I’m saying.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Reid

    In 1996 Wilson was sentenced to 21 years in prison for his offenses. Therefore his true release date had NZ not embraced crim cuddling & Kumbaya is 2017. Regardless of the extra supervisory conditions the arsehole has not yet completed his sentence & the fact that he will have a chance to prove himself capable of not reoffending comes under the heading of mercy as opposed to rights.

    I would point out that you & I will probably not commit crimes that would involve a couple of decades in the can in the foreseeable future so there’s proof that it can be done. With practise & incentive maybe Wilson will be able to eschew small offenses too.

    …”If he does attack someone else in the future, then this is the fault of those people in the society who claim credit for designing systems and processes that would prevent that: i.e. the politicians”… With respect…crap!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. MT_Tinman (3,186 comments) says:

    In three years time Mr Wilson will have finished his sentence.

    At that time he can wander the country doing as he will with no restrictions?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    nasska, it’s not up to Wilson to change, it’s up to “the system” to rehabilitate him.

    If the system has reached the end of its tether and Wilson is still not rehabilitated, then this is not Wilson’s fault.

    That’s the only point I’m making and it’s the point everyone seems to be ignoring, especially the system itself, which is pretending it is Wilson’s fault, by restricting him via trip-wire parole conditions, as if the system’s chosen method of rehabilitation would work, if only Wilson would cooperate with it.

    This is London complete fucking arrogance on the part of the system, I have to say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    So, no personal responsibility then: if he rapes someone he too is a victim.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    All personal responsibility wat.

    The issue is, we have a system.

    The system prevents and punishes and rehabilitates.

    The person has been through the system, in every respect.

    If the person does it again, then is it the system’s fault or the person’s fault?

    And let’s remind ourselves: we don’t know shit except: this person has been through the system. So we’re assuming this system is the only possible thing on Earth that could possible prevent anyone from ever doing it again, and isn’t that kind of.. you know?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    It’s the person’s fault.

    He is responsible for everything he does.

    No one else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    If the person does it again, then is the system’s fault or the person’s fault?

    So what do you think should be done to Wilson to make him co-operate in his rehabilitation? Torture?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    In three years time Mr Wilson will have finished his sentence.

    No. His sentence finishes in thirteen years time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Reid

    …”If the system has reached the end of its tether and Wilson is still not rehabilitated, then this is not Wilson’s fault.”…..

    But the system hasn’t come close to the end of its tether. Even without the 10-year extended supervision order he is still under the supervision of Corrections until December 2015. He has chosen not to cooperate in any way & I fail to see why society or even politicians can be held responsible for that. The fact that he chooses the weak & their children for his victims guarantees that the system will come down on him like a load of bricks.

    Perhaps you could suggest ways in which offenders with no intention of cooperating can be reformed just in case another “Beast” enters the system?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    So what do you think should be done to Wilson to make him co-operate in his rehabilitation?

    Chemical castration metcalph, since you ask.

    But the politicians don’t have the balls to do that, let alone enact life imprisonment with no possibility of parole: you die inside, which is also on my own personal list of approved penalties.

    But the gutless politicians don’t want to frighten the horses, do they. The fools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Nostalgia-NZ (5,198 comments) says:

    I’m might be getting confused by all the hysteria but didn’t this guy just have a 10year supervision order placed on him?

    I know people like panicking but it looks like half the country has brought into the fear factor – of one old man with no resources, probably poor health, the Justice Department basically sharing ‘accommodation’ with him if he ever gets released, first of all from prison then from the supervision order. Even the SPCA got 2 cents worth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. kowtow (8,449 comments) says:

    ha my post on hamhead smoked 2 out;

    RRM the resident apologist for all things left……he who would use Orwell not as a warning but a training manual and

    FESter,the arrogant lawyer who is the only one on KB allowed to pontificate on all things legal.The concept of human rights that I don’t understand? I understand. I understand the jealous guarding the “profession ” does as it wishes to control and command.All the while reducing the rights of the law abiding in the face of growing criminality,more business for the robed and wigged elite. I understand.

    I rest my case ,m lud.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Okay so my previous reply didn’t appear.

    The system prevents and punishes and rehabilitates.
    The person has been through the system, in every respect.
    If the person does it again, then is it the system’s fault or the person’s fault?

    It’s the person’s fault.

    He is responsible for everything he does.

    No one else.

    How is this not obvious?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. nasska (11,491 comments) says:

    Just in case anyone still doesn’t know what these “onerous” conditions are:

    Conditions of Wilson’s parole include:

    He cannot move addresses without approval
    The Parole Board will review his progress in three months
    When he leaves the property he must be accompanied by two people from his reintegration team
    He cannot leave the Whanganui District
    He cannot associate unsupervised with anyone under the age of 16
    No females can be at his home without prior approval
    He cannot have contact with victims
    He must attend sessions with a psychologist
    He must be part of a reintegration programme
    He cannot gain employment or be a volunteer
    He cannot have unsupervised use of the internet
    He can only be in clubs or churches if accompanied by a supervisor
    He cannot use alcohol or drugs
    He cannot own or drive a vehicle.
    His location will be monitored by GPS

    How terrible, that’s so bad, oh dear!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    Shoot the prick !!..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    Problem solved !!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    Just give all of his known victims a button.. Kill / Live..

    Not my choice.. Not yours..

    Theirs !!..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    Reid,

    Chemical castration isn’t permanent – it stops once the medicine is no longer taken. Do you seriously think that Wilson who has refused to co-operate in other ways is going to keep on taking the medicine?

    As for not having the balls to enact life imprisonment with no possibility of parole, they have extended the sentence of preventive detention to cover Wilson’s circumstances after he was sentenced. But approve of the retroactive change of Wilson’s sentence to preventive detention is rather odd coming from someone complaining about the onerous nature of his parole conditions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. kowtow (8,449 comments) says:

    ooooohhh adam2314 you evil nasty person you,don’t you know a civilised society is judged not by how it treats it’s majority but by how it treats it’s disenfranchised ,marginalised and least valued……….cue bleeding heart crim huggers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    Shoot the prick.. discusse your problems later.. :-)0

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    So long as you are willing to pay for the venue and the costs for those that wish to attend :-)0

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Gulag1917 (915 comments) says:

    Wonder how fast he gets back where he deserves ie the slammer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote