Juliana Herrera Murder: Corrections Community Notifications & Engagement Policy Broken
The Wigram looks in depth at the Willis report and asks whether it will prevent future tragic deaths like Herrera's.
Independent psychologist Gwenda Willis has condemned Corrections’ community notifications and engagement policy to the rubbish bin. Released today, Gwenda Willis’ review has come on the back of the brutal murder of Addington local Juliana Herrera by parolee Joseph James Brider.
Her report has highlighted Corrections’ inconsistent approach towards notification, staff lacking knowledge about adult sexual offending, and a preference not to notify due to the potential for an adverse community reaction and its impact on finding offenders a home.
Corrections has accepted all seven of her recommendations. General Manager Case Managment and Probation, Darius Fagan, has written that “work is already underway to improve our community notification and engagement processes.”
“While our previous notification policy predominantly focused on community notification for people who offended against children, we can now notify for people who have committed sexual offences against adults or general violence assessed with an above average risk for sexual or violent reoffending.”
Willis does not specifically address the circumstances of Brider’s release or the decision not to notify his release to Herrera or other neighbours. It is also unclear whether any of Willis’ recommendations would have prevented her death.
To date, the circumstances surrounding his release remain secret, and few if any staff notes of the time leading up to her death were kept.
Willis places the onus squarely on frontline Corrections staff to keep communities safe, play a key role in the reintegration process and refer cases to an oversight panel before the decision to notify is made.
Only time will tell whether future tragedies will be prevented.
What does remain clear is that Corrections remains under pressure to release 15,000 inmates each year into the community.
“Although not extending to all regions, some interviewees voiced concern that current practice equated to finding any excuse not to notify. In the words of one interviewee,…”
“…we’ve created a policy that we take the off ramp to get out of at every opportunity and then it just makes it look like um we’re not following a policy, when in fact the policy is flawed because it’s fundamentally not based on research…doesn’t make people safe…we should focus on proactive education.” ”
Corrections had placed Brider into a flat in Grove Road, Addington, next door to Herrera’s home. Brider had served time for kidnapping his former partner and had only been on parole for 72 days.
Herrera was not told about Brider’s criminal offending.
Willis interviewed 22 frontline Corrections workers and two Police officers from across the country before submitting her final report in August this year to Corrections. The review focused on the decision-making process for deciding to, or not notify, the public about criminals being released into their neighbourhoods.
Wrote Willis: “Considering findings of the current review alongside international research reviewed in Part 1, Ara Poutama’s notification and engagement process cannot be considered fit for purpose as a risk management strategy.”
She found that “Select elements of the current process appear to support community safety, whereas several features risk compromising community safety.”
Lack of Critical Oversight
Regarding sexual offences against adults, Willis observed the “Southern region…never considering such cases at a DPP.”
Willis found there was a lack critical oversight of notifications made where a person had committed a sexual offence against an adult.
Such oversight could be provided by District Planning Panels. The panels brought “together key people with relevant expertise and intel, and facilitate robust discussion concerning release planning.”
“Interviewees described a more nuanced decision-making process concerning who was notifiable compared to that described in current guidance.”
Differences could be seen “within and between region differences concerning whether persons with convictions for sexual offences against adults or general violence were considered for discussion at a DPP.”
Regarding sexual offences against adults, Willis observed the “Southern region…never considering such cases at a DPP.”
Rather the focus “of notification and engagement activity was on individuals with convictions for sexual offences against children”.
“There was consensus,” wrote Willis, “on a need for greater focus on reintegration planning for individuals convicted for sexual offending against adults and/or violence, who do not currently receive the same level of oversight as individuals convicted for child sexual offences (yet might present greater risk to communities).
But, even of those cases that went to the DPP for review, Willis found a tendency not to notify.
In the Southern Region, only 22 out of 322 cases were notified.
Figures for 1 February 2018 to 7 February 2023
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The New Zealand Reporter to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.