Thomas, R (on the Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE STEWART
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Claimant, serving a life sentence for sexual offences against children, sought Judicial Review of the Secretary of State's rejection of a Parole Board recommendation to transfer him to an open prison. The Parole Board's recommendation followed a comprehensive review and an oral hearing. The Secretary of State, however, expressed concerns about the Claimant's risk level and the adequacy of the Parole Board's assessment. The court held that the Secretary of State's decision was rational and the process followed fair, guided by principles from previous cases and statutory provisions.
Judgment
Mr Justice Stewart:
Introduction
By a claim form filed on 19 June 2014, the Claimant seeks Judicial Review of the Defendant’s decision dated 21 March 2014. In that decision the Secretary of State did not accept the recommendation of the Parole Board that the Claimant was suitable to be transferred to an open prison.
Judge Russell QC granted permission to bring Judicial Review and ordered an expedited hearing. His observations were:
“Given that the decision of the Parole Board was made following an oral hearing at which the evidence of the experts was tested and the Applicant gave evidence, the Claimant’s claim that the Defendant’s decision to reject the Parole Board’s recommendation for transfer was irrational is arguable.”
Background
The Claimant was sentenced on 28 July 2006 to life imprisonment in respect of 35 counts of sexual offences against children. The Claimant had been a vicar, though the sentencing judge accepted that none of the offences was made using his capacity as a vicar noting however, “the same good social skills which made you a successful priest were used…to groom these young boys and breach their trust.” The offences took place over a period of four years when the Claimant was aged between 40 and 44. The life sentence tariff was set at 8 years and the tariff expiry date was 14 February 2014.
The Claimant completed various programmes, was enhanced under the Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme and had not received any negative behaviour warnings or adjudications.
In May 2013 the Defendant referred the Claimant’s case to the Parole Board for consideration of whether or not it would be appropriate to direct his release. He also asked for advice as to whether the Claimant was suitable for open conditions, the Claimant being in custody in HMP Wakefield.
Reports available to the Parole Board were:
The pre and post sentence reports
A report dated 22 May 2013 from the Claimant’s then Offender Supervisor, Ms Crisp.
A report dated 9 August 2013 from the Claimant’s Offender Manager, Mr Pennell.
An OASys dated 9 August 2013 completed by Mr Pennell.
A report dated 14 May 2013 from the Claimant’s key worker, Prison Officer Bourke.
A psychology report dated 01 June 2013 from Tina Mistry, Forensic Psychologist.
Psychiatry and security reports.
A psychology report prepared on the instructions of the Claimant’s Solicitors by Rhys Matthews, a Forensic Psychologist and dated 15 September 2013.
There were also written repres