Dr David Curnow1
1Post Sentence Authority, Melbourne, Australia
Biography:
David was registered as a psychologist in 1998, received his specialist title of Forensic Psychologist in 2000 and was awarded his PhD in 2011. David’s career spans state and federal governments, private practice and research agencies. He was a member of the Adult Parole Board from 2014 to 2020 and in 2020 was appointed to the Post Sentence Authority. David was a member of the Standards Australia committee which reviewed the Fraud and Corruption Control Standard (AS8001), and currently serves on the Victorian Executive of the Forensic College of the Australian Psychological Society and the Justice Human Research Ethics Committee.
Abstract:
A Post Sentence scheme has operated in Victoria since 2005. The scheme's purpose has consistently focused on community protection and increasingly on rehabilitation for people subject to these orders. It has undergone several legislative changes since then, culminating in its most recent iteration in 2018 where it was broadened to include serious violent offenders. Within the body of the Serious Offender Act 2018 Legislation, there was a requirement for a review of the operation and effectiveness of this Act within 5 years after the commencement of all of the provisions of this Act. This presentation will examine the history of the Post Sentence scheme until the present day and provide an overview of the process undertaken for a person to be placed on an order. It will also include a review of the number of people made subject to different post sentence orders since the scheme’s inception, to show that only the ‘critical few’ are made subject to the scheme. By reviewing both the number of people on the scheme who have seriously offended (sexually and/or violently) while on an order and the number of people who were subject to an order but had their order either expire without renewal or be revoked, it will posit that an argument can be made about the relative success of the scheme. The Legislative review of the scheme considered the reasons for this success which emphasised the delicate balance between community protection and rehabilitation.