The Department of Corrections have revealed how Tauranga man Tony Robertson was managed following the lapsed name suppression of the convicted murderer and rapist.

Robertson, who has numerous convictions for offences in Tauranga, was on probation under the management of North Shore Community Corrections when he raped and murdered Auckland mother Blessie Gortingco.

Tony Robertson in the dock, facing charges for the rape and murder of Blessie Gotingco. Photo: David White/Fairfax NZ.

Department of Corrections Northern Region regional commissioner Jeanette Burns says: 'The department passes its sincere condolences on to Mrs Gotingco's family and friends.”

Senior corrections and police staff met with members of the Gotingco family last year to help address any questions they had about corrections' involvement in the management of Robertson's sentence.

Jeanette says it's usual corrections practice to review cases where serious crimes or breaches have occurred to establish that mandatory practice standards were followed, and to identify any learnings that could strengthen future practice.

Corrections Chief Probation Officer, Darius Fagan, reviewed the management of this offender in the community following a lengthy sentence in prison.

'The review found Robertson was managed in an appropriate and highly responsive manner,” explains Jeanette.

'Probation staff met all parole mandatory standards and exceeded practice standards in all aspects of sentence management.

'They applied the appropriate tools to assess the offender's level of risk and inform decision making, undertook a robust pre-release process and applied an intensive level of offender management throughout the case.”

Robertson was subject to GPS (global positioning system) monitoring as a condition of his release from prison.

'The corrections GPS monitoring programme significantly assisted police in rapidly solving this crime,” she adds, 'and was used as critical evidence in the High Court that led to Robertson's conviction.”

Robertson was released in December 2013 after serving his full eight year sentence.

He did not receive parole before the end of his sentence because he was resistant to undertaking treatment in prison and as a result was deemed to present an undue risk.

Upon release from prison, he was subject to six months of conditions in the community.

As he was not paroled he could not be recalled to prison, but if he breached any of his conditions he would face a range of censures that could result in court charges.

The Review found…

In total, Robertson reported to Community Probation 38 times - nine of these being at his home address and some of them unscheduled, says Jeanette.

'This reporting regime with Community Probation escalated from twice a week to three times a week – well in excess of the standard that requires an offender to report once every 10 days,” she explains.

'All incidents of non-compliance with his release conditions were swiftly followed up and resulted in two periods where he was held in custody.

'Efforts were made to rehabilitate Robertson and he had worked with a department psychologist while in custody and attended treatment with the alcohol and drug service while in the community.

'The intensity of his management was changed to match his level of risk through increased contact with corrections staff and visits to his address.” Jeanette says there was good co-ordination of information on this offender by police and corrections.

Time line following release…

On release, Robertson stayed with his extended family in a North Island town for a week, where he was fitted with GPS monitoring equipment.

The location was not suitable for him to stay permanently and he was then placed in supported accommodation with an approved provider.

However, after a fortnight he was evicted for smoking and allowing another individual to stay overnight without approval.

A breach of conditions was filed in court and he was taken into custody by police.

He appeared in court in January last year and was sentenced to six months community detention.

He was then placed in a house in Birkdale as arranged by his family, with GPS monitoring.

Other addresses were assessed but found to be unsuitable or GPS wasn't suitable, says Jeanette.

'In approving this address the probation officer carefully balanced the safety of the community against the need to house the offender in a place where he could be electronically monitored,” she says.

'Identified risks associated with his type of previous offending were mitigated by setting exclusion zones that would prompt an electronic monitoring alarm if he entered these zones.”

Community Corrections considered whether his immediate neighbours needed to be advised of his criminal history, but did not do so, and it is considered unlikely that notification would have mitigated his specific level of offending.

Police and Corrections shared information on this offender and police were kept informed of his changes of address and the vehicles he used.

'Various exclusion zones including parks and schools were set as part of this monitoring, which meant if he went into one of these zones, the corrections monitoring centre would be alerted and the offender and police would be immediately contacted,” says Jeanette.

Later in January, Robertson was tracked going into a park and police arrested him.

In February, an Extended Supervision Order, which would allow him to be monitored for up to 10 years beyond his sentence completion, was imposed by the Court after an application from corrections.

It was due to begin in June 2014. The need for this had been identified well before his release with the process beginning a year earlier.

For the breach of conditions (going into the park) he was sentenced in February to two months imprisonment, but as he had already been in custody for more than half that time, he was released with the conditions re-imposed.

Probation increased its contact frequency to three times a week and he commenced weekly treatment sessions with a Community Alcohol and Drug Service.

He completed six sessions and probation visits dropped to twice a week.

In May, police asked for GPS data in relation to the death of Mrs Gotingco. Information around this has already been made public, says Jeanette.

'Since this terrible crime was committed,” she says, 'the government passed into law in December 2014 the use of Public Protection Orders which, if granted, allows an offender to be detained in a prison facility beyond the completion of their sentence if they pose an imminent risk of serious re-offending.

'It's hard to know whether Mr Robertson would have reached that threshold as the law has not yet been tested.

'The government currently has a bill before the house to allow for drug and alcohol testing of offenders serving sentences in the community if they have abstinence conditions imposed on them.”

In addition, the government is also currently considering the introduction of a sex offender's register, and strengthened requirements to participate in rehabilitation while imprisoned.

'This is the first time an offender subject to GPS in New Zealand has committed such a heinous crime, and for some this will raise the question about whether the system is effective,” says Jeanette.

'The department's experience of GPS monitoring is that it has been effective in detecting breaches of conditions relating to offenders' whereabouts.

'Some of these breaches have been serious enough to result in the imprisonment of the offender.

'International studies have shown that the likelihood of sex offenders violating the conditions of their parole without GPS is two-and-a-half times greater, and that the likelihood of reconviction for those without GPS is two times greater.

'Sadly, however, no amount of supervision, rehabilitation or tracking will deter an offender who is determined to commit a crime no matter the consequences.”