Double murderer Scott Watson has appeared before the parole board, where it emerged he was involved in a misconduct incident in prison last year.
The 53-year-old has spent nearly half his life in jail for the murders of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope in the Marlborough Sounds in 1998.
Watson wore his grey prison uniform during what is now his sixth parole hearing.
But he didn’t get a chance to speak as the hearing sat for an unusually long six hours.
The parole board wanted to understand his level of risk after previously receiving three reports with differing views.
The hearing heard about Watson being involved in misconduct that was caught on CCTV in June last year.
A witness described it as an assault – but Watson called it as a play-fight.
One psychologist said downplaying it showed Watson’s superficially and lack of responsibility.
“When caught red-handed, so to speak, it would be more reassuring to take responsibility.”
He said it fit with a victim stance.
The board did not make a decision on Watson’s parole at the end of yesterday’s hearing but is expected to do so before the end of this month.
The board members questioned four psychologists – three from Corrections and one independent – who assessed Watson.
The first scored him highly for recidivism, or repeat offending, saying his denial of the murders and lack of remorse was a concern.
The second psychologist said he was a medium risk, and argued that his denial wasn’t a risk factor.
However, board chairman Sir Ron Young pointed out a cautious approach is taken with those who deny their convictions.
The third psychologist said Watson was medium risk and still had a propensity for violence.
She said overall he was still untreated, but was showing some early signs of promise.
The fourth psychologist – who was independent – said she didn’t see a propensity for violence and that Watson’s “bark was worse than his bite”.
When asked by a board member to explain this given he was a convicted double murderer, the psychologist explained how Watson gets sullen when his needs are not met and he did seem to have some “nastiness”.
She said he had a medium risk, but given he had robust community support, his release could be managed safely.
As a life parolee, she said the conditions imposed on him would be very tight.
