The prominent Christchurch eye surgeon and partner of a district court judge jailed for attempting to murder his landlord has been warned by the Parole Board for “threatening” his victims during his bid for changes to his release conditions.
Ian Dallison, 66, was jailed for six years and 10 months in April 2023 after pleading guilty to one charge of attempting to murder Alberto Ceccarelli and one of wounding Ceccarelli’s wife with intent to commit grievous bodily harm in August 2022.
The day of the attack, Dallison was adjudicated bankrupt on an application by Ceccarelli and an associate, who owned a commercial building that Dallison previously leased.
The order related to $247,000, most of which was rent owed to the pair.
Later that day, Dallison drove his red Porsche to Ceccarelli’s home.
Inside his car, he had nine firearms and 167 rounds of ammunition. The guns included a loaded Ruger semi-automatic pistol, a loaded Smith & Wesson revolver, a Sterling Model 300 handgun, an Accelerator Model handgun, a Ruger Revolver, and a double-barreled derringer handgun.
He also had a Maglite torch gun loaded with a 410-shotgun round plus two rounds in his jacket pocket, two Mag pen guns, one with a silencer, and three Ruger 10/22 magazines.
Dallison burst into his former landlord’s home as he sat at the dinner table with his wife before firing a shot at his head which only narrowly missed.
In December 2022, he pleaded guilty to charges of attempted murder of Ceccarelli and wounding with intent to injure the man’s wife.
Dallison was sentenced to six years and 10 months in prison. He was released on parole in June this year – subject to a number of conditions, including that he not enter the Canterbury area.
However, Dallison now says that it is impeding his reintegration into the community, and he has made an application to the Parole Board to vary his conditions.
He is currently living at an approved address in Marlborough but wants to relocate to Canterbury as soon as possible, saying his support network, including his partner Jane Farish, a District Court judge, is all in the area.
Dallison appeared before the Parole Board yesterday.
His lawyer Kerry Cook told the board that Dallison was “not an undue risk” to the community.
He said Dallison had been a “model prisoner … a model parolee” and had “complete respect for his conditions”, never “pushing the boundaries”.
“He doesn’t want Christchurch, he hasn’t asked for Christchurch… he wants an area outside Christchurch … out of respect for the victims,” Cook said.
“We’ve had five months of exemplary conduct, no issues whatsoever.”
Cook said the current conditions prohibiting him from entering Canterbury were “onerous” and were effectively hindering his full reintegration into the community.
The board heard that Dallison’s victims were opposed to the variation of his conditions.
The specifics of their opposition are suppressed.
Dallison spoke to the board about his release.
“In general terms, the last five months of getting back into society have been an interesting experience, shall we say.
He said being in Marlborough since his release had allowed him to “find my feet”.
“I just feel now it’s time to start moving further forward. The hard thing is being far away from my support … I get phone calls … it’s not like being able to see them in person,” he said.
“If anything, in prison, I saw more of them at weekly visits. I’ve been reasonably isolated from people, and that’s going to get worse.”
Dallison acknowledged his victims’ views – but assured he was no longer a risk to them.
“I have no way to communicate that with them,” he said.
Dallison spoke about what would happen if his application were rejected.
He noted that in three years, his parole conditions would end and there would be no restriction on where he could go.
“I will be moving back to Canterbury and there’s nothing to stop me …
“I will be going into Christchurch if need be,” he said.
He also said that to date, he had not applied for one-off permission to come to the Canterbury area to see family.
He claimed that this was so his victims would not be put through a process of being notified each time.
But indicated that if he could not live in the Canterbury area, he would make applications more frequently going forward, so he could see his family and supporters.
“I have resisted invites to go to the region, for functions and to catch up with people,” he said.
“Christmas is coming up, and I will be making applications. I will have less hesitancy to do so. [The victims] will be getting hassled about me wanting to go down there.”
To that, Parole Board panel convenor Mary More said:
“Be careful, Mr Dallison … It sounds like you’re threatening the victims with consequences if this application isn’t granted, that they will be hassled by the Victim Notification Register?” she said.
Dallison clarified his position.
“I did not mean that as a threat … it will purely be a coincidence of where we’re at,” he said.
More asked Dallison to “put yourself in the victim’s shoes” and consider how they would feel if they saw him in Canterbury.
“If I saw them, I would be turning in the opposite direction and hightailing it out of there,” he said.
“Naturally, they’d feel anxious, they’d feel frightened … they’d probably be on the spot and remain frozen, thinking ‘oh hell what’s going to happen next.
“Hopefully they’d be reassured by my disappearing off the scene.”
Board member Greg Coyle said if Dallison was allowed to return to a specific part of Canterbury, the victims would effectively be excluded from that area.
He was concerned whether that was “reasonable” for a victim of a violent crime.
Another board member said the application to move felt “very early” in Dallison’s parole journey.
She noted it had only been five months since he left prison.
Dallison explained that part of the motivation for his application was that the friends he was living with were leaving Marlborough.
He said he could rent or purchase a property there but his future was not in that area so he felt that was pointless.
The board took some time to consider Dallison’s application and decided to adjourn the hearing until December.
More said a further report was needed before any final ruling could be made.
She indicated that if Dallison was allowed to move to Canterbury, he would likely be required to adhere to residential restrictions, including a curfew.
Dallison said he would agree to that.
The hearing will continue on December 22.
Anna Leask is a senior journalist who covers national crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2008 and has worked as a journalist for 20 years with a particular focus on family and gender-based violence, child abuse, sexual violence, homicides, mental health and youth crime. She writes, hosts and produces the award-winning podcast A Moment In Crime, released monthly on nzherald.co.nz