When convicted killer and rapist Paul Russell Wilson was freed on parole in January 2011 he was deemed a low risk of reoffending.

But in April last year Wilson offended again - violating and taking the life of a second woman.

Newly released decisions from the Parole Board give insight into Wilson's offending and supposed rehabilitation - and outline why he was released from his first life sentence.

Wilson, also known as Paul Pounamu Tainui, today pleaded guilty to sexually violating 27-year-old Nicole Marie Tuxford in her Christchurch home last year.

Advertisement

He had earlier pleaded guilty to the life coach's murder.

He will be sentenced for that offending on March 28.

At the time of Tuxford's murder Wilson was on parole for the 1994 rape and murder of Kimberly Jean Schroder in Hokitika.

A 31-year-old sickness beneficiary at the time, Wilson visited Schroder's flat and tied up her male flatmate.

When his girlfriend came home, he cut her hands during a confrontation, before cutting off her jeans and raping her.

He then stabbed her in the neck after she made comments about relationships with other men.

Wilson was sentenced to 15 years non-parole, though on appeal that was reduced to 13 years.

During his prison term he met high profile inmate David Bain and the pair became firm friends.

WIlson even acted as Bain's best man at his wedding to Liz Davies in 2014.

The Herald has today obtained the parole decisions for the double killer.

His first parole hearing took place in June 2007.

At that hearing a psychological assessment described Wilson as being at low risk of reoffending.

"He has a glowing report from the prison," the report stated.

"He has received 275 individual sessions with four different psychologists.

"He has had nearly 300 escorted outings."

While Wilson may have been a model inmate, he was declined parole as the board was concerned he had not addressed his violent offending.

"We are concerned at what seems to have been numerous interventions in his case without focusing on the aspects of the offence he committed," the report said.

"For us, the beginning of any journey to release is an honest recollection by him of what he did and some insight into why he did it at the time.

"It seems to us that he is still denying and minimising large parts of that."

Nicole Tuxford was his second murder victim.
Nicole Tuxford was his second murder victim.

They said Wilson continued to insist that he had had consensual sex with Schroder and had "ignored" the sexual element of his offending and "not concentrated sufficiently on his actions".

The board sought a "fresh" psychological assessment which focused on Wilson's offending and "what exactly happened on that occasion; why it happened, and what he has done about that subsequently so that we can get a better view of his risk at the present time".

"We have had glowing reports of his ability as a worker. Very fine people have testified to that. He is otherwise very well behaved in prison," the board said.

"All of that is commendable but it is expected by us, although commendable, none of it washes in the sense that it does not relate to what he did on this appalling occasion and we lack that focus.

"This makes us feel uncomfortable and uncertain about his future. We are declining to parole him at the present time."

Wilson next saw the board in June 2008.

Again, he presented as an "excellent" prisoner.

Again, he was declined parole.

"Today we have told him again that we have recently met with members of his victims' family," the report stated.

"In brief, they have been devastated by his offending. They expressed to us, as has been now expressed to him through their statements, their dismay that there could be any thought of him being released.

"They told us in very graphic terms of the way in which his offending had been so destructive to members of the family. Those terrible wounds continue for them daily."

The board heard that a new psychological assessment had been completed, which "explored the issues identified" at his first hearing.

"He seems to us to have adopted the language of the occasion very well, but we are not convinced he has any depth to his understanding of the points we have made nor of the effects of his offending on others," the report revealed.

The psychologist made a number of recommendations - most importantly that Wilson "continues to engage with individual treatment" and identify and explore his sexual offenidng which he had previously ignored.

"He is doing that. That should continue," the board said.

"What we have experienced today is Mr Wilson's ability with language.

"He now confirms, instead of talking about 'making love' to his victim, he says 'I forced her' and he uses the word 'rape'.

"It seems to us at the present time that he has this new language but he does not convey to us any real depth of feeling nor any real impression that he has made some changes to the way in which he has thought about this matter or to his behaviour in the future which would give us confidence that the community would be safe if he were to be released."

The board said at the time that Wilson had "work to get on with" and could not be released until that had been done.

At his third hearing in June 2009 the board was still not satisfied that Wilson could be safely released.

"He is said to have made excellent progress in his therapy sessions over the past year," that decision stated.

"These focused on his offence and his behaviour at the time.

"He is said to have been open and apparently contrite when discussing his behaviour in these sessions and to have accepted full responsibility for his offending."

The board agreed with a number of experts that Wilson posed "a low risk of further violent or general re-offending".

"In his view any further offending, if it were to occur, would most likely be in the context of relationship difficulties leading to an escalation in his attempts to influence or control his partner," the board said.

Wilson told the board that he had "gone as far as he should in individual therapy" and any more would be "counterproductive" and he wanted to participate in group treatment which would "provide opportunities to challenge himself and develop new skills".

"The Board may only release an offender on parole if it is satisfied on reasonable
grounds that he will not pose an undue risk to the safety of the community having
regard to the support and supervision available to him and the public interest in his reintegration into society as a law abiding citizen," the decsion read.

"While acknowledging that Mr Wilson continues to be assessed as posing a low risk of re-offending on the basis of both static and dynamic risk factors the board has reservations about supporting his release into the community in the near future.

"We are not satisfied that it is safe to do so.

"This has to do with many factors including the appalling nature of his offending, the impact of it on his victims, and whether he has learnt the lessons and made the changes asked of him.

"For now, parole is declined. As we told Mr Wilson, we think he needs to consolidate and apply the skills that he has learnt in therapy over the years."

The fourth parole hearing took place in June 2010.

Following strong submissions from his victim's family - and due to concerns of the board - Wilson was reassessed using an assessment tool known as the PCL-R (psychopathy checklist).

"The conclusion reached mirrored that of all the previous assessments," the board said.

"It also discounted the suggestion that he displays psychopathic personality traits."

The psychopathy report said: "In summary, a review of the dynamic factors associated with recidivism suggests that Mr Wilson will be able to effectively manage his assessed low actuarial risk of reoffending at the present time".

The board did not agree.

"Over the years Mr Wilson has had the benefit of extensive individual counselling to address all aspects of his functioning and offending," the report said.

"In the course of this work he has developed an offence chain to analyse why he committed the murder, and a safety plan to help avoid a similar tragedy occurring again.

"The reports say that he has made considerable gains in treatment and is committed to a positive approach to rehabilitation and genuinely contrite for his offending.

"We must say that we did not observe that improvement in our interview with him."

In explanation, Wilson told the board he "turns to jelly" before his hearings.

"Whatever the reason, he was unable to answer even relatively simple questions and gave extremely limited and inadequate responses," the report revealed.

"Parole is declined today.

"We make no promises as to the outcome of the next hearing."

At the next hearing in December 2010 the board gave Wilson the answer he was waiting for.

The killer would be released.

"We have talked to Mr Wilson about the victims' position - how they continue to grieve for the tragic loss of their much loved family member and friend, and the horrendous circumstances of her death," said the board at the time.

"They believe that a sentence of life imprisonment should mean just that, and oppose his release.

"They say that he showed no remorse at the time of his trial or when he first became eligible for parole, and doubt that he is remorseful now."

The board said they had "a much more constructive dialogue" with Wilson at the December 2010 hearing than at previous hearings.

"He assured us that he is deeply sorry for what he did and the pain that he caused and that he understands and accepts the victims' stance," the board said.

Wilson's prison history was unblemished and he had been on more outings and worked as part of a prison work gang.

"As is to be expected, his behaviour on these outings is described as "exemplary" and "faultless"," the board said.

"He is also reported to have a good rapport with staff and offenders, and to communicate easily with them.

"He maintains a minimum security classification and an (drug) free status and has not been involved in any incident reports or incurred any misconducts.

"He has not undertaken any further counselling as that was thought to be counterproductive."

Wilson proposed to leave prison and live at a facility that offered rehabilitative programmes for offenders.

"As discussed in the Board's previous decision, Mr Wilson has consistently been assessed as posing a low risk of reoffending," the board said.

"We see no reason for that assessment to change.

"We are satisfied that Mr Wilson is aware of his high risk situations and has appropriate strategies to address them.

"On that basis, and having regard to the extensive support and oversight which will be provided by the staff at [(the facility), coupled with the support from his probation officer, family members and friends, and his strong release plan, we are satisfied that Mr Wilson will not pose an undue risk to the safety of the community, or any members of it if released at this stage of his sentence."

Wilson was granted parole and freed from Christchurch Men's Prison on 17 January 2011.

He was subject to special conditions for the first five years of his parole and standard conditions for life.

A life sentence is just that, and whilst Wilson was released on parole, any breach of the conditions could have seen him recalled to prison for the rest of his days.

In August 2011 he appeared before the board for a final time for a monitoring hearing.

"He has an excellent report… he is doing very well," that board report stated.

He had some medical issues but they were being "investigated".

He hoped to move into a flat.

He had a job.

"A very good thing to report is that he began work on Monday," the board said.

"He secured that himself. That is very much to his credit."

The board decided then that they would not see Wilson again.

"We do not need to see him again. We think he has had a very good start and has done very well indeed," the report said.

"He has good support and is showing that he can control his anxiety levels and get on with the tasks ahead of him in a very positive way.

"He is obviously a valuable member of the community at (the facility). The good report is noted. No changes are made."

But the board did see Wilson again - after he killed Tuxford and a final order to recall him to prison was sought.