Joseph Brider was sentenced to preventive detention this week. Photo / John Kirk-Anderson/ Pool
Joseph Brider was sentenced to preventive detention this week. Photo / John Kirk-Anderson/ Pool
The Parole Board have blasted Corrections over the community management of the man who murdered Juliana Herrera in her Christchurch home just 72 days after his release.
Board chairman Sir Ron Young said there was a clear failure by Corrections in providing vital information which would have changed the decision to parole the convicted kidnapper and rapist.
On Wednesday Joseph James Brider was sentenced to life in prison and preventive detention for the murder of the Colombian native in her Christchurch flat - described by Justice Jonathan Eaton as brutal, cruel, callous, depraved and sadistic.
At sentencing, Brider was described as a psychopathic offender who lacked any remorse or empathy and was undoubtedly a significant and “very real” danger to women.Brider had been released on parole - after being refused five times - with strict conditions including GPS monitoring and a curfew.
He moved into a flat adjoining Herrera’s on Grove Street, Addington and within days became obsessed with her.
The Parole Board had refused to release Brider on multiple occasions and only agreed to do so - shortly before his sentence end date - so they could impose conditions and put monitoring in place.
That monitoring - including GPS tracking and a curfew - fell to Corrections once Brider was living outside the wire.
Today Sir Ron released a statement highly critical of Corrections management of Brider.
His comments come after an independent report from Professor Devon Polaschek into the Parole Board’s decision in October 2021 to release Joseph Brider on parole.
In her review Professor Polaschek had concluded the Parole Board’s decision to release Brider was reasonable based on the information available to it.
Sir Ron said the board’s preferred address for Brider was the Salisbury Street Foundation.He said the address “discussed extensively” at his parole hearing.
However the board was unable to release Brider to the Salisbury Street Foundation.
“This was because according to the information provided by Corrections to the Parole Board’s October 2021 parole hearing, there was no room available for Mr Brider at the Salisbury Street Foundation,” said Sir Ron.
”I now believe the information provided to the Board by Corrections that there was no room available at the Salisbury Street Foundation for a release on parole was not correct.”
“It is my understanding that after the June 2021 parole hearing, where it was clearly intended that Mr Brider would be released to the Salisbury Street Foundation, Corrections contacted the Foundation and cancelled the referral. This occurred in August of 2021.
”The Parole Board was not made aware of this significant change in the release plan by Corrections at any time before Mr Brider’s release on parole.”
Juliana Bonilla-Herrera was murdered by her neighbour, Joseph Brider while he was on parole for rape.
Sir Ron revealed today that the Salisbury Street Foundation had now told the Parole Board that they had a bed available for Brider “if he had been released in June” and “would have still made a room available for him following the October parole hearing”.
”Given the Board’s clear commitment to releasing Mr Brider to the Salisbury Street Foundation, as shown in the Board’s hearing decision of June 2021, this was a very serious failure by Corrections to tell the Board of the cancellation,” Sir Ron blasted.
“It is the Parole Board and not Corrections that decides where an offender may be released to on parole. To do that effectively the Board relies on accurate information from Corrections.
“Corrections had no authority from the Board to withdraw the application to the Salisbury Street Foundation when it was aware that was the Board’s preferred address and that a bed was available for Mr Brider.”
“It is clear to me that Corrections’ failure to provide this vital information compromised the Board’s decision-making.
”The Board would most definitely have released Mr Brider to the Salisbury Street Foundation if it had known the correct facts.”
In response, Corrections chief executive Jeremy Lightfoot said they had not been able to substantiate whether the claim was correct.
“I take any allegation raising concerns about information we provide to the New Zealand Parole Board extremely seriously.
“That’s why I have called for an independent review into this claim. I am determined to understand exactly what has occurred here so Juliana’s family have the clarity they so rightly deserve. I would like to apologise for any distress this has caused them during what has already been a difficult and traumatic week.”
Lightfoot expected the review to “quickly and clearly” outline what information led to the Parole Board being advised in the final Parole Assessment Report prepared by Corrections that a bed at Salisbury Street Foundation was not guaranteed.
“I also expect this review to identify any changes that can be made to further strengthen information sharing between Corrections and the Parole Board.”
Corrections provided an excerpt to the Parole Board in their assessment for parole for the October 2021 hearing.
“Whilst his release to the Salisbury Street Foundation (SSF) has previously been advised to the NZPB, in preparation of his October 2021 appearance, an alternative release proposal has been required to be pursued with [withheld due to suppression orders]; continuing his engagement with the [withheld due to suppression orders] into the community and their accommodation service.
“This alternative release proposal has been pursued as Corrections were advised by SSF that the service could not guarantee a bed will be available for Mr Brider at his release/end date, alongside concerns raised around an insufficient time remaining on his sentence to fully engage in SSF’s intensive programme.”
High-profile victim advocate Ruth Money said if true, it was “unfathomable” that Corrections would cancel the placement when “it is not their role to decide the release conditions”.
”In cancelling the placement to Salisbury Street, Corrections has forced the Parole Board into a making a decision that resulted in Juliana’s murder,” she told the Herald.
”The negligence is unbelievable.
”What was the motivation of the Corrections staff who made this decision? Heads should roll.”
Money said the claims made “a total mockery” of the “so-called” review by Corrections’ chief probation officer Darius Fagan who found “the actions of staff neither caused nor could have prevented this offending”.
”Fagan should resign immediately – how can we trust anything he has said?” Money posed.
”This is further evidence that Corrections are woefully under-skilled and underfunded when it comes to managing the high-risk predators.
”It is unprecedented that the Parole Board would say that Corrections have made a ‘very serious failure’ - good on them for being honest with Juliana’s family and the community.”
At sentencing, the court heard from experts who complied pre-sentence reports about Brider.
They said they doubted Brider would be amenable to any rehabilitation - and said he had “antisocial and psychopathic personality features”.
”Any attempt to mitigate his risk... would be highly likely to be successful,” one said.
He was also described as “unemotional, impulsive and callous” and it was clear he “took pleasure in harming others”.
Further, he “consistently displayed evidence of minimisation and blaming others” during his interviews.
“In the circumstances, he has displayed no remorse… no empathy,” said Boshier.
Brider’s lawyer James Rapley KC said while the murder was “brutal and depraved” and no one would “ever understand how someone could act that way” - his client had accepted responsibility.
Rapley claimed that as Brider “spends decades in prison” he would receive treatment and get insight into his offending which may help to change his behaviour in the future.
He said while Brider’s offending was “very heinous” he did not think an indefinite sentence was necessary.
Rapley suggested a final sentence of around 19.5 to 20 years.
The killing of Juliana Bonilla-Herrera: What Brider did
At an arraignment for Brider in September Crown Prosecutor Claire Boshier read the summary of facts to the court - outlining the horrific attack on Bonilla-Herrera.
She revealed that just a week after Brider was released from prison he searched “Colombia lady” on his phone.
After that he purchased two rolls of masking tape and searched again for Bonilla-Herrera online - putting her name into Facebook and Google.He searched again the day before the murder.
He purchased a box of condoms and latex gardening gloves and on the night of the murder he searched a number of pornographic sites including men sneaking in on women sleeping and “familial relations videos”.
That night Bonilla-Herrera returned home from a night out with a friend intending going to bed.
She saw Brider sitting outside his flat and asked her friend to drive her up to her door and wait for her as she felt “threatened by” and uncomfortable about him.”
He gave her a bad feeling and she felt like she was being watched,” a friend told police.”She was deeply concerned for her safety... she did not feel safe because of the neighbour,” another friend said. The night she was killed she spent some time online speaking to friends.
After midnight Brider broke into Bonilla-Herrera’s house. A sleep app recording nighttime noises captured the first 10 minutes of her murder.
Bonilla-Herrera was heard saying “excuse me” and later “crying and begging for her life”.
”Stop, shut up,” Brider told her, threatening repeatedly to cut her throat. Screaming and an “audible struggle” could also be heard.
Police said Brider then sexually assaulted and violently attacked her.
Eight minutes into the recording three punches could be heard and Brider said to his victim “are you going to behave”.
The recording finishes with Bonilla-Herrera moaning and saying “where are you taking me”.Forensic evidence revealed Bonilla-Herrera tried to escape but was “dragged” back across the bed.
Brider took her to the lounge and she tried to fight him off and run away. He inflicted 51 separate blunt-force injuries and stabbed the terrified woman repeatedly.
Bonilla-Herrera’s friend went to meet her at the flat the next day for a planned bike ride. Brider spoke to the friend saying “she must still be asleep”.
Hours later Bonilla-Herrera was found dead in her own home - naked apart from one sock and showing distinct defensive wounds along with the almost 30 stab wounds that killed her.
Forensic examinations of both Bonilla-Herrera and Brider’s flats revealed blood, fingerprints and semen pointing directly to the killer.
Brider tried to conceal his involvement, showering, washing clothing and disposing of the murder weapon and other items.
Afterwards, he drove to McDonald’s. Later when he spoke to police he acknowledged he knew a woman lived next door but claimed he did not know her or where she was from.
Life in prison + preventive detention - Brider’s sentence
Justice Eaton, after considering submissions from the Crown and defence, handed down Brider’s sentence.
Brider, in a green prison tracksuit with his balding head shaved, sat still through the hearing, showing no emotion and only uttering “nah” when asked if he had any comments to make to the court.
Justice Eaton said it was clear from the moment Brider moved in next door to Bonilla-Herrera that he “developed an unhealthy interest” in the woman
As he outlined Herrera’s last moments Justice Eaton revealed he’d listened to the recording of the first part of the attack.”
She was crying, she was repeatedly begging for her life,” a sombre Justice Eaton said.”In a display of extraordinary bravery and extraordinary determination... she tried to run from you - she was literally running for her life.
Justice Eaton said Brider claimed his early years were tough but there were “inconsistencies” in what he said about his upbringing.
Brider said he began using substances at the age of 13, and left school for employment at 16.
A short time later he joined the Mongrel Mob which made him “feel accepted”.
His criminal history commenced with minor driving offences as a 17-year-old in 2003 followed by reasonably frequent offending since then including raping a woman in 2014.
Justice Eaton said there was a “consistent theme” in the reports that he lacked empathy, had the inability to manage impulses and had a tendency to exert control through violence.
He said Brider was an “ongoing risk, particularly to women”.Justice Eaton said there were a number of significant aggravating features of the offending - the fact it was premeditated for a start.
Brider claimed it was a “spur of the moment decision to kill” because he was “enraged” to find the man he thought his father, was in fact not.
He told report writers he was “going out to murder” and just happened to come across his neighbour.
Justice Eaton said he did not accept “it was just a coincidence” he had fixated on Bonilla-Herrera in the days before he killed and he was satisfied the break-in, attack and murder were calculated and planned.
He said there was “a high level of brutality”.”It was unspeakably cruel, it was brutal, it was depraved and it was callous.”
“You eviscerated the victim - the violence was extreme... gratuitious.
