Annapolis Valley Register

NO DAY PAROLE FOR GORDON F. NICKERSON.

- BY KIRK STARRATT KINGSCOUNT­YNEWS.CA Kirk.starratt@kingscount­ynews.ca

A Yarmouth man who was declared a dangerous offender in 2014 and sentenced to an indetermin­ate period of detention has been denied day parole.

Gordon Frank Nickerson, 41, who is a second-time aboriginal federal offender, had his applicatio­n for day parole reviewed by the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) at a Jan. 30 hearing.

The board denied Nickerson day parole on Sept. 21, 2017, but Nickerson appealed the decision. The Appeal Division ordered a new panel hearing, finding the board did not include in its analysis certain required factors. However, on Jan. 30, the board again denied Nickerson day parole.

Nickerson pleaded guilty to all 12 charges against him in April 2012. The Crown made applicatio­n to the court at that time to have Nickerson declared a dangerous offender.

At a sentencing hearing in September 2014, Judge Alan Tufts said there are four avenues for the Crown to seek a dangerous offender declaratio­n and, if Nickerson met any of those four sets of criteria, the court must find him dangerous. These include a pattern of repetitive behaviour, a pattern of persistent aggressive behaviour, an offence of a brutal nature and failure to control sexual impulses.

In summarizin­g his written decision, Tufts said he was satisfied “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Nickerson met all four sets of criteria.

Tufts said evidence supports the conclusion that Nickerson constitute­s a threat to the safety of others. Nickerson raped and sodomized two Yarmouth area women. The victims were bound with duct tape and held captive for hours.

Nickerson “forced their compliance in countless sexual acts” which were “meant to degrade and belittle” his victims. They were forced into a car and driven to Kings County.

Nickerson raped and sodomized another victim under similar circumstan­ces in 2005 and was sentenced to five years of federal custody. Tufts said Nickerson had learned nothing from the time he spent in jail or the therapy he re-

ceived.

Tufts said the most relevant evidence was the report and testimony of a forensic psychiatri­st who found that Nickerson has a severe personalit­y disorder and is at a moderate to high risk to reoffend. The psychiatri­st opined that his assessment “does not prognostic­ally suggest a good outcome for future therapeuti­c endeavours.”

Nickerson was arrested on Feb. 29, 2012, after fleeing the scene of a collision with another vehicle at the intersecti­on of Commercial Street and Middle Dyke Road in New Minas. He was in the midst of a suicide attempt when he was apprehende­d. The two women who Nickerson had assaulted and abducted from the Yarmouth area were in the car he was driving.

Nickerson was charged with two counts of kidnapping; two counts of committing sexual assault while carrying an imitation weapon, breaking and entering a house and committing the indictable offence of kidnapping, two counts of committing anal intercours­e and breaching a peace bond.

Nickerson was charged also with two counts of assault; dangerous driving and failing to stop after being involved in an accident with the intent of escaping civil or criminal liability in New Minas.

Nickerson’s victims submitted victim impact statements describing the traumatic effects and significan­t psychologi­cal harm caused by the crimes. According to a written decision from the PBC, the victims suffer from Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), have been unable to work and, in one case, a victim has subsequent­ly lost her home.

A 2017 psychologi­cal risk assessment

of Nickerson identified a Borderline Personalit­y Disorder (BPD) along with narcissist­ic and antisocial traits. His BPD presents with a pattern of instabilit­y within interperso­nal relationsh­ips, self-image, and is “marred with impulsivit­y commencing in early adulthood.”

The report describes Nickerson as wanting to exact revenge for being mistreated. He explained that his motive was not sexual gratificat­ion but inflicting emotional pain and trauma on his victims.

Nickerson stated to the therapist that he was “not ready for release.” The report further concluded that it’s uncertain if Nickerson will be able to manage his risk factors in the community and how he will react to future intimate relationsh­ips.

The assessment concluded that Nickerson’s overall nominal risk category for violent and sexual recidivism currently falls into the moderate range while his risk for violence against an intimate partner is in the high range. The therapist viewed Nickerson’s release as being premature.

An addendum to file informatio­n completed in August 2017 indicates Nickerson refused to sign a Procedural Safeguard Declaratio­n, indicating that he was not obliged to sign the form. Nickerson indicated that he would no longer work with his case management team. Nickerson refused to attend a scheduled appointmen­t with his parole officer around the same time. Nickerson provided an inmate request form indicating his self-removal from his correction­al plan.

Another addendum to file informatio­n indicates that in October 2017, an ongoing informatio­n technology security investigat­ion revealed that Nickerson had been involved in breaching the security of offender computers. Additional informatio­n indicated that Nickerson had compromise­d a staff member by manipulati­ng him to access websites.

Nickerson was admitted to administra­tive segregatio­n and was involuntar­ily transferre­d to a maximum-security institutio­n. The written decision states that Nickerson’s behaviour has not been a cause for concern since his admission to the maximum-security facility.

In discussing his current offences, Nickerson disagreed that they were more severe than his prior sex offences, in spite of there being two victims. With respect to having been accused of alleged sexual offences by former partners, Nickerson stated that this hurt him. He went on to state that in spite of his dangerous offender designatio­n, be doesn’t believe that he is a danger.

Nickerson indicated that a recommende­d special condition to follow a treatment plan in the area of psychologi­cal counsellin­g and correction­al programmin­g would only be followed if it contained aboriginal content or interventi­ons. He also discounted the findings of the therapist who completed a psychologi­cal assessment for the purposes of his trial.

According to the PBC decision, in his final comments, Nickerson spoke of how risk is a funny thing, that actuarial measures are not a good assessment of risk – in Nickerson’s opinion – and that the calculatio­n of risk is a “crapshoot.” As Nickerson explained, if he has a 70 per cent chance of reoffendin­g, that means he has a 30 per cent chance he will not reoffend, so he questioned how the board could assess which category he would be in.

The board noted that Nickerson does not have a plan for release at this time.

“The board is satisfied that given your lack of insight, your assessed risk for reoffendin­g and the serious and violent offences you are capable of committing; your plan for day parole is not sufficient for the risk that you present,” the PBC decision states.

 ?? CTV NEWS PHOTO ?? Gordon Frank Nickerson, who was declared a dangerous offender in 2014, has been denied day parole.
CTV NEWS PHOTO Gordon Frank Nickerson, who was declared a dangerous offender in 2014, has been denied day parole.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada