KEY POINTS:
A Parole Board decision released yesterday gives a rare glimpse into the mind of a serial sex offender dubbed the "Beast of Blenheim".
Stewart Murray Wilson - who admits prison taught him to say sorry even when he hadn't done anything wrong - will stay in prison for at least four more years because he is still considered too dangerous to be released.
Wilson, 62, was convicted in 1996 of rape, attempted rape, indecent assault, stupefying, bestiality and wilful ill treatment of a child.
As required by law the decision will be reviewed in six months.
He could have been released on December 2 after serving two thirds of his sentence, but the Corrections Department successfully applied to the Parole Board to keep him in prison.
In his statement to the board, Wilson gave conflicting statements about his involvement in a string of serious sex offences.
He told board members he had learnt in prison that you had to say sorry for doing wrong - regardless of whether you were responsible.
Asked by a board member if that meant he was admitting any of the offences he gave no definitive answer.
Wilson said if he had been guilty he would have entered guilty pleas, but he also said if he had contributed to the offences he would have to apologise.
He told board members he was not prepared to engage in a counselling programme in prison because it clashed with his religious beliefs, but he would complete the programme in the community.
Wilson's "cruel and degrading" treatment of his victims was a main reason for the board denying Wilson parole.
He took the women - many of whom were mother and daughter - into his home on the pretext of friendship, but then subjected them to indecencies, including rape.
The board found he took control of their lives to an extraordinary degree and got compliance by threats of force.
Psychologists found Wilson posed a high risk of reoffending and had done nothing to make that risk more tolerable.
The board said until Wilson showed some insight into his offending, and accepted personal responsibility for the "appalling" impact on his victims, it had no confidence - given the slightest opportunity - the offending would not happen again.
It also found his release plan was inadequate, and without a high level of support the community would be in jeopardy.
