Nothing to predict the RSA killings, court told

It was not possible for the probation service to predict that William Bell would go from aggravated robber to triple murderer, a High Court judge was told yesterday.

At the High Court in Auckland the Crown is seeking to strike out a claim by Tai Hobson, the husband of slain RSA worker Mary Hobson, for $550,000 damages.

He said that Bell was not properly supervised while on parole following a five-year sentence for aggravated robbery and that failure led to the killings.

Bell assaulted a woman on bail and Mr Hobson said he should have been recalled to prison. But Crown counsel John Pike said this was not a case of "clear and present danger".

Bell was a violent man, but sadly there were many violent people on parole.

There was nothing in his previous pattern of offending to predict that he would commit murder.

Mr Hobson's lawyer, Brian Henry, told Justice Paul Heath that it was mandatory under the legislation for probation officers to supervise people under parole.

That was the public expectation, both for the rehabilitation of the offender and for public safety. He said it was not necessary to show that Bell had a propensity to murder, only that he had a propensity to commit violent crimes.

In the aggravated robbery for which he was given parole, Bell attacked a service station attendant with a baton and pursued his victim, who fled and locked himself in a toilet for protection.

Mr Henry said that once the probation service learned that Bell was doing a liquor licensing course, it should have found out that he was training at the RSA.

A reasonable probation officer would have contacted the club and told the manager to get rid of Bell and warn staff that Bell was a violent offender, Mr Henry said.

Reserving his decision, Justice Heath offered Mr Hobson his condolences for the murder of his wife.