He buried her alive in a shallow grave at Pencarrow, near Wellington. Her body was found six weeks later.
The board’s order doesn’t cover historical photos of him from this time. Dally was jailed for life in 1990.
At a hearing before the board in April, at Auckland South Corrections Facility, Dally’s lawyer Emma Priest sought the non-publication order because there were few providers of the sort of accommodation Dally would require if released.
“Mr Dally requires accommodation with the highest level of supervision and reintegration programmes given,” the board said, in a written decision released to RNZ.
“There has already been an indication from two such providers that they would have to decline their services because of Mr Dally’s notoriety and the potential public backlash for them and other residents.
“A second reason (no less important) is that so heinous was his crime, his own personal safety may be in jeopardy from those who seek justice outside the justice system.”
Priest did not apply for parole at the April hearing, but there was discussion about what would be required should Dally be released in the future.
Psychological review ordered
In reaching its decision to grant the order, the board described the case as exceptional, noted Dally’s appeal against his convictions, and said the murder “has a live infamy in the public domain”.
“Mr Dally’s crimes (the appalling features of which have steeped themselves into the national psyche), the way in which he was detected as the perpetrator and his trial are well known.”
The board said its primary consideration in making the non-publication order was the lack of options Dally would have for accommodation upon release.
Given the lengthy time he’s served, the board also directed the prison chief psychologist to commission a case review before Dally next appearance in front of the board, later this year.
The psychologist who did the review would look over “the entirety of the psychological information to ensure that every strand relevant to Mr Dally’s risk over the last 35 years is comprehensively addressed for the board”.
There had been two previous reviews, but the board wanted updated information.
“We are also mindful of the public profile of Mr Dally’s case and believe that this issue needs to be part of any formulation of risks he will face and the risks he poses to the safety of the community.”
Dally claimed he enjoyed the offending
The board decision outlines some of what Dally’s file reveals. He’s been denied parole many times.
It said his “sinister proclivity” developed when he was a teenager, and that for a long time he denied there was any sexual element to his 1989 offending.
A review ordered by the board in 2009 found he scored highly on the “psychopathy checklist measure”, and that his characteristics pointed to the likelihood of serious violent and sexual recidivism.
Back then, Dally dismissed the offending as “ancient history” and claimed he was convicted of murder, not sexual offending.
The board report said that after meeting him in 2014: “It was worrying that he acknowledged in answering questioning of the board that he had enjoyed the event and the circumstances of his crime and the control he could exercise on the child during his dreadful offending”.
In a later review a psychologist found Dally thought of his crimes as a random act of violence and he didn’t acknowledge the premeditation, although by then he admitted it was mostly sexually motivated.
“He denied there was any sadism involved and again minimised the nature of the sexual offending.”
His risk of reoffending had changed from extremely high when he began his sentence to, in recent years, a low risk of violent offending and an average risk of sexual offending.
– RNZ