A convicted rapist sentenced to 20 years in jail could be released back into society five years early after the Chief Justice yesterday ordered the prison's Parole Board to take "immediate and proper reconsideration" of the case.

Lonnie Eugene Trott was jailed for two counts of rape and one count of burglary on May 12, 1991.

After serving eight years in prison, on November 12, 1999 Trott was released from prison on licence from the Board. But this licence was subject to conditions to an actual order made on October 28, 1999.

The conditions of his parole licence included: to be on good behaviour and refrain from all criminal activity, not to be influenced by people of bad character, be fully employed, be under the strict supervision of probation services; not be charged with any offence under the Criminal Code or Misuse of Drugs Act and to participate in the community-based sexual offenders programme.

However, on October 13, 2003, Trott was charged with a sexual assault while on parole and was remanded in Magistrates' Court on October 14, 2003 for being in breach.

"On October 27, a natural justice notice was sent to court saying the parole board was considering a recall. This notice contained a memo dated October 17, from Senior Probation Officer Chris Paul notifying the board of the offence, that Trott had travelled abroad four times, and had been driving drunk whilst disqualified, since he had been released from prison," Chief Justice Richard Ground said.

On December 8, 2003, the community based sexual offender programme terminated Trott from the programme: "On the grounds he evaded probation with a pattern of lies evidenced by his behaviour at group therapy," Mr. Justice Ground said.

But on March 22, 2004, during the preliminary inquiry on the sexual assault, the charge was withdrawn "for reasons set out in a letter to the senior Magistrate dated March 18. The letter stated the complainant no longer is desirous to proceed, as discussed with the Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Because of an illness, the complainant is not able to proceed with the long form preliminary enquiry," he said.

However, Trott was not released from custody after the charge was dropped, so on April 6 he wrote a letter to the Parole Board asking the Board to get him out of jail.

A hearing was held on November 5, 2004, between the Parole Board and Trott and "at the meeting... Trott advised they take a further look at his file in the event of the not guilty verdict," he said.

"As to the original hearing, the condition not to be charged with a criminal offence is not a fair or proper condition to be imparted in any event. The proper condition should be: do not commit any offence".

But Mr. Justice Ground questioned the legality of this condition.

"He has no control I can understand if they said not to commit any offences - don't go drink and drive, for example. But to tell him not to get charged is like telling him not to catch a cold."

Therefore, the Chief Justice ordered the Parole Board to make an "immediate and proper reconsideration" of Trott's case.

And "by proper I mean the person should be given an opportunity to be heard," he said. "The proper way ahead is not to quash the organised recall but to mandate a proper hearing now in light of the charges withdrawal".

"It was said by (Trott's lawyer Elizabeth Christopher) the Board had made up their mind in any event and the hearing would be pointless. I don't accept that."

He ordered the Parole Board to give Trott another hearing - where he must be fully appraised of all the evidence going to be relied against him.

Also, they were to disregard the fact he travelled abroad as the judge said he "could find nothing in law or in the licence to restrain that".

Earlier in yesterday's proceedings Barrister Martin Johnson of the Attorney General's Chambers said: "the interest of society is larger than any individual's rights. The court has to protect society... from serious offences."

Mr. Johnson said Trott had "pornographic materials on his computer".

Trott admitted to probation officers the illicit material was on his computer but said it got there by "pop-ups".

Probation Officers seized the computer.

Trott took the Parole Board, the Commissioner of Prisons and the Minister of Health and Social Services to court.

It was up to the Island's top judge to determine the legality of the Parole Board's decision in the judicial review yesterday.

"Nor would I say the recall was wrong or improper," he said.