Every year on International Women’s Day we celebrate women’s achievements and progress. But celebration without safety is hollow.
Across Australia, women are increasingly being killed by violent men. Behind every statistic is a daughter, a sister, a friend whose life was stolen.
My sister Anne-Marie Culleton was only 20 years old when she was stalked, raped and murdered in 1988 by a parolee, Jonathan Bakewell.
Nearly four decades later, the trauma has never ended — because the parole board continues to release her killer despite numerous parole breaches for taking drugs and most recently for stalking. This is alarming giving Bakewell stalked my sister and took drugs before breaking down her back door to rape and murder her in her bed.
It is shocking that this dangerous sexual killer is being repeatedly released, putting the safety of women in the community at risk.
This International Women’s Day, if we are serious about protecting women, we must confront an uncomfortable truth: our parole laws still allow the most dangerous killers of women to be released.
It is time for Restricted Prisoner Legislation to ensure the most heinous murderers are never released back into the community unless they are dying and incapable of harming anyone again.
The Case for Restricted Prisoner Legislation
The legislation I am advocating would create a category of Restricted Prisoners — offenders whose crimes demonstrate such extreme violence and ongoing risk that parole should only be possible in the narrowest circumstances.
The proposed categories include:
- Murderers who sexually assaulted their victim
- Murderers who stalked their victim, including breaching protection orders
- Murderers who committed sadistic acts
- Murderers of children
- Murderers of two or more victims
- Murderers of a police officer
These crimes overwhelmingly target women and children. In a country facing rising levels of femicide, this reform is not radical — it is necessary for public safety.
Under this model, a Restricted Prisoner could only be released if they are:
- in imminent danger of dying, and
- so seriously incapacitated that they no longer have the physical ability to harm anyone, and
- can demonstrate they pose no risk to the community.
When the Parole System Fails
My sister’s killer is currently in custody pending yet another parole hearing by the South Australia Parole Board.
Since being released in 2016, Jonathan Bakewell has breached parole nine times. His most recent breach involved stalking behaviour — the same predatory conduct he used before murdering Anne-Marie.
Even more alarming, he has stalked four different women since his release.
Yet despite these repeated breaches, the parole board has continued to release him.
This is the reality victim families live with: the constant fear that their loved one’s killer will be returned to the community again and again, putting the community at risk.
The parole system forces victims’ families to relive the worst moment of their lives every time parole is reconsidered.
It is a cruel cycle of retraumatisation.
Parole Release of Snow Town Serial Killer James Vlassakis
In what is reported to be a world first, the South Australia Parole Board took the decision in 2025 to release notorious Snowtown Serial Killer James Vlassakis.
The Government appealed the decision on the grounds that the Parole Board had “erred in granting the prisoner’s release on parole”.
In listing his reasons, the Attorney General Kyam Maher, said the board had “failed to give proper weight to” the safety of the community, the likelihood of the prisoner complying with the conditions of parole, the circumstances and gravity of the offence, and any reports tendered to the board under the act.
The Parole Administrative Review Commissioner upheld the government appeal and overturned the parole board decision, finding the board erred in considering community safety and said Vlassakis “would be a risk to the community.”
Despite this, Parole Board Chair Frances Nelson mounted a challenge against the Parole Administrative Review Commissioner in the Supreme Court to overturn his decision.
The Parole Board’s determination to release a serial killer further demonstrates how broken South Australia’s parole system is and the need for strict Restricted Prisoner Legislation to keep the community safe.
Femicide Killers Can Repeatedly Seek Parole Release
In every state and territory femicide killers in prison can repeatedly seek parole release.
This raises a fundamental question:
Who is the system designed to protect — offenders or the community?
The Trauma for Victims’ Families
For victims’ families, parole hearings reopen wounds that never truly heal.
Each hearing forces us to relive:
- the details of the murder
- the terror our loved one endured
- the loss that changed our lives forever
If the offender is released, the trauma deepens. We live with the fear that another woman will become the next victim.
Under current laws, the real life sentence is served by the victim’s family.
This is cruel and it must end.
Australia’s Femicide Crisis
Australia is facing a national crisis of violence against women with murder rates rising.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has publicly acknowledged the growing national crisis of violence against women.
Public protests across the country increasingly reflect community outrage.
In South Australia alone:
- four women were murdered in one week in 2023
- women have marched and protested outside Parliament House demanding stronger responses to violence against women
The state government established a Royal Commission into Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence (South Australia) which reported in 2025.
But despite the scale of the crisis, the Malinauskas Labor government has refused my repeated calls to introduce legislation to strengthen sentencing and parole laws for femicide murders.
Sexual Violence and Femicide
Murders involving sexual assault represent a most extreme form of violence against women.
Criminological research identifies sexual homicide as a distinct category of murder characterised by domination, sexual aggression and humiliation of the victim.
Studies examining sexual homicide offenders show significant rates of violent reoffending among those released.
These crimes are not random. They reflect deeply entrenched patterns of misogynistic and predatory behaviour.
That is why offenders who commit murder with sexual violence must be subject to the strictest possible parole restrictions in which they are not released – unless they are at imminent death and so seriously incapacitated they pose no harm to anyone. The Restricted Prisoner Legislation would ensure this.
Stalking and Femicide
Research examining cases of femicide consistently shows that stalking behaviour is present in a significant proportion of domestic violence murders.
In many cases, stalking intensifies when a woman attempts to leave a relationship, reflecting the perpetrator’s attempt to reassert control.
When a murderer has previously stalked their victim, their behaviour demonstrates fixation, persistence and disregard for legal boundaries.
These behaviours are recognised internationally as indicators of offenders who pose a continuing and serious risk of violence.
That is why offenders who commit murder with stalking, including breaching a protection order, must be a category in the Restricted Prisoner Legislation.
Sadistic Violence and Femicide
Sadistic violence in homicide cases disproportionately affects women.
Femicide murders involving sadistic acts represent one of the most extreme manifestations of violence against women. In these cases, the offender deliberately inflicts prolonged suffering, humiliation or degradation on the victim before or during the killing.
In many cases of femicide involving torture, sexual degradation or prolonged attacks, the victim is targeted within a context of misogyny, sexual domination or coercive control.
Research examining sexual homicide offenders has found that a significant proportion display characteristics consistent with sexual sadism, a condition in which an individual derives arousal or gratification from inflicting pain, fear or humiliation on another person.
Given the extreme brutality associated with sadistic violence, offenders present an ongoing and serious risk to the safety of women and the broader community.
For this reason, offenders who commit murder with sadistic violence must be a category in the Restricted Prisoner Legislation.
Proven Laws Already Exist
The Restricted Prisoner Legislation was modelled on similar laws operating in Victoria and New South Wales:
Victoria’s Corrections Act includes strict provisions preventing parole for:
- Murderers of a police officer
- Frankston Serial Killer Paul Denyer
- Hoddle Street Killer Julian Knight
- Russell Street Bomber Craig Minogue
New South Wales first introduced similar legislation in 1999 to prevent parole for the rapist murderers of:
- Anita Cobby
- Janine Balding
- Virginia Morse
These laws have survived multiple High Court challenges and remain constitutionally sound.
There is no legal barrier preventing states and territories from adopting this Restricted Prisoner Legislation.
International Women’s Day Must Deliver Real Change
International Women’s Day should not be reduced to slogans and social media posts.
If we truly want to honour women, we must protect their lives.
Restricted Prisoner Legislation would:
- keep the most dangerous killers of women behind bars
- reduce the risk of further violence against women
- restore public confidence in the parole system
- spare victims’ families the lifelong trauma of repeated parole hearings
Most importantly, it would send a clear message:
Women’s lives matter.
This International Women’s Day, the most meaningful commitment our leaders can make is simple:
Make women’s safety the priority — introduce Restricted Prisoner Legislation to ensure the most heinous murderers are never free to harm again.