Mackay granny killer Martin Harrod applies for parole cancellation review

There is only one thing keeping a man convicted of stabbing an 89-year-old grandmother to death after he broke into her home. Read what it is.

A man convicted of stabbing a grandmother to death inside her Mackay unit 34 years ago after she caught him breaking in has failed in his bid to have the supreme court review his cancelled parole.

But the only thing keeping him behind bars is a lack of suitable accommodation.

Martin Harrod was aged 28 and had recently arrived from Sydney when he broke into an 89-year-old grandmother’s home overnight between March 31 and April 1, 1988.

Gretchen Smith had been living in a self-contained apartment attached to her son’s home on Daniel St.

It was reported she woke and caught him breaking in through an open window and Harrod, drunk and high, committed the heinous act.

Ms Smith’s son-in-law found her body.

She suffered three stab wounds to her chest and neck and it was reported a 15cm knife was found in a rubbish bin and believed to be the murder weapon.

It was reported a manhunt continued for six weeks crossing into southern states until Harrod was eventually arrested at Mildura, in northern Victoria, and brought back to Mackay.

In August 1988 he pleaded guilty to murder and was jailed for life.

Martin Harrod was convicted in 1988 of murdering a grandmother.

He was eligible for parole on August 23, 2001, but was not released until February 22, 2011 – after more than 22 years behind bars for the grandmother’s murder.

Harrod’s parole prohibited him from using illicit drugs, but he tested positive to marijuana a month later on March 22 and his parole was cancelled.

He was again released on February 13, 2012, but on May 8, 2012 he tested positive to meth and his parole was cancelled.

A recent court judgment stated he was again released on March 6, 2019, but within two months his parole was suspended on July 2, 2019.

And since then the Parole Board has met eight times to reconsider the decision and from about March 2020, has been guided in part by a psychiatric report.

The psychiatrist rated Harrod as being a moderate risk of “violent recidivism”, which was based on “his historical risk factors and past supervision failures”.

The psychiatrist said in his opinion Harrod was not an unacceptable risk to the community.

The judgment revealed the psychiatrist supported Harrod’s release, although stated it was likely he might fail his parole conditions in similar ways again, and stated he needed support, supervision and psychological help in place.

However the Parole Board had issues with Harrod’s accommodation suggestions deeming them to be unsuitable – because of his criminal history and history on parole he is not allowed to live with women, children or people suffering any intellectual or physical disability.

Justice Soraya Ryan, in the recent judgment, said Harrod was told “when he finds suitable accommodation, he will be released on parole”.

“Mr Harrod has supplied at least 18 different addresses to the board since his return to custody, none of which have been suitable parole accommodation,” Justice Ryan said.

“For obvious reasons, he wishes the board had reached a different decision and he is frustrated that the board has rejected all of the proposals he has made for his accommodation.”

The judgment revealed a particular concern was the accommodation sites allowed Harrod “unsupervised access to women and/or vulnerable persons; or provided him with no support”.

Justice Ryan said Harrod was “particularly disappointed” he was told in November 2021 he would be released on parole at a certain address in January 2022, only for that decision to be reversed “within weeks of its having been made”.

Justice Ryan commented Harrod seemed to be of the view the supreme court could overturn the Parole Board’s decision.

“As I attempted to explain … the court’s focus is not on whether the board’s decision to cancel his parole was right or wrong but rather on whether the board reached its decision lawfully,” she said.

“Also, as I attempted to explain, the court would only intervene if it were persuaded by Mr Harrod that the board had made a relevant error on the way to its decision to cancel Mr Harrod’s parole.”

Justice Ryan dismissed the application for a statutory order of review.

“It was filed out of time and there is no merit in it. Mr Harrod has not been able to demonstrate an error in the board’s decision-making processes,” she said.

Justice Ryan said Harrod had also brought another application for parole in January 2022.

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly suggested Gretchen Smith was Martin Harrod’s grandmother. She was a grandmother but not Harrod’s grandmother. The Daily Mercury apologies for this error.