Notorious killer’s bittersweet victory against parole board

A notorious Queensland killer has had a victory against the parole board one month before he would be eligible to make a new parole application.

Killer William Kelvin Fox

It took just over a year for a notorious killer to appeal the Queensland Parole Board's decision to rescind his parole two weeks after they granted him parole after 22 years behind bars.

William Kelvin Fox's bittersweet win against the parole board comes one month before he would be eligible to make a new parole application.

Fox made four applications to the Supreme Court regarding decisions made by the parole board, since he lodged a parole application in May 2018, with all four applications being made in an effort to have the board's decisions overturned.

Fox, who is about 70 now, has been in jail for 24 years, serving two life sentences.

He walked into a caravan and shot his former partner's friend three times in front of a two-year-old child in 1992 on the Gold Coast.

19/6/20 - Basia Hellwich was shot three times by William Kelvin Fox in 1992. Picture: Naomi Jellicoe

Barbara "Basia" Hellwich still has a bullet lodged in her skull after she was shot three times in the face, head and back by Fox in the attack.

Basia Hellwich who was shot three times by William Kelvin Fox in 1992 with X- Ray's showing a bullet still in her head and bullet fragments in other parts of her body.,

Four years later, he murdered his former wife, Patricia Gaye Atkinson, and tried to kill three other people including his own son and his son's partner, in a shooting spree at Glenwood near Gympie in 1996.

Murdered Glenwood woman Pat Atkinson (Patricia) was killed by her former husband, William Kelvin Fox (Bill)in a shooting incident near Gympie.

Fox has been eligible for parole since September, 2011.

This is not the first time Fox has attempted to have the parole board decision overturned with NewsCorp reporting in September 2015 that Fox failed to have his 2014 parole denied decision overturned.

Fox told the Supreme Court in Rockhampton on June 16, 2021, he lodged a parole application on May 3, 2018, which was refused on February 26, 2019.

The refused decision was "rescinded" eight months later and Fox was asked to lodge a Home Assessment.

He said he was then granted parole on June 6, 2020.

"Fourteen days later, they rescinded that decision on confidential information they received," Fox said.

"They've had 12 months to disclose the information to me.

"This is the second knock back on this parole application.

"This parole application has been going for three years."

He said the parole board stated it was unaware of outstanding charges Fox had yet to deal with in another jurisdiction.

The court heard the outstanding matter dated back to the early 1990s.

Fox said the NSW matter had been mentioned in sentencing remarks and other decisions, which the parole board would have been looking at as part of the application process.

The court heard Fox fought the parole board's decision based on the grounds he was "denied natural justice and procedural fairness by not being made aware of certain confidential information to which the board had regard in deciding to refuse his parole application".

The Supreme Court heard the parole board proposed Fox could be allowed to make a fresh parole application.

The court heard the parole board, in considering issues raised by Fox in his application and other court documents, decided to rescind its decision (where Fox was granted parole in 2020 and 'ungranted' parole days later) on June 15, 2021.

The parole board invited Fox to consent to some draft orders which would allow him to make a fresh parole application with the board to pay for legal costs.

Fox gave consent to the parole board's proposal with Justice Graeme Crow making it an official order.

Queensland legislation states the Board must decide on an application within 120 days of receiving the application. However, if the Board has deferred the application for the purposes of obtaining any additional information it considers necessary (pursuant to s. 193(2)), the Board must decide the application within 150 days of receipt of the application.

The Act does not provide a penalty should the application not be decided within the appropriate time frame. However, a prisoner may make an application to the Supreme Court for an order requiring the Board to make a decision.

Originally published as Notorious killer's bittersweet victory against parole board