WARNING: This story contains graphic content relating to sexual violence and murder

The Department of Corrections has released its review into the management of a convicted rapist who went on to violate and murder a Colombian woman in her Christchurch home just 72 days after he was released on parole.

It has been determined the actions of Corrections’ staff “neither caused nor could have prevented this offending”.

However, “a number of steps ”have been taken “to further strengthen” the department’s processes nationwide.

Joseph James Brider was today sentenced to life in prison and preventive detention for the murder - described by Justice Jonathan Eaton as brutal, cruel, callous, depraved and sadistic.

At sentencing, Brider was described as a psychopathic offender who lacked any remorse or empathy and was undoubtedly a significant and “very real” danger to women.

Brider had been released on parole - after being refused five times - with strict conditions including GPS monitoring and a curfew.

He moved into a flat adjoining Herrera’s on Grove Street, Addington and within days became obsessed with her.

He later broke into her home while she was asleep, physically and sexually assaulted her and stabbed her to death.

• Family's heartbreak: She came to NZ for a safer life; she was killed in her own home
• Family of slain Christchurch woman Juliana Herrera speak
• Man charged with murdering Colombian woman back in court
• Juliana Herrera's killer- a convicted rapist- jailed for life

Juliana Herrera was killed in January 2022 in her Christchurch home. Photo / Supplied

When details of Brider’s offending against Herrera could be published, including the fact he’d only been out of prison for a matter of weeks before he killed her, Corrections and the Parole Board came under fire from some in the community.

The Parole Board had refused to release Brider on multiple occasions and only agreed to do so - shortly before his sentence end date - so they could impose conditions and put monitoring in place.

That monitoring - including GPS tracking and a curfew - fell to Corrections once Brider was living outside the wire.

After Brider pleaded guilty to abducting and murdering Herrera and his name could be published, the Department of Corrections confirmed a full review of his post-release management had been completed in July last year.

The findings and conclusion of the review were not to be released until after sentencing, and after Herrera’s family had been made aware of its contents and been given a chance to discuss and ask any questions they had.

In response to questions over why Herrera was not told who her new neighbour was and about his offending, Fagan said Corrections was also reviewing its existing notification policy “to ensure it continues to support public safety”.

Juliana was a much loved daughter, sister, aunt and friend. Photo / Supplied

The report was released to the Herald this afternoon after it was shared with the victim’s family.

“We considered that providing Juliana’s family a copy of the review prior to any public release was the right thing to do,” said a spokeswoman.

Corrections’ Canterbury district manager Toni Stewart said chief probation officer Darius Fagan completed a review into the management of Brider in July last year.

“Many people worked hard to ensure Mr Brider had the right support in place and the review found he was managed appropriately, with a significant level of oversight and support provided to him both prior to and after his release from prison,” said Stewart.

“At no point were any concerns raised with Corrections about his integration into the community.

“However, this does not change the fact that Juliana’s life was tragically taken.

“We have taken on board recent public concerns about how we notify local communities when people are released from prison, and commissioned an independent review into our notification policy to ensure it is clear, transparent, fit for purpose and contributes to public safety.”

Steward said when Brider was released three months ahead of his statutory release date the Parole Board imposed 14 special conditions to sit alongside the standard release conditions.

These special conditions included electronic monitoring, exclusion zones - areas the person cannot enter, to not contact any victims or family members of the victims of their offending - and to take part in treatment and rehabilitation..

“He did not have any conditions in relation to his use of the internet,” said Stewart.

“He was not prosecuted for any breach of his conditions during his time on parole in the community or recalled to prison at any time.”

Stewart said while in prison, Brider “undertook intensive treatment programmes for alcohol and drug use and violence, as well as receiving a “high level of support from reintegration services prior to his release”.

“Following his release from prison, he was supported into employment and staff ensured there was collaboration between police and support organisations,” said Stewart.

“Given he was assessed as being a medium-high risk of reoffending prior to release, a Community Corrections manager conducted a review to ensure he continued to be managed appropriately.

“While (Fagan’s) review found that the actions of staff neither caused nor could have prevented this offending, we have taken a number of steps to further strengthen our processes nationwide.

“This includes conducting a quality audit to ensure curfews are being correctly recorded on offender’s records and reviewing the workloads of Community Corrections staff to provide further assurances that their workloads are being actively managed.

“We have also assigned a dedicated manager to further support and coordinate with reintegration service providers.”

Stewart said while it was noted that it would have likely not changed the outcome - the review did note that a curfew placed on Brider was not loaded into the electronic monitoring system, as per one of his special conditions.

“However, if the curfew had been loaded an alert would not have been generated at the time of the murder due to the close proximity of Juliana’s property to his,” Stewart explained.

“The probation officer was completing regular checks of his compliance with his electronic monitoring conditions, including the curfew, during the period he was on parole in the community.

“He had not breached this special condition prior to the night of the murder.”

Stewart said Corrections was now working with its electronic monitoring provider to “enhance monitoring at addresses that are in close proximity to other properties”.

“On behalf of everyone within Corrections, our thoughts are with everyone affected by Brider’s actions and especially Juliana’s family,” she said

“I cannot begin to imagine the pain that Juliana’s family continue to experience as a result of this serious and devastating crime, and hope that today’s sentencing brings them some closure.”