Lifers

Blogging is a strange business and one I'm only just beginning to understand. I notice that I'm not as angry as when I started, thus I suppose proving the therapeutic effect it clearly can have. I seem to have set myself the seemingly impossible task of posting daily and wonder constantly if I'm going to run out of things to say. Today was going to be about employment, or more correctly the lack of it for our clients, but I've just read this powerful piece in the Guardian about lifers and decided instead to run with something I wrote several months ago on the subject. 

I've never had to supervise a 'whole life' tariff prisoner, but this article serves to highlight all too clearly some of the issues. I cannot help noticing that probation does not get a mention and I can only speculate that possibly some or all of the men have decided that they have no need of such a facility and withdrawn their cooperation. I'm also left just as puzzled as ever as to the diagnosis and definition of psychopathic personality disorder, whether it is treatable or not and how some offenders are felt appropriate for the Special Hospital route and others prison. 

Apart from sex offenders, I think it's fair to say that 'lifers' will pose some of the greatest challenges for a probation officer during their career. It used to be that unless you were in a specialist post, you were never likely to be responsible for that many, but the numbers have been increasing dramatically in recent years and they are likely to be with you for many years if you don't move office. This was always felt to be good practice long before NOMS came up with the concept of 'end-to-end offender management'. It represented a degree of continuity when the prisoner was likely to move prison establishment reasonably frequently and as a consequence the Home Probation Officer (now designated Offender Manager) became the defacto expert on the case. I feel this is particularly important as LSP3E reports for the Parole Board can be written with unrivaled authority and knowledge and therefore assist enormously in the key task of assessing risk at all stages of the prisoners progression through their sentence.

When I joined the service, all lifer supervisors were 'paired' with another officer, not only to ensure continuity, but also to give support in what could be some quite gruesome cases. I'm pretty sure this practice has all but disappeared and continuity of supervision is being made ever more difficult by newer recruits to the service wanting to move post more frequently. It cannot be satisfactory for lifer cases to be passed around from officer to officer on a regular basis, but I know it happens, is very unsettling to the prisoner and does nothing to help the Parole Board in their difficult task of assessing risk. In an increasingly 'risk averse' environment, it is getting noticeable that the Parole Board are releasing less and less lifers and a significant problem is developing. HM Inspector of Probation recently referred to this issue in the hope of stimulating a debate. I'm not aware of one as yet.    

I think it is still the practice nationwide to allocate a potential lifer case right from first court appearance, ideally so that the officer can follow the trial and upon conviction and sentence be well prepared to write the Post Life Sentence report. Life sentences are of course the only time when a Pre Sentence Report is not prepared. Somewhat confusingly for the public, there are four types of life sentence :- Mandatory (for murder) Discretionary (for rape, arson etc) Automatic (replaced in 2005 - previously for repeat serious offences) Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP). This latter category has proved somewhat controversial in that when Parliament passed the legislation, it was envisaged that it would only apply to a relatively small group of offenders, not the significant numbers that have been handed down. Again, confusingly for the public, a life sentence very seldom means life, except for the 50 or so cases where 'Whole Life' tariffs have been set.

Since the Home Secretary lost the power to set the tariff, or minimum term felt appropriate for punishment before release can be considered, it is invariably announced by the trial Judge at time of sentence. Generally speaking tariffs have tended to be set higher in recent years, for example most recently in relation to knife-related murder. Release can only be authorised by the Parole Board when they are satisfied that there is no significant risk to the public and there are many prisoners in the system who have gone 5, 10, 20 or 30 years beyond their tariff and for some of them it will indeed turn out to be a life sentence. 

As a result of there being so many lifers in the prison system that have gone way over their tariff and become institutionalised, the Prison Service have been forced to build special geriatric wings, such as that at HMP Norwich. I cannot describe how sad it is to see elderly, infirm men either shuffling around on crutches, or pushing themselves in wheelchairs on the wing with virtually no prospect of release. Sadly, because they are still felt to pose some risk, hostels or other appropriately supervised community facilities are virtually impossible to find, so they continue to languish in prison. Surely there has to be a more suitable and humane way for society to deal with this group?

It should be a sobering thought for us all that the UK has more prisoners serving life sentences than the rest of Europe combined and the release rate has slowed to a trickle due to nervousness at the Parole Board. However, a recent opinion survey on the subject gave cause to feel that the public might be ready to consider afresh the whole sentencing framework and tariff structure relating to life sentences and the government have signalled a possible change in the law relating to mandatory life sentences for murder. Lets just hope that any debate can be conducted sensibly and free of party politics.