'anonymous' - insightful, no. Inciting, maybe. The Lay Judiciary should have been dispensed with years ago. Just read the Magistrates Blog as a good example of everything that is wrong with the magistracy. They have no concern for justice, just the status they believe putting JP after their name gives them.
"No concerns for justice" - what cobblers! Over the years I've had a great deal of experience of the Lay Judiciary, not least because from day one of my appointment I've always worn a tie at work and hence was routinely packed off to court when requested. Of course the calibre of magistrate has varied from the bumbling and not very bright, to the insightful and capable, from the caring and concerned to the vindictive and bullying, but they invariably sit in threes and in my experience are normally extremely concerned about justice, as in 'did they do it? For every time I've witnessed a Bench outrageously fail to question a police officer's evidence, I've seen a Bench throw out cases with insufficient evidence. I've seen brilliant decisions by District Judges, and equally punitive and misguided ones.
It's swings and roundabouts, a lottery or any number of metaphors you choose to come up with. Now for a real example of injustice, take a look at this story from Russia. Apparently there is a 99% chance of conviction if your case gets to court. A staggering three million entrepreneurs have been jailed over 10 years, most the victims of 'fitups'. The advice seems to be that it's much better to pay the £300 bribe at the point of arrest in order to make sure 'the case goes away', rather than take your chance in court.
'On Probation' - Winston Smiths views on children in care are more relevant than any comments on education.
I have written previously and at some length about how damaging it can be for young people supposedly placed into the 'care' of the Local Authority - a misnomer if ever there was one. Always under-funded and staffed by those with less qualifications and experience, residential care requires urgent attention from the government and there are signs that something is happening on this front.
You can teach skills to improve capabilities in a role. The problem with the Probation Service is that, generally, the wrong type of people have been recruited to achieve the aims of the organisation. Once an organisation is infested and managed by the wrong people there is no hope for it other than to start again from scratch.
Of course capabilities can be improved by teaching, but we seem to agree that you have to start with the right raw material as it were. There is no doubt that the change in ethos of the probation service has brought about a different kind of recruit in recent years. Predominately young and female, increasingly the Service has lost the ability to attract a wider cross section of age groups and hence life experience borne of differing previous occupations. Without doubt this has been extremely unfortunate, especially as the majority of our caseload consists of young men. With hindsight this substantial skewing of our employee profile should have been identified earlier, if not foreseen and action taken to present a more balanced profile to clients in what is essentially a key role-modelling position.
'For probation to have any chance of working its magic.'
I think Paul Daniels has more magic than the Probation Service and he should have been put down years ago too.
Well it's a question of judgement, but I do agree Paul Daniels is a very annoying magician.
Gadget panders to a minority of officers who mean well but really don't have a clue as to what is happening in the broader sense. I wouldn't waste my time raising issues there.
Inspector Gadget is at his worst when he panders to the lowest common denominator represented by what can best be described as the 'canteen culture'. However, there is no doubt in my mind that he has enormous and valuable insight into what is really happening on the 'frontline' of many of our towns and cities, in stark contrast to probation who have all but retreated into edge-of-town 'bunkers' or posh city centre offices. I find much of his writing utterly gripping and thought-provoking.
Perhaps you can reflect on how many successes you have had with clients compared to failures and what you may need to do to increase successes. Not enough accountability.
If I'm honest, I think it's this that irritates me the most - simplistic notions of 'success' or 'failure'. How much in life can be truely measured in such a way? First off, I have stated before the blindingly-obvious fact that failure to re-offend might simply mean failure to get caught. Probation officers by definition only see the 'failures' who re-offend, so pointing to successes is a tad difficult. I could produce 'fairytale-sounding' stories of letters and cards from clients grateful for turning their life around, but even if true, diffidence and necessarily limited numbers would preclude this, along with the absence of proof for confirmation. Again I say it is naive to think that a couple of sessions with a PO will result in someone going off a changed person and set on the road to a crime-free life.
So how does a probation officer measure 'success' or 'failure' then? I have to say that the former often comes in very small doses not unlike the search for the elusive Higgs boson particle. It might range from a client just turning up, let alone on time, to an incredibly dangerous sex offender that you've worked with over years. A 'hopeless' case that you've refused to give up on, seen them through the sentence, gain release, grin and bear the hostel, settle with a female partner, get a job and complete the licence without incident. A journey that began with a man so dangerous and damaged that prison interviews could only take place with two officers outside the interview room and ending with chats over cups of tea in his front room. Yes of course it could be classed as a 'success' - but none of us has a crystal ball and should that man flip one day and end up killing or raping again, I can say hand on heart I did my bloody best.
'Success' might be getting a convicted murderer to at last admit what really happened, or it could be finding a place in a hostel. It could be getting a court to change its mind and give a person a chance, or making sure a prosecution goes ahead because you judge it is in the public interest. To spell it out, in this job if you measure 'success' a little more carefully as individual steps towards the long term goal of achieving a crime free life (and hence protecting the public), the work of a probation officer might become a little clearer. It's not about accountability - it's about understanding.
Just like 'success', there are many ways of measuring 'failure'. I find it easier to recall 'failures'. I think I can pretty well remember all the clients that have died whilst under my supervision. From the old lag dying in hospital from a lifetime of alcohol abuse and begging me to get him out so he could die at home, to the mobile phone call in the car telling me that the young man I was driving to visit in prison had just died of the long-ignored brain tumour. From the young man who died in the office from ingesting unnoticed thinners, to the man who jumped to his death moments after I said I was too busy to see him. In this job, 'failure' of one sort or another can have serious consequences.
I understand very well that writing people off or just locking them up and throwing away the key are not sensible solutions. I still maintain that the way the Probation Service and YOT are currently working are of little effect at all. I agree that other related services are just as ineffective and the whole system needs to be joined up.
"Joined up services" is very much a bit of government-speak, just as meaningless in my view as 'seamless end-to-end offender management' - code for the prison service takeover of probation under NOMS. What really matters is substance, not soundbites. What is actually happening or not. In many ways setting up Youth Offending Teams was a good idea, but in the process it created a rather brutal and arbitrary transition to probation involvement at age 18 which was not present previously and is often unhelpful. Nevertheless, contrary to your assertions, YOT's are succeeding in diverting many young people from criminal behaviour and finding suitable alternatives to the inevitable damage caused by incarceration.
I repeat that you should be concerned about the privatisation of the police both as a potential customer and as a member of the justice system. When the police is privatised you will see the focus on other parts of the criminal justice system.
I'm extremely concerned about the creeping privatisation of the police, and other parts of the Criminal Justice System, including probation. Does anyone think that justice is going to be better served by the demise of the Forensic Science Service and it's fragmented replacement by private companies and in-house police provision, any more than G4S swanning around trying to look like proper police officers? There is no evidence to support the view that private prisons are cheaper than public ones, or run any better and with virtually no accountability.
"A potential customer" - is that as a probation officer, or do you know something I don't?
'For probation to have any chance of working its magic.'
I think Paul Daniels has more magic than the Probation Service and he should have been put down years ago too.
Well it's a question of judgement, but I do agree Paul Daniels is a very annoying magician.
Gadget panders to a minority of officers who mean well but really don't have a clue as to what is happening in the broader sense. I wouldn't waste my time raising issues there.
Inspector Gadget is at his worst when he panders to the lowest common denominator represented by what can best be described as the 'canteen culture'. However, there is no doubt in my mind that he has enormous and valuable insight into what is really happening on the 'frontline' of many of our towns and cities, in stark contrast to probation who have all but retreated into edge-of-town 'bunkers' or posh city centre offices. I find much of his writing utterly gripping and thought-provoking.
Perhaps you can reflect on how many successes you have had with clients compared to failures and what you may need to do to increase successes. Not enough accountability.
If I'm honest, I think it's this that irritates me the most - simplistic notions of 'success' or 'failure'. How much in life can be truely measured in such a way? First off, I have stated before the blindingly-obvious fact that failure to re-offend might simply mean failure to get caught. Probation officers by definition only see the 'failures' who re-offend, so pointing to successes is a tad difficult. I could produce 'fairytale-sounding' stories of letters and cards from clients grateful for turning their life around, but even if true, diffidence and necessarily limited numbers would preclude this, along with the absence of proof for confirmation. Again I say it is naive to think that a couple of sessions with a PO will result in someone going off a changed person and set on the road to a crime-free life.
So how does a probation officer measure 'success' or 'failure' then? I have to say that the former often comes in very small doses not unlike the search for the elusive Higgs boson particle. It might range from a client just turning up, let alone on time, to an incredibly dangerous sex offender that you've worked with over years. A 'hopeless' case that you've refused to give up on, seen them through the sentence, gain release, grin and bear the hostel, settle with a female partner, get a job and complete the licence without incident. A journey that began with a man so dangerous and damaged that prison interviews could only take place with two officers outside the interview room and ending with chats over cups of tea in his front room. Yes of course it could be classed as a 'success' - but none of us has a crystal ball and should that man flip one day and end up killing or raping again, I can say hand on heart I did my bloody best.
'Success' might be getting a convicted murderer to at last admit what really happened, or it could be finding a place in a hostel. It could be getting a court to change its mind and give a person a chance, or making sure a prosecution goes ahead because you judge it is in the public interest. To spell it out, in this job if you measure 'success' a little more carefully as individual steps towards the long term goal of achieving a crime free life (and hence protecting the public), the work of a probation officer might become a little clearer. It's not about accountability - it's about understanding.
Just like 'success', there are many ways of measuring 'failure'. I find it easier to recall 'failures'. I think I can pretty well remember all the clients that have died whilst under my supervision. From the old lag dying in hospital from a lifetime of alcohol abuse and begging me to get him out so he could die at home, to the mobile phone call in the car telling me that the young man I was driving to visit in prison had just died of the long-ignored brain tumour. From the young man who died in the office from ingesting unnoticed thinners, to the man who jumped to his death moments after I said I was too busy to see him. In this job, 'failure' of one sort or another can have serious consequences.
I understand very well that writing people off or just locking them up and throwing away the key are not sensible solutions. I still maintain that the way the Probation Service and YOT are currently working are of little effect at all. I agree that other related services are just as ineffective and the whole system needs to be joined up.
"Joined up services" is very much a bit of government-speak, just as meaningless in my view as 'seamless end-to-end offender management' - code for the prison service takeover of probation under NOMS. What really matters is substance, not soundbites. What is actually happening or not. In many ways setting up Youth Offending Teams was a good idea, but in the process it created a rather brutal and arbitrary transition to probation involvement at age 18 which was not present previously and is often unhelpful. Nevertheless, contrary to your assertions, YOT's are succeeding in diverting many young people from criminal behaviour and finding suitable alternatives to the inevitable damage caused by incarceration.
I repeat that you should be concerned about the privatisation of the police both as a potential customer and as a member of the justice system. When the police is privatised you will see the focus on other parts of the criminal justice system.
I'm extremely concerned about the creeping privatisation of the police, and other parts of the Criminal Justice System, including probation. Does anyone think that justice is going to be better served by the demise of the Forensic Science Service and it's fragmented replacement by private companies and in-house police provision, any more than G4S swanning around trying to look like proper police officers? There is no evidence to support the view that private prisons are cheaper than public ones, or run any better and with virtually no accountability.
"A potential customer" - is that as a probation officer, or do you know something I don't?
No comments:
Post a Comment