Monday 12 August 2019

Depressing Reading

To be perfectly frank this article in the Independent makes for particularly depressing reading for anyone in our line of business or thinking of starting their career in what was once an enlightened and honourable endeavour to help address some of the consequences of failed social policies:-

Dismay as Boris Johnson ‘ignores evidence’ with pledge to crack down on crime with thousands more prison places

Boris Johnson has been accused of ignoring evidence on the causes of crime with a vow to create thousands more prison places and “properly punish” offenders.

The prime minister is to announce his plans at a meeting with police chiefs, judges and prison officers on Monday.Downing Street officials said he wanted to “improve the criminal justice system and make sure criminals are serving the time they are sentenced to”, following controversies over the automatic release of prisoners including a grooming gang leader halfway through their sentences.

Robert Buckland QC, the new justice secretary, suggested new prisons could be built “so we can keep criminals behind bars”. The prime minister is putting prisons at the heart of our bold plan to create a justice system which cuts crime and protects law-abiding people,” he added. “More and better prison places means less reoffending and a lower burden on the taxpayer in the future. Boris’s vision for policing shows this government is serious about fighting crime. It is vital we have a world-leading prison estate to keep criminals off our streets and turn them into law-abiding citizens when they have paid their debt to society.”

The move will be seen as a push to shore up support for Mr Johnson’s new government following the announcement of 20,000 more police officers and funding for the NHS. There has been speculation that a snap general election could be called if MPs force a vote of no confidence in the prime minister over a no-deal Brexit. The Conservatives previously pledged to create 10,000 more places in several new jails but only one – HMP Berwyn – has been completed and construction did not start on a second prison until June.

There was no immediate comment from the Ministry of Justice, which just three weeks ago released research indicating that short prison sentences were driving up reoffending that costs the UK £18bn a year.

Days before losing his post as justice secretary, David Gauke appealed for the next prime minister to “follow the evidence” rather than appeal to populist rhetoric on crime and punishment. “I don’t want to see softer justice – I want to deliver smarter justice where offenders serve sentences that punish but also make them less likely to reoffend,” he said last month. Mr Gauke had called for “ineffective” prison sentences of under six months to be abolished in favour of community orders and substance misuse programmes that address the root causes of people’s offending.

The plans, which were welcomed by penal researchers and advocacy groups, are to be scrapped by Mr Johnson. During the Conservative leadership campaign, he called for offenders given prison sentences of 14 years or more to remain inside for the entire term, rather than being released on licence halfway through. The change would dramatically increase demand on prisons in England and Wales, which are currently filled to 95 per cent of their operational capacity.

An annual report released by HM chief inspector of prisons last month cited overcrowding and squalid conditions as one driver of rising violence and self-harm, but also called for an effective drug strategy, improved rehabilitation, better planning for release and purposeful activity for inmates. “At present ‘overcrowding’ in prisons is assessed by the prison service based on how many prisoners can be crammed into the available cells,” said HM chief inspector Peter Clarke. “Perhaps we should think about describing prisons as being overcrowded if, among other things, there are not enough meaningful education or work places for the prisoners being held in them.”

Downing Street acknowledged that prisons need a “greater emphasis on rehabilitation” and training but did not detail plans to provide it. The Prison Reform Trust warned that government had historically underestimated the difficulties in removing or replacing old prisons. Director Peter Dawson said:

“According to the prison service’s own figures it would take 9,000 new spaces just to eliminate overcrowding – not a single dilapidated prison could be taken out of use before that figure was reached. Current projections suggest a further 3,000 new spaces will be needed just to absorb sentences already passed, and we know the aggressive rhetoric of ‘prison works’ invariably drives up the use of imprisonment long before the capacity to deal with that has been created. Half-baked policy on prisons always runs up against inconvenient reality. Tough rhetoric is no substitute for understanding the evidence.”

Frances Crook, CEO of the Howard League for Penal Reform, called the construction of new prisons “an exercise in ego and reputation” and a “gross squandering of taxpayers’ money”. She said prison governors and officers described managing men on sentences longer than 20 years “an impossible challenge”, adding: “Sentence inflation is now out of control.”

Christina Marriott, chief executive of the Revolving Doors Agency, said short prison sentences “create more crime and more victims”. She added: “The prime minister says he wants to take tough action on crime, but for effective action, he must listen to the evidence including, that from the Ministry of Justice.”

19 comments:

  1. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0007k5f

    2:10 into the iplayer, i.e. 8:10am on Today programme

    Nick Robinson interviews Robert Buckland

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10,000 prison places

      The plan: Up to £2.5bn funding to create 10,000 new prison places.

      What it means: The government already had a target, announced in 2015, of creating 10,000 places in new prisons by 2020.

      However, this target was to create new places in order to shut old, outdated prisons, not to increase the overall capacity of the prison system.

      And the government has now reduced this target to 3,360 by 2023.

      But Mr Johnson has now set a new target of another 10,000 by "the mid-2020s", although it is not clear whether these will replace places lost in closures of older prisons or see a 10,000 increase in overall capacity.

      This new target will partly be achieved by expanding HMP Full Sutton, in Yorkshire, although expansion at this site has been planned since 2016.

      Currently, the prison population in England and Wales is almost 83,000, which is 8,700 above the prisons service's own overcrowding limits.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49318400

      Note - Nick Robinson helpfully did the sums earlier (see R4Today link) & highlighted that of the previously promised 10,000 prison places (by Gove, Truss & Tory manifesto) only some 3,500 had materialised to date.

      Delete
  2. Buckland: "probation reforms that my predecessor announced & which I have been working on will achieve that depth of approach that we need"

    And we thought they'd already plumbed the depths...

    ReplyDelete
  3. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/26/lock-em-and-throw-away-the-key-that-will-make-britain-great-again

    Guardian, one year ago

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Britain has a history of excellence in penal innovation stretching back several centuries. During this period, we have successfully resisted the sort of fashionable but foolish fads that are the hallmark of woolly liberal and European thinking.

      There have been several milestones along the way of which the nation is rightfully proud. Perhaps the most outstanding is our visionary and enlightened attitudes to prisoners. Who knew that when we pioneered the concentration camp during the Boer War that it would be taken up so enthusiastically and refined by such leading specialists in confinement as Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin?

      We should also be proud of our record during the Industrial Revolution of debtors’ jails and workhouses, memorably and sympathetically portrayed by Charles Dickens in novels such as Little Dorrit and Oliver Twist. Mr Dickens knew that our Industrial Revolution wouldn’t have been half as successful if we were allowing people to run around the country willy and nilly without paying back what they owed at a reasonable rate of interest.

      I like to think that in his novels he got the balance just right between applying unstinting discipline and rigour in our treatment of miscreants and the need for a degree of compassion. I’ve always modelled myself on the complex and deeply misunderstood character of Mr Bumble myself.

      Hopefully, once we’ve left the EU, we can begin to apply some traditionally British rectitude and moral backbone to the prisons system. Britain locks up more of its citizens than just about any other western European country. Even the bloody Jocks lock up more women, including expectant mothers, than almost any other nation in northern Europe. These are records of which we should be justly proud: we shouldn’t give them up without a fight.

      What better way of showing our little ones that crime doesn’t pay than by having them born into captivity? Rather than reduce the number of women in our prisons, we need to increase it. Exponentially, that would mean more babies being born in prison, especially if we were to encourage much more intimacy during conjugal visits. Thus, many more children would be born who had learned tough but necessary lessons about the nature of crime and punishment.

      Britain has an unblemished record away from home in military conflict, apart from an early reversal against the Americans and a score draw with the Irish Republican Army. We wouldn’t have achieved such excellence in the field of human conflict if we’d treated our prisoners with a light touch. After all, we’ve always required them to be ship-shape and Bristol fashion to feed our relentless war machine. And once we start sending in the gunboats to reinforce our interests with the more truculent of the World Trade Organisation states, we’ll need our sovereign ruffians even more, gawd bless ’em all.

      Many people seemed to be troubled last week by reports that several of our jails are operating like speakeasies run by Al Capone during the prohibition era. I think they all need to see the bigger picture. G4S security was chosen specifically to ensure a smooth handover in power from the prison officers to the prisoners. Everyone knows that G4S couldn’t be trusted to walk your granny across the road without losing her somewhere along the way.

      Deployment of G4S followed a study of the methods of the US penal reform society from its award-winning promotional video, entitled Escape From New York. This seemed to offer a progressive and enlightened solution to prison overcrowding and sensitive issues around electrocuting innocent people that had led to some boisterousness in wider society. It all seemed to be rooted in the visionary, controversial but deeply misunderstood concept of locking ’em up and throwing away the key.

      Delete
    2. Handing over the prison contract fully to G4S would ensure that the prisoners would be running the jails before you could say: “Would you like a £10 wrap with your porridge today, sir.” Soon after, we would simply withdraw all staff and let the inmates get on with it.

      Of course, we would keep an eye on them with CCTV to ensure that those displaying a special aptitude for organisation and leadership in such demanding circumstances would be earmarked for high office with our security services or for deployment in our Moscow embassy. Chaps and ladies displaying unusually high levels of psychopathic tendencies have always thrived in these environments.

      Those exhibiting rare prowess in chib-to-head combat would be fast-tracked for action in some of the dirty little wars in which we always seem to be engaged here and there. If anyone is getting squeamish about this, I’d remind them that we used just such an approach in various Irish wars against the rebel scum when we sent in the Black and Tans early last century. I need hardly remind you that these were the torch bearers for our policy in Northern Ireland during the Troubles in the 70s.

      Eventually, with the help of our flexible friends at G4S, we would create walled penitentiaries around cities that have always resisted our forced civilisation initiatives, such as Manchester and Glasgow. All of our most violent criminals (and possible SAS recruits) would be thrown in there and the rules of the free market would apply to ensure the survival of the fittest. What’s not to like?

      Kevin McKenna is an Observer columnist

      Delete
  4. A library of global despair...

    http://cookislandsnews.com/opinion/item/70837-lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key/70837-lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key

    http://wclcriminallawbrief.blogspot.com/2012/06/lock-them-up-and-throw-away-key-is-that.html

    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/most-criminals-reoffend-so-whats-the-answer-locking-them-up-and-throwing-away-the-key-2505419-Dec2015/

    https://violence-prevention-network.de/perspektiven/einsperren-allein-ist-nicht-die-loesung/?lang=en

    https://olywip.org/lock-throw-away-key-old-men-growing-older-prison/

    http://www.edmontonvpc.ca/lock-throw-away-keys/

    http://www.sundaytimes.lk/160703/news/we-lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key-199526.html

    http://www.guardian.co.tt/article-6.2.408334.7358320c4e

    ReplyDelete
  5. It may be of interest to some, at 8:20 this evening on Talking Pictures (freeview) there's a very old film called Boys in Brown (1949 and B/W).
    It's focused on Borstal Training and it's drama, but it may be interesting to compare the then and now, and see some of the issues and thinking within the CJS of 1949.
    Maybe we've come a long way since then, or perhaps we've gone backwards?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boys_in_Brown

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well spotted 'Getafix! One of my favourite channels too, having just enjoyed a long run of 'Public Eye' and the wonderfully enigmatic private eye Frank Marker - who of course did 'time' and had a probation officer. Well worth setting the Tivo box for later and thanks again for your continued support for the blog - it really is much appreciated.

      Jim

      Delete
    2. "What people seem to forget is that we start with a 100% failures and turn out 50% successes. I wonder how Eton and Harrow would get on if their intake was limited to the failures and no-goods?"

      These are the words of Jack Warner's borstal governor in this 1949 film. To which I - someone who identifies as a socialist and who has worked with ex-offenders in the past - say, 'good on you, comrade!'

      Now, for anyone unfamiliar with borstals, these were institutions run by the prison service and used to reform juvenile offenders up to the age of 23. You'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise watching Boys in Brown though as its cast of young offenders are all… more

      Delete
  6. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/sending-people-to-jail-is-the-easy-bit-kh5bcwqlr#

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well worth a listen:


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0007k5v


    After cleaning up Glasgow's reputation as 'murder capital of Europe' and seeing her blueprint copied in London and elsewhere, Karyn McCluskey, the driving force behind the city's Violence Reduction Unit, has earned a reputation as a criminal justice trailblazer.

    Now, as head of Community Justice Scotland, Karyn has taken on an even more complex task. She is set on nothing less than shifting the nation’s perception of justice.

    A cornerstone of her argument is making the case that the people who get locked up are as much victims of society as they are wicked perpetrators of crime. Born into disadvantage, they arrive, in a sense, imprisoned already.

    Against the backdrop of a populist political landscape, a skeptical media and a public who want to see criminals serve the longest possible sentence, can Karyn change hearts and minds?

    ReplyDelete
  8. If they built 100 probation hostels with a capacity of 50 each. That would house 5,000 individuals. Just saying. Cheaper
    Better etc

    ReplyDelete
  9. From Napo website:-

    PM orders urgent review of Sentencing Policy

    Prime Minister, Boris Johnson’s, call today for an urgent review of prison sentencing policy – which would see 10,000 extra prison places - has been all over the news today. Napo General Secretary, Ian Lawrence, spoke to Sky News’ lunchtime programme about the proposals.

    Ian told Sky News that there were already too many people in prison; people who should not be there like those with mental health issues. What was really needed in terms of sentencing policy, he said, was a return to ‘what works’, and proper rehabilitative work from more, skilled, probation officers in the community.

    Grayling’s TR reforms were an acknowledged disaster, he told the programme. The part-privatisation of the probation service had failed on all counts and resulted in the government U-turn and the return of ‘offender supervision’ into the National Probation Service. Napo welcomed this and was committed to working with the MoJ to deliver but, he told Sky, the proposed changes were not enough: we need all probation work brought back into under public accountability. He also said that we needed more resources and more skilled probation staff. There were currently over 1,000 vacancies across the country – HMPPS needed to motivate and recruit staff as a matter of urgency and the current, two-tier pay system that was the result of the TR system was not the way.

    Was Boris Johnson listening? Ian said he hoped so. Napo had a good working relationship with Justice Secretary, Robert Buckland, and we believe he understands the situation. But, Ian stressed, the way forward is properly resourced supervision in the community, to deliver rehabilitation and to keep communities safe: and this was only possible if probation was in the hands of skilled professional practitioners not private companies interested only in profit.

    ReplyDelete
  10. i believe in rehabilitation but i'm with Boris on this one - far too many serious offenders getting off early and being given lenient sentences. I have several Poss Pointed article on my caseload and non received a custodial - no deterrent whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bladed articles and offensive weapons - possession
      Criminal Justice Act 1988 (s.139(1)), Criminal Justice Act 1988 (s.139A(1)), Criminal Justice Act 1988 (s.139A(2)), Prevention of Crime Act 1953 (s.1(1)), Prison Act 1952 (s.40CA)

      Effective from: 1 June 2018

      DATA COLLECTION (across all magistrates’ courts, 23 April to 30 September 2019)

      Please remember to complete a form if you have just sentenced an offender for a bladed articles/offensive weapons (possession) as their principal offence.

      Possession of an offensive weapon in a public place, Prevention of Crime Act 1953 (section 1(1))
      Possession of an article with blade/point in a public place, Criminal Justice Act 1988 (section 139(1))
      Possession of an offensive weapon on school premises, Criminal Justice Act 1988 (section 139A(2))
      Possession of an article with blade/point on school premises, Criminal Justice Act 1988 (section 139A(1))
      Unauthorised possession in prison of a knife or offensive weapon, Prison Act 1952 (section 40CA)

      Triable either way
      Maximum: 4 years’ custody
      Offence range: Fine – 2 years 6 months’ custody

      This offence is subject to statutory minimum sentencing provisions. See Step 3 for further details.

      Step 1 – Determining the offence category

      The court should determine the offence category with reference only to the factors listed in the tables below. In order to determine the category, the court should assess culpability and harm.

      The court should weigh all the factors set out below in determining the offender’s culpability.

      Where there are characteristics present which fall under different levels of culpability, the court should balance these characteristics to reach a fair assessment of the offender’s culpability.
      Culpability demonstrated by one or more of the following:

      Culpability A
      - Possession of a bladed article
      - Possession of a highly dangerous weapon*
      - Offence motivated by, or demonstrating hostility based on any of the following characteristics or presumed characteristics of the victim: religion, race, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

      Culpability B
      - Possession of weapon (other than a bladed article or a highly dangerous weapon) – used to threaten or cause fear

      Culpability C
      - Possession of weapon (other than a bladed article or a highly dangerous weapon) not used to threaten or cause fear

      Culpability D
      - Possession of weapon falls just short of reasonable excuse

      *NB an offensive weapon is defined in legislation as ‘any article made or adapted for use for causing injury, or is intended by the person having it with him for such use’. A highly dangerous weapon is, therefore, a weapon, including a corrosive substance (such as acid), whose dangerous nature must be substantially above and beyond this. The court must determine whether the weapon is highly dangerous on the facts and circumstances of the case.


      Harm - The court should consider the factors set out below to determine the level of harm that has been caused or was risked:

      Category 1
      - Offence committed at a school or other place where vulnerable people are likely to be present
      - Offence committed in prison
      - Offence committed in circumstances where there is a risk of serious disorder
      - Serious alarm/distress

      Category 2 - All other cases

      https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/bladed-articles-and-offensive-weapons-possession/

      Delete
    2. Step 3 – Minimum Terms – second or further relevant offence

      When sentencing the offences of:

      - possession of an offensive weapon in a public place;
      - possession of an article with a blade/point in a public place;
      - possession of an offensive weapon on school premises; and
      - possession of an article with blade/point on school premises

      a court must impose a sentence of at least 6 months’ imprisonment where this is a second or further relevant offence unless the court is of the opinion that there are particular circumstances relating to the offence, the previous offence or the offender which make it unjust to do so in all the circumstances.

      A ‘relevant offence’ includes those offences listed above and the following offences:

      - threatening with an offensive weapon in a public place;
      - threatening with an article with a blade/point in a public place;
      - threatening with an article with a blade/point on school premises; and
      - threatening with an offensive weapon on school premises.

      Unjust in all of the circumstances

      In considering whether a statutory minimum sentence would be ‘unjust in all of the circumstances’ the court must have regard to the particular circumstances of the offence and the offender. If the circumstances of the offence, the previous offence or the offender make it unjust to impose the statutory minimum sentence then the court must impose either a shorter custodial sentence than the statutory minimum provides or an alternative sentence.

      https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/bladed-articles-and-offensive-weapons-possession/


      *** The rules, guidelines, sentences, etc etc are already in existence ***

      Still... some people know more about facilitating, aiding & abetting &/or causing fear & violence don't they Boris?

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/darius-boris-and-a-blast-from-the-past-1658043.html

      Delete
  11. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/funding-for-violence-reduction-units-announced

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can we refer MoJ staff?

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/14/ministry-justice-adviser-assaulted-paramedic-got-drunk-christmas/

      A Ministry of Justice adviser assaulted a paramedic who came to his aid after he drunkenly fell over after a Christmas party at the Oxford and Cambridge Club, a court heard.

      Andrew Meads, 52, who is the department's deputy chief economist, was seen stumbling around Marlborough Palace, Kensington, on December 17, following drinks at the university club.

      Paramedic Craig Cassidy found the government aide slumped on a pavement wearing a blood-stained shirt with a gash above his eye, Westminster Magistrates Court heard.

      Police were called after Meads threatened to punch Mr Cassidy as he received treatment.

      After he was handcuffed and taken inside an ambulance, Meads' hands were freed briefly while his wounds were being tended to, the court was told.

      However, Mr Cassidy was punched in the right temple after he leaned forward. As Pc Nikhil Patel restrained Meads, the officer was told: “Take these f------ handcuffs off or I will f------ kill you.”

      The York and Bath University graduate, who represented himself at court, formerly worked at the Treasury and has been employed by the Ministry of Justice since 2014.

      Meads, of Lesbourne Road, Reigate, told the court he used to go out four or five times a week but had reduced this to only a few nights per year.

      On the night of the incident, he said that he became so engrossed in a long conversation with a friend he had not spoken to in 30 years, he lost track of his alcohol intake.

      The Ministry of Justice said it was not one of their events.

      Meads said: “I have a stressful job - it has been stressful now for two years. It was the end of a very stressful day.

      “I came in that day as part of my job to do some work - some legislation. I had a huge amount of stuff dumped on me. My day- particularly in the afternoon- became extremely stressful.”

      Meads has one previous conviction from 2003 for driving while over the limit for which he received a disqualification and a community order.

      Married Meads, who lives in an £800,000 home in Surrey, admitted assaulting an emergency worker, being drunk and disorderly in a public place and using insulting words to cause alarm.

      Mr Cassidy said: “I feel upset, whilst I was trying to help because he was clearly in need. It will make me wary of helping others.”

      Pc Patel said: “In so far as the offence is concerned, I am angry that Mr Meads has threatened to kill me- I come out to work to help people.”

      Meads will return to the court on Thursday to be sentenced.
      ________________________________________________
      https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/moj-adviser-who-punched-paramedic-blames-fleeflowing-drinks-at-oxbridge-party-a4042561.html

      ... He was charged with a new crime of attacking an emergency worker, which was brought in last November to give tougher sentencing powers when paramedics are assaulted.

      It doubled the maximum sentence for attacks on police, prison officers, firefighters and paramedics from six months to 12. But district judge Vanessa Baraitser sentenced Meads to a 12-month community order, including 150 hours of community service. She also ordered him to pay £1,000 compensation to Mr Cassidy.

      “This was a serious incident, the assault of an emergency worker,” she said yesterday at Westminster magistrates’ court. “He suffered a short-term impact, he immediately felt upset. He now feels more cautious towards people while carrying out his duties.”

      Delete