The Probation Reality 2

Following on from Friday's extensive media coverage of the McCann case, many staff in NPS will be returning to work today with an understandable sense of dread and foreboding. Morale is at an all-time low and it is to be hoped that at the highest level it will be accepted that along with TR and drastic cuts, putting probation under the control of the prison service  as civil servants has been a disaster. 

The profession is crying out for effective leadership with the courage to speak up and call out what we all know to be wrong with the current HMPPS. For probation to be in any way effective it MUST regain its independence!

Not surprisingly, Friday's revelations has caused widespread discussion and comment amongst staff on various public platforms, including Facebook open groups, and I think the following edited exchanges help explain the background and tensions staff are facing on a daily basis:- 

Of four probation staff in the South East and Eastern division who were directly involved in McCann's supervision, one was demoted, according to PA sources. An earlier investigation resulted in one member of staff involved with McCann being dismissed and an agency worker's contract being terminated for "poor performance", although it was not understood to be directly related to the case.

******
I assume this is from the SFO report? And we can assume the “demotion” was a manager. And that’s a selection of serious consequences. But if (just) four POs looked at this case & no-one clocked that an IPP case should be recalled, something is seriously off. What about prison staff? Court staff? ANYONE?

******
I was just thinking the same thing. Usual practice of scapegoat the Probation service
I mean, clearly there are huge failings here. But the amount & volume is more than the responsibility of just one person or organisation here.

******
How does an entire system stay quiet to allow an IPP to be released automatically?
Stinks.

******
The entire system is so woefully underfunded, disconnected & looked at with such disdain & scorn by government and public. It’s shocking.

******
There’s more here than Probation that needs looking at.

******
There is now a policy of alternatives to recall. It's very difficult in the North West to get anyone recalled including IPP.

******
 "Joseph McCann was released from prison after an error by the probation service, sources have said". Since when did we start releasing prisoners?

******
We didn't recall him on his IPP so when he got a further determinate sentence he was released.

******
Except at any point people from all over could’ve called out that lack-of-recall error. Instead of blindly writing out a licence.

******
How did the prison miss it, the court missed it and only probation staff take full responsibility? 

******
It's amazing to think this was missed by court staff, managing PO, OS in prison. How bad must things have been at that office at the time?

******
Hung out to dry again. How come nobody realised he was on licence when he was sentenced to the new offence? And did he have a previous history of sex offences? There are so many unknowns yet again but we are the only professionals ever to be held to account. If we're that important, treat us as such and give us the resources and the wages we need!

******
How did the court miss it when Sentencing him?

******
In my experience the Court relies on information from the Probation Court Officer - an important role which has changed so much!

******
They didn't the judge even mentioned recall in his comments.

******
Typical. The PO gets made the scapegoat.

******
The article says he wasn't recalled against the IPP but instead given 3 years custody and automatically released.

******
Yes. The point is that he wasn’t recalled. That’s the problem.

******
Yes, if he was recalled he would have had to be released again by the Parole Board, not automatically released halfway through the new sentence.

******
I'm a PO and that was a big mistake to miss that recall. It's automatic that if someone commits another serious offence they are recalled immediately. It certainly is in our office, regardless of the new sentence. Especially when it's an IPP sentence. I hate any of my offenders offending on licence. I take it personally if they commit any offence on licence. I have high standards for the people I supervise. I know they can change and expect it of them. I believe in their change and have a lot time for them to help them but if they don't want to change then they go back to prison. I take my public protection responsibilities seriously as do the majority of my colleagues. We have huge successes all the time but someone changing their lives is not news worthy. We only focus on the few that go wrong and the problem with this job is when it goes wrong it goes wrong big time with huge consequences. But we create change everyday in people.

******
I love this and totally agree with the concept of taking it personally. That’s exactly how I feel. This is an excellent post. Focusing on process and the values underpinning a valuable profession. I would have thought that MAPPA would have been involved at release by Parole Board and at the point of offending when on the IPP licence. The court team also have a responsibility. Finally the SPO. Ongoing supervision and reviewing of cases?

******
Feels like a big systems error and there should be an enquiry.

******

That's how our work should be. We need to care. Really care for our offenders and the communities we serve. The offender will know as soon as they meet you if you care or not. If you don't care then why should they.

*****
I work as a police offender manager and I’m constantly battling with probation officers to get offenders recalled because they are reoffending and their risk is increasing. The latest one was recalled only after being charged with 5 burglaries. 5 more unnecessary victims of crime after his ‘divert from custody’. It’s a joke!

*****

Recalling without a new charge isn't that straight forward. NOMS will often overide the decision to recall. Rather than blame OM's in different bits of the service we should try to gain a better understanding of the limitations of each others roles and responsibilities.

*****

Part of his licence says be of good behaviour among a number of others such as drug testing, driving a stolen car, no insurance, no licence etc. positive drug tests. Oh but his index offence isn’t burglary they said. Yep the car was stolen from a burglary?! No recall, divert from custody. Like I said it’s a joke.

*****

To be fair, there are often times the PO holding the case WILL want to recall but will be blocked by people higher up the chain.

*****

I agree but we have monthly meetings and we spell it out to them SPO’s that this particular person is going down hill and will reoffend guaranteed hundred percent. They could recall purely on the fact they haven’t kept appointments. But no, we need a charge sheet so basically they are saying reoffend then recall. Prevention is better than cure surely not?Sorry but it’s broken it’s become a joke.

*****

Please don't blame the front line Probation staff - blame the system and the upper decision makers. I worked in IOM for a number of years and would have recalled more than I did if allowed but I was prevented from doing so due to policy and governmental directives.

*****

I certainly understand your frustration. I think after recent events the pendulum is going to swing firmly back into the enforcement sphere and we will likely see recalls increase.

*****

It's not an SPO that signs off a recall it's an ACO and even with 3 people in Probation agreeing, NOMS can reject it. Which is why l said rather than playing the blame game we should try to get better today of the limitations of our roles. I've recalled a HROSH client for behaviour and had the Police ask me why? This Police against Probation just creates division not unity.

*****

I don’t blame front line staff generally but I have come across, let’s be honest here, lazy and indifferent officers who are treading water. Other probation officers have pointed this out to SPO’s who have took no action. I’ve witnessed one playing candy crush during a consultation!

*****

The thing is the prisons are at bursting point and not fit for purpose.

*****

Again, in the interests of fairness there are also some Police OM’s who don’t quite make the grade, are slow at providing intel, don’t attend shared meetings as promised and so forth - and I say that as someone who is a big supporter of the Police. I agree completely with Xxxxx above. We are all on the same side! We are all facing the same challenges and difficulties and one of the ways to change this is a fundamental shift in the way we work together.

*****

Every point you raise is valid but just goes to illustrate that this problem is bigger than either of our respective agencies.

*****

I have never said we are perfect, far from it, but if an offender commits an offence whilst on licence it’s not the police’s fault. We did our job in securing a conviction in the first place for the original offence job done. It’s down to the probation and prison service to protect the public from that offender till end of licence. It really is as simple as that.

*****
Usually I would guess the police would want every one to be returned to prison for suspected behaviours, but clearly we know our justice system does not allow for suspicion-based convictions. I'm guessing this would also be for return to custody, and that would have it's own criteria to be met?

*****
It's unprofessional for you to criticise your partner agency in open forum.

*****

I’ll criticise in open or closed forums. I often do and it’s about time people got from behind their computers, got a grip of offenders who openly laugh at and play the ‘system’ and do what their job description says and protect the public,instead of pandering to faceless bureaucrats.

*****

It’s rarely the case with IPPs though.

*****
I’ve seen IPPs get recalled for intentionally being late for their curfew. No change in risk. But all they know is prison & probation were so tight in IPP issues. So for an IPP to *not* be recalled, especially on a similar offence, is what’s so drastically wrong.

*****
People not being recalled on standard licences is another matter. Especially given the state of prisons. However I can see why a multi burglary offender not being recalled would be worrying/frustrating. Equally as a police officer, you’re not at the point of conviction.

*****
And no, prevention isn’t better than the cure in this case. We know prison doesn’t work.

******

There would be a lot less victims of crime had a number of offenders been recalled to prison to serve their sentence instead of being let out half way through to be supposedly managed in the community. A community full of drugs fellow offenders and broken families just ripe for them to re offend.

******

Yes let’s just lock them all away & throw away the key.

******

Not at all, create proper prisons with great facilities and learning possibilities I’ve worked with offenders whom the last thing they need is a custodial sentence. However I’ve also worked with a number of offenders who regardless of what you do to them (you could give them an all-inclusive holiday in the Maldives for six months) they will still continue to re offend as their social environment is broken. I’ve worked with these people for over 30 years now.

******

So if people don’t have a “proper” social environment we throw away the key? For every offender who chooses to burgle someone’s house or rob an innocent person going about their business or who decides it’s ok to drive a car with no licence insurance and on drugs (all whilst on licence) there are so many people who don’t? And strangely enough they also live in this very same social environment.

******

Perhaps you need to also remember it is the perpetrator who holds ultimate responsibility for their actions. Placing blame on professionals trying to do an extremely difficult job, in impossible circumstances, is unhelpful and unfair.

******

If it was that simple we wouldn't be having this discussion and when you say 'well the Police have done our bit by securing the conviction' again it creates division and is actually not true. The CPS secure the conviction the Police investigate and provide the evidence. We all are responsible for a different element of crime prevention. When l was an IOM PO l often had Police colleagues complain about the lack of recalls. One day my colleague and l worked with our Police colleagues to support them understand the process and evidence threshold we have to meet to get a recall agreed when we recall for behaviour. No surprise they stopped complaining once they had a better understanding of the complexity of a recall. The other issue that the Police often aren't aware of is if we recall purely on behaviour or they are on Police Bail awaiting charge, that client can lodge a case in High Court for a Judicial Review to challenge us, the individual PO. Not CRC not NPS us the individual. I've had that threat twice and it's not a walk in the park to have your professionalism pulled apart in court because you've made a decision based on information from a partner agency who incidentally often isn't called to give evidence during the Judicial Review or if they are they hide behind their agency. Greater understanding is needed all around.

*****

I’m sorry but SPO’s and probation officers who have an offenders risk of re offending clearly pointed out to them evidence based who fail to act should be held to account especially by victims of crime who sadly get overlooked.

******
Why should it be PO and SPO's when I've told you it's an ACO who has to authorise a recall not a PO and SPO and again this comment shows how little you actually know about Probation Practice. Thanks to the Parole Board going against Probation and Prison recommendations not to release the Black Cab rapist, in the event of an SFO an ACO will share the findings of an SFO Review with the victim. And victims are not overlooked. There's a whole section on the Recall Report that focuses just on the victims. Maybe you should offer to actually work alongside a PO who is considering a recall, like the Police Officers l worked with did to increase your understanding.

******

I've often had Police wanting recall on information that isn't going to lead to a charge, without considering the implications of this legally. If there is enough evidence to recall because they have done it then there should be enough evidence to charge for the new offence.

******

I’m sorry but a licence says you should be of good behaviour and if you're not then you are in breach of it and should receive a warning then another then one more then recall. What part of testing positive for class A drugs driving around in a stolen car without a licence no insurance constitutes good behaviour? It clearly doesn’t. You wouldn’t, I wouldn’t do it and neither would a most people I know. So how the hell can someone half way through a prison term get away with it and not be recalled? It’s madness.

******

There is dodgy practices and people on all professions. Don't judge us all by some bad practice. If you're on licence and you offend then there should be a sanction of some some sort. If your offence is a risk to public, then there should be a recall. If this doesn't happen then I'd speak to the SPO, or Head of Service or Divisional Director. But we may be taking action such as increase in frequency of reporting, warnings, direction to agencies etc. A recall is important but often only a temporary measure. We look at the longer term change that is needed and a 14 or 28 day recall may not have any impact and make them more angry have more hatred to agencies and ultimately more risky. Probation Officers walk a very delicate line, we have to get alongside people to help them change but also manage their risks and protect the public. All these issues are very complex and we all do very difficult jobs so we must work together rather than point the finger. I have a story where I can point the finger. Someone committed a further offence, no one told me, not the police, not the court. Mistakes happen on all sides.

******

Thankfully for me it was an IOM Police Officer who got her Police colleagues to understand what was happening to me and no surprise the 17 open robbery investigations were dropped one by one and he was released from the recall. I made it clear if l had been called I'd have told the High Court who exactly in the CID had provided the information about the alleged Robberies and let that person be scrutinised in open Court.

******

I have attended many oral hearings and I think the Parole Board are rigorous in their assessment of risk of harm to the public. There needs to be a body independent of probation. We all have different agendas and beliefs. The police want to lock them up and keep them locked up, probation's job is to manage that risk and also to rehabilitate, we believe people can change. But I also know we need an independent arbiter for the public to assess risk that they pose. I think the Parole Board actually do a great job and play a vital role. We need checks and balances in the criminal justice system.

******

I was involved in a case where the offender constantly breached his licence but his PSO refused to recall to prison. Two weeks later the offender bludgeoned someone to death.

I'm sorry to hear this. We do have to justify our recall. There is also government guidance pressure they we have considered alternatives to recall, ie warnings, increase in reporting, direction to agencies such as drug /alcohol. So although we may not recall we have to consider other options. It may look like we are not doing anything but we are. Obviously your example was very sad and it must feel frustrating for you. But I know we take public protection very seriously. I take guidance from the police very seriously in my decisions. I'm shocked that others may not.

******

I am very aware of the guidelines. The offender constantly breached his licence and was a dangerous person. When I constantly reported it I got told I was stupid and couldn't assess risk.

******

That was shit. I remember how we were told not to recall.

*****

That's the thing though, we could of recalled him.

******

That's dangerous practice. We should all be respecting each other and listening to concerns from the police. I'd raise it with their SPO and if not satisfied the Head of Service and if still not satisfied the divisional director. There is no excuse for that.

******

Just read the article and noticed it was a CRC that was managing the case you mentioned. I work for the NPS. The public owned part of the service. The Tories privatised 70% of the service when they created the CRC companies to fit their ideology. Each company is different. I worked for a CRC for four years and they were quite arrogant when they came in not humbly wanting to learn from us but quite brash and looking at Probation and all we did previously as wrong. They cut staff and the service to the bone. They created tiers of people that you know would not know what they did. All monitoring what you did and analysing data. They de-professionalised the service completely. They believed that we were all lazy and didn't understand what we did. It was like working for Top Shop, there was us on the shop floor and those at head office, a huge divide. They brought in dangerous structural changes that failed and within a year it was all changed back to the public sector model following a disastrous inspection. Many SFOs, more created victims from a failed policy. I left because if felt like I was working for a sales company rather than a public service. Complete focus on targets. I never heard managing risk mentioned. It was all about the targets they needed to meet not to lose money. When I started back in the NPS it was breath of fresh air focusing on risk and managing it.