Many people will be aware of the Pre Sentence Report and its place in the Criminal Justice System as a vital element in the sentencing process. Traditionally prepared by a Probation Officer either for Magistrates or Crown Courts, they've been around for years and can often significantly influence what sort of disposal is handed down. They have always represented substantial pieces of professional work and anyone who has experience of preparing them will know how much thought and skill is required to tell an often complicated story, provide meaningful analysis and a cogent and easily understood explanation for a particular course of action. This takes time of course, but over the years the time allowed has reduced from four to three weeks.
As I have previously described, the whole process has been made more bureaucratic, time-consuming and intellectually challenging by the introduction of OASys and the computer generated finished product. However at the very same time, various efforts have been made to speed the court process up and as a result the concept of the Fast Delivery Report has developed, having grown out of the verbal 'stand down' report of old. Management particularly like the idea because FDR's can be undertaken by PSO's at court on the day and so are not only quick, but considerably cheaper as well. Naturally courts have got to like them for the same reason, but the trouble is there's been considerable 'mission creep' in that they are now being used routinely for quite serious offences and have spread to the Crown Court.
It will be appreciated that an FDR is not the same as a full PSR, or Standard Delivery Report as they are increasingly being called. In my view the seemingly inexorable spread of the FDR is undermining the essential role and purpose of a PSR. In essence the FDR started out as a quick method of checking that an offender was suitable for a particular disposal, mostly Community Service. Then the remit widened to include other possible disposals, including checking what possible negative effects custody might have, a very bad development in my view.
We now have a situation where Crown Court Judges are getting used to the idea of sentencing on quite serious offences on the basis of either an FDR prepared in less than five days, or on a quick interview at court on the day. Personally I'm appalled at where this is taking us as an FDR is simply not of the same quality or as comprehensive as a full PSR. Seemingly the only sentence that the Chief Presiding Judge is ruling out as capable of being imposed following an FDR is one of indeterminate Imprisonment for Public Protection. This is getting crazy - the PSR as a vital sentencing document is being completely undermined.
Also there seems to be a view growing up that a PSR is not required if a substantial period of imprisonment is inevitable. Again this is extremely worrying in my view and I would cite the following example of why it can be very unwise. It is certainly not untypical in my experience for a defendant to arrive at Crown on bail ready for a trial on a serious charge, possibly Rape, only to be encouraged to change his plea on the day to one of guilt to a lesser charge say of Indecent Assault. The Judge states that a PSR is not necessary as custody is certain and hands down say 5 years. Now, when the time comes for a probation officer to interview the prisoner say in order to assess him for SOTP or further down the line for Parole, he will deny culpability saying 'the only reason I pleaded guilty was because my brief told me to'.
Now, had the Judge requested a PSR, this line would not have been possible because an equivocal plea would not have been acceptable to the interviewing PO or indeed the court. The defendant would have had to admit commission of the offences for which he had entered the guilty plea and the report would have addressed the circumstances of the offences in some detail. On the other hand, without that discussion, months or years down the line the probation officer is more than likely going to be met with blanket denials or minimisation. As a result the interests of public safety are considerably compromised by the lack of a PSR. I would go further and say that the process of justice is being undermined by the ill thought out spread of FDR's.
I'm interested to know why you think 'checking what possible negative effects custody might have' is 'a very bad development'. If a PO thinks an offender shouldn't go to prison but knows that the magistrate or judge is likely to do so, isn't this information another tool with which to dissuade the sentencer from being overly punitive?
ReplyDeleteVery interesting ideas about using the PSR to create justice but, in your example, the offender could still turn around when being assessed for SOTP and say 'I didn't do it, I only said what I said so that you would propose a shorter or more rehabilitative sentence'- blanket denials are by no means unheard of amongst prisoners/offenders who do have full PSRs.
Criminologyandstuff - In my view it's a very bad development because only a full PSR would do the situation justice and allow a spirited and reasoned case for an alternative to custody. FDR's are not appropriate where custody is a distinct possibility. It smacks of 'going through the motions'.
ReplyDeleteI've had a long think and cannot recollect a case of a blanket denial later on and following a full PSR. Minimisation or obfuscation possibly.
In my experience, judges simply will not go to the expense of having a PSR (whether fast delivery or a full report) prepared where custody is the only option. Certainly, at Snaresbrook I've seen probation officers tell judges that they are a waste of time where prison is the inevitable outcome.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Jim they get around your problem of the equivocal plea highlighted in PSRs by simply refusing to accept that the plea is equivocal or ruling that the Defendant only wants to change his plea back to not guilty because he now realises how long he will spend in prison.
Slightly off the point, but in my experience it feels like most defendants who plead guilty to a sexual offence start denying that they committed the offence within about a month of going to prison. I even had one chap who said he did it... but he definately wasn't guilty!
"Certainly, at Snaresbrook I've seen probation officers tell judges that they are a waste of time where prison is the inevitable outcome."
ReplyDeleteI find that amazing and can't believe a proper old style PO would say such a thing! It seems to imply that the purpose of a PSR is to only suggest an alternative - it should do much more by giving the Judge a rounded picture which has always been felt important as an aid to sentencing. It's also important as it serves to inform the prison and any other probation staff about the background etc. A good PSR always forms the basis for all later assessments etc. Of course it's a double whammy because no PSR = no OASys either - a guy arrives in custody and the system knows absolutely nothing about him - these are all reasons why the thing was invented in the first place, but we're losing sight of that!
We are galloping towards becoming a third-world country where abstract concepts like justice are secondary to how much it costs. Our new political leaders are hiding behind the financial crisis to dismantle the way things have developed (sometimes over many, many years) and crying crocodile tears while rubbing their hands with glee at dismantling the public sector.
ReplyDeleteOf course their actions will never directly affect them as The People That Matter in government are stinking rich and can buy privileges and protections that most of us - certainly the bottom tiers of society we deal with - cannot afford. I could weep for my country.
I agree that a SDR is 'better' when mounting a defence against a custodial sentence and that FDRs can be seen as going through the motions, but when POs are put in the situation of having to gain permission to do an SDR instead of FDRs, surely including a discussion about the impact of custody is a compromise which shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
ReplyDeleteI have witnessed (in the course of research I've been doing in the probation service) POs describing PSRs as a waste of time when custody is pretty much inevitable. I have noticed that this attitude is more common amongst less experienced staff. This may explain your view that "I... can't believe a proper old style PO would say such a thing!' rather than proving that it doesn't happen.
criminolgyandstuff - the whole thing about FDR's at Crown makes me very depressed indeed when you think about the seriousness of the offences. It's also the last place to put less experienced staff FFS - but the grumpiness is coming to the surface again I guess. Thanks for your comments BTW and for giving me a plug on your blog. Much appreciated. Jim
ReplyDeleteI find it quite frightening that we are now being encouraged to write FDRs on domestic violence cases. These reports do not even contain a section to analyse relationships and are usually completed in hours or days which makes your standard DVU/CYPS checks rather difficult. The offences are labelled 'minor' offences, often bargained down to a much lesser charge and the fact that this one crime quite often falls inside a much bigger picture of abuse is at risk of being overlooked. It does make you wonder why you go through the whole process. It wasnt so long ago we were advised to co-work these cases on an SDR, the most recent advice I received regarding FDRs (when questioned regarding the time spent on so-called 'fast' delivery reports as a result of my desire to produce decent quality reports) was that it 'doesnt have to be good, it just has to be done'... oh the shame...!!
ReplyDeleteYes it is worrying and depressing that quality is seemingly being sacrificed everywhere in the Service for speed and numbers. In my Service DV reports are now being written by PSO's - you don't say if you are a PO or not - but until quite recently these reports were only felt appropriate for PO's and certainly not in FDR format. Thanks for commenting as I want to highlight this sort of issue and hopefully prompt some kind or response, so spread the word too! Cheers,
ReplyDeleteJim