George Monbiot has written a moving piece in the Guardian today about the tragic loss of little April Jones and the effect it's had on their community. As he so rightly says, now that the trial is over, Mark Bridger convicted and sentenced to a Whole Life term of imprisonment, the healing can begin.
I also felt moved to write about this sad case last October and made the point that a probation officer would almost certainly have been allocated the case right from first remand. Cases like this touch people and for that officer now charged with preparing the Post Life Sentence Report, I made the point that we should return to the practice of allocating such an officer a 'pair' both for support and to provide a degree of continuity through a very long sentence.
It's quite clear to me that Mark Bridger will continue to try and exercise a degree of cruel control by denying the police and family details as to the whereabouts of April's body. Some people we are required to work with tax our professional integrity and moral compass to the limits and I'm sure this man will pose any officer many sleepless nights.
Long after the police attention has waned, they will be engaging in a regular intellectual, moral and philosophical battle with him, all the while conscious of the inherent danger of falling victim to his cynical manipulation. We've seen this with Ian Brady and the so-called mental health advocate, and today we read of Bridger's 'confession' to a priest at HMP Manchester while he was on remand.
Just imagine the moral dilemma and anguish this priest was put through in having to make a decision between respecting the sanctity of 'conversations' (not a Confession we are told) on the one hand, with the moral and civic duty of reporting the content to the police on the other. Bridger would know this of course and as with Brady, it just represents another twist in the utterly cruel game of holding out false hope to those desperate in wanting to bury their loved one.
My heart goes out to April's parents who have remained dignified throughout.
I do feel rather awkward, as I do not want anyone to think I'm point scoring on the dreadful events of recent weeks, or in respect of the two high profile trials relating to the murder of two lovely children April and Tia. Even with ample evidence to the contrary, I do want to belive people are inherently good and the number of truly evil, demonic, self centered individuals are few and far between, I do struggle at times. The connection I made in my mind, about those engaging in these most awful crimes did not have their intentions tatooed on their foreheads and few if any previous convictions or indicators of what is to come, and are so typical of those people soon to be 'supervised' by private enterprise! Good luck to them, with developing the infrastructure to respond to such incidents....usually referred to as SFO's in Probation.
ReplyDeleteYou should have stayed with the feeling of awkwardness, and resisted the temptation to try to link this to the privatization debate. Jim has it right here. This is about the impact on people, not who they happen to work for.
DeleteWhen theres no demonic intent tattooed on the forehead and no real previous indicators, prediction or prevention of such tragic and horrible occurances is just impossible. Although i concur with jims views on the dismantlement and destruction of the probation service, and admire his insights and understanding on some related topics, in this sad instance the debate over public or private has no relevence what so ever. It is a time for healing only,and the politics belong in a very different arena
DeleteActing from the premise that the primary focus of probation work is rehabilitative which is framed by concerns to prevent reoffending and afford public protection, I don't see much worth in rehabilitation when the prisoner is subject to a whole life tariff. Who cares if he is rehabilitated or not. So where does the impetus come from to engage in 'moral or philisophical battles'. Why bother? Seems to me that the only duty on any professional in the prison system dealing with Mark Bridger is to treat him with decency and respect, in spite of his crime. The overriding duty is to seek to sustain a humane prison system.
ReplyDeleteYes, along the same lines as Anonymous31 May 2013 15:02, I was going to ask why the Probation Service are involved in such a case?
ReplyDeleteIt's good practice to allocate a probation officer to any person facing a charge of murder, and hence possible life sentence, from first remand.
DeleteIf there is a conviction, although no PSR is prepared prior to the Judge passing the mandatory life sentence and setting of the tariff, a Post life Sentence Report has to be prepared within a couple of months. This is usually signed off at ACO level and forms the basis for sentence planning within the prison system.
Every life sentence prisoner will have a home probation officer throughout their sentence and although I've never been involved with a whole life tariff prisoner, I see no reason why the same practice would not apply.
There is always work to undertake with life sentence prisoners, and in this case it would initially centre around encouraging as full an admission as possible regarding what actually happened, together with some insight into why it happened.
Even with a prisoner who has no prospect of release, there are still issues to be dealt with, not least his management within the prison system, his safety and the safety of others. There will be family issues and victim's family issues and possibly general welfare issues. Someone has to to do all this and that someone is generally a PO.
Of course I can see there are issues around victims, family and safety within the prison system. I think encouraging prisoners to make full admissions and gain insight is a good thing - with caveats: in general, there are those in the system who are in denial of their offences, but probation invariably proceed on the basis that the prisoner is guilty. The whole life tariff prisoners are exceptional cases and specifically in respect of Bridger I think there is not much to be done in a rehabilitative sense. And though he may well be reviewed by the parole board, that review will be about management of the prisoner, not release planning.
DeleteThanks for the explanation Jim.
ReplyDeleteMy admiration for those of your colleagues who have to undertake this task.
Not sure if this is still the case but whole life tariff lifers used to be reviewed by the Parole Board after 25 years and at regular intervals thereafter.
ReplyDeleteMight just be me having a Lombroso moment but don't Mark Bridger, Stuart Hazell and Mick Philpott all look the same? Time for a "looks like a wrong'un" box in OASys?
ReplyDeletehave you heard of the plan to tupe probation to a holding company called newco to make it easier to sell off?
ReplyDeleteYes and the topic is covered in today's post. Cheers.
Delete