Tuesday 28 January 2020

Another Wearisome Battle

We've discussed many times before on here how making crime and punishment a political football might win votes, but it inevitably stores up a shed-load of problems further down the line. A new government means the circular argument must repeat itself and here's the Prison Reform Trust firing the first round in yet another wearisome battle:- 

Punitive prison policies risk repeating past mistakes

Planned government changes to sentencing will add to pressures on our overcrowded and overstretched prisons, without reducing crime or improving public confidence, a new Prison Reform Trust report warns.

The latest edition of the Bromley Briefing Prison Factfile reveals that, contrary to the impression given in much recent political debate and media coverage, England and Wales have become much tougher in their approach to punishing serious crime over the past few decades, on a scale which exceeds comparable countries or historical precedent.

Writing in the report in a specially commissioned section on life sentences, Professor Ben Crewe and Dr Susie Hulley, from the University of Cambridge, and Dr Serena Wright, from Royal Holloway, University of London, reveal a dramatic increase in the number of people serving sentences that were until recently considered wholly exceptional in their severity.

Between 2000 and 2003, fewer than 100 people a year were given life sentences where the minimum guaranteed period in custody, known as the “tariff” exceeded 15 years. But in the years that followed, this number increased significantly, rising to 249 adults in 2008.

By September 2019, 1,872 life sentence prisoners had tariffs (the guaranteed minimum time inside for punishment) of over 20 years. 880 people had a tariff of more than 25 years, and 291 had a tariff of more than 30 years, excluding 63 people who were serving the state’s most extreme punishment, a whole life tariff—and so very unlikely ever to be released.

The authors’ analysis suggests that the most likely and significant cause of the recent growth in the use of long sentences has been changes in sentencing legislation, particularly the 2003 Criminal Justice Act and subsequent amendments, which bought into effect a significant increase in the minimum sentence for a range of forms of murder.

They find no clear evidence that the recent rise in tariff lengths is linked to changes in the nature or severity of offending itself.

They conclude that the growing numbers of people serving long sentences means that our prisons are likely to remain overcrowded for the foreseeable future, regardless of any changes in sentencing practice for less serious offending or improvements in reconviction rates.

The Bromley Briefings have established themselves as an essential reference publication for anyone concerned about the prison systems in the UK.

The facts and figures compiled for the latest report reveal that our prisons continue to face unprecedented challenges, with conditions which undermine our justice system, and whose consequences blight our communities rather than helping them to thrive.

England and Wales already has one of the highest rates of imprisonment in western Europe, with 140 people held in prison for every 100,000 of our population. We also keep people in prison for far longer than many other countries, with more people serving life sentences here than Germany, Russia, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands and Scandinavia combined.

Pressures on prisons set to worsen as government seeks to introduce punitive reforms in its proposed sentencing bill. A government commitment to 10,000 additional prison places is unlikely to meet rising demand given the government’s failure in the past to deliver on prison building promises. A similar 2015 promise to close decrepit and overcrowded Victorian and pre-Victorian jails and replace them with up to 10,000 new prison places have resulted in just 206 additional places being built to date, whilst the commitment to close older prisons has now been abandoned.

Commenting, Peter Dawson, director of the Prison Reform Trust said:

“Following almost a decade of deterioration, the government is right to want to restore confidence in our justice system, but so far it is looking in the wrong places. Longer sentences haven’t improved public confidence or safety before, and they won’t now. But they have helped produce a prison system that fails to deliver either safety or rehabilitation. Good soundbites don’t always make good policy - a coherent plan for reform is long overdue.”

--oo00oo--

This from the Guardian:-

Longer sentences will not cut crime, say prison experts

Boris Johnson’s hardline approach to justice will not cut crime and will only pile pressure on overstretched prisons, expert campaigners have said, as research reveals life sentences have already risen sharply.

The Prison Reform Trust issued the stark warning just days after the government unveiled proposals to lock up some serious violent and sexual offenders for longer by scrapping automatic release halfway through a jail sentence. Offenders serving standard determinate sentences of seven years or more, where the maximum sentence is life, will be released at the two-thirds point, rather than halfway, under the changes unveiled last week.

Introducing a new report, the Prison Reform Trust director, Peter Dawson, said the government was looking in the wrong places to restore confidence in the justice system.

He said: “Longer sentences haven’t improved public confidence or safety before, and they won’t now. But they have helped produce a prison system that fails to deliver either safety or rehabilitation. Good soundbites don’t always make good policy – a coherent plan for reform is long overdue.”

Researchers suggest England and Wales are already tougher on punishing serious crime than other countries. Prof Ben Crewe and Dr Susie Hulley, from the University of Cambridge, and Dr Serena Wright, from Royal Holloway, University of London, found a dramatic increase in the number of people serving life sentences.

According to the findings, fewer than 100 people a year were handed a life sentence with a minimum term of 15 years in England and Wales between 2000 and 2003. By 2008, this had risen to 249 adults and as of September 2019, 1,872 life sentence prisoners had tariffs of more than 20 years.

Last year, there were also 880 serving a minimum of 25 years and 291 with a tariff of more than 30, excluding those serving the whole-life tariff who are unlikely to ever be released.

The findings of the report indicate there was no clear evidence that the latest rise in lengths of tariffs is linked to changes in the nature or severity of offending. The research claims growing numbers of people serving long sentences will mean prisons are likely to remain overcrowded for the foreseeable future.

A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman said: “Under this government, serious violent and sexual offenders will spend more time where they belong – behind bars. We are spending £2.75bn on transforming and modernising the estate, including creating 10,000 additional prison places.”

9 comments:

  1. Three years before Usman Khan stabbed two young people to death on London Bridge, Ian Acheson warned that the way the justice system treated violent extremists was a shambles. He wrote a report for the then Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, which delivered 69 urgent recommendations to the Ministry of Justice. Only eight were accepted.

    In this documentary, the former senior Home Office official and prison governor asks whether more could have been done to prevent Usman Khan from carrying out his murderous rampage. He explores every stage of Usman Khan's journey through the British criminal justice system, wondering what might have changed his trajectory.

    Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service is something of a closed book but, drawing on the testimony of whistle-blowers, Ian Acheson digs into the causes behind the situation he first identified as a crisis in 2015. He meets former prisoners and extremists, criminal justice experts, parole officers, and a former prisons minister, most of whom are damning about a system that has been "woefully neglected”.

    He asks if the quality of de-radicalisation programmes can be improved, whether it is right to separate the most dangerous terrorists from the prison population, and if it is possible in a liberal democracy to lock up dangerous terrorists and throw away the key.

    This documentary will test some of Ian Acheson’s more radical ideas and ask whether we can ever eliminate the possibility that an atrocity such as that carried out by Usman Khan will happen again.

    Presenter: Ian Acheson
    Producer: Rachel Wright

    A Novel production for BBC Radio 4

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's a "parole officer"? Once again the media can't even get our job title correct let alone understand what we do. I shouldn't be surprised as its not the first time and won't be the last but when Buckland went on the Today programme to stand up this reactionary knee jerk crowd pleasing bollocks he mentioned the importance of the role of every agency by name except, you guessed it, Probation! I remain heartily sick of being ignored and undervalued for my role in protecting the public by helping people change but sadly, not surprised.

      Delete
  2. The Guardian offers one perspective, and one perspective only. Never liked the paper and never will. When you deal with criminals of any calibre there is no fail safe way to ensure they will never offend again. Mix and match who you like in prisons and the results are the same. You either keep your head down, and get on with your lives or you entangle yourself further into criminality. Most will give up through age and the usual social and environmental factors, and other re so far gone they enjoy and revel in what they do, it gives them satisfaction. This is the conundrum we face, but until the CJS gets a grip on itself not much is going to change.
    Old lag, reformed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It will always a battle, and wearying: the really depressing thing is that from the time I started in Probation way back in the last century, we (practitioners, academics, progressives) seem to have been losing ground.
    I formed a view a long while back that when UK looked to Europe for influence on its criminal justice policy, things got a bit better, and when we looked to the US, things got worse. So that wearying fight looks even more desperate now

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's always reforms and policy changes in the CJS. But they're never accompanied with any explanation of how they're intended to advance the system. They're reactionary, politically motivated and short sighted.
      I can totally understand why people call for longer prison sentences, and an end to automatic release at the halfway mark. It should be remembered however that under the old two thirds system that many prisoners were released on parole having served much less then half their sentence, and if released after two thirds they were not subject to supervision.
      Just making sentences longer changes what?
      If someone's sick and admitted to hospital for a week and receives no treatment, then they're still likely to be sick when they're discharged. Simply saying that they are now going to spend two weeks in hospital without any treatment just means they stay in hospital longer, but still get discharged with the same issues.
      Sometimes I wonder if the CJS is a too valuable political tool for politicians to really want to fix it.

      'Getafix

      Delete
  4. https://www.itv.com/news/2020-01-29/true-or-false-do-lie-detector-tests-work-and-are-they-be-able-to-prevent-terrorist-attacks/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Plans have been announced to introduce lie detector tests - known as polygraph tests - to assess if terrorists have reformed and no longer pose a risk.

      But many disagree the style of testing, first seen in 1921, is accurate enough to determine if a subject is lying.

      Director of UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience Professor Sophie Scott told ITV News: "You can't use a polygraph to work out if somebody is lying or not.

      "Because actually there's no one thing that people, their bodies or their brains do when they're lying that we can scientifically identify and say 'right then, there, a lie happened'."

      Polygraph, which translates to 'many measures', can note changes in a person's heart rate, their breathing and even how sweaty their skin is - something the Ministry of Justice has used to check the behaviour of sex offenders since 2014.

      But scientists have never been able to say for sure if this data proves a person is telling a lie.

      According to Prof Scott, who has worked in the area for over 30 years: "I think the bigger problem is that while it may tell you that somebody is in an emotional state, what it does not tell you is why they are in that emotional state.

      "There is often the idea that you could game this - you might hold your breath or try and increase your heart rate some other way and I mean you could never rule out the possibility that somebody could do this."

      Currently, the test cannot be used in UK courts because of uncertainty around how accurate the results are.

      But Home Secretary Priti Patel plans to roll the technique alongside increasing the number of counter terrorism probation officers, providing specialist psychologists and training front-line prison and probation staff to identify those behind bars and on licence.

      The Counter Terrorism (Sentencing and Release) Bill is in response to the recent London Bridge attack committed by convicted terrorist Usman Khan, who was out on licence from prison when he killed Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones.

      However, former Head Head of the National Counter Terrorism Security Office Chris Phillips thinks that these measures don't go far enough.

      Mr Phillips said: "I don’t think lie detectors on their own will ever be good, we know they can be defeated, everyone knows they can be defeated.

      "Lie detectors are one tool in a big tool kit, those other tool kits could be geo-location devices and of course you can tag telephones to see who they’re talking to and what they’re saying, so these are all just parts of a tool kit.

      "But of course, all these things are only useful if you’ve actually got the officers, the people to do it and that’s not always the case."

      Delete
  5. it's been announced that Interserve are not bidding for UPW/Interventions in the new round of tenders. Nothing on google as of yet but it has been announced to staff. Interesting times ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Prison officers describe struggles with anxiety and depression

    It has emerged that 1,000 prison officers in England and Wales took time off work last year because of stress, with another 800 suffering from anxiety and depression.

    The figures - provided to BBC News under Freedom of Information laws - represent a significant increase on previous years.

    Two former prisoner officers told BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw about the mental health problems they suffered.

    ReplyDelete