From Telegraph yesterday:-
Errors in previous sentencing led judge to tell Damien Bendall he did not think 'for a second' he would reoffend again
A judge told a triple child killer he did not think “for a second” that he would be back in court again as he released him just months before the murders, The Telegraph can reveal.
Damien Bendall, 32, was last week condemned to spend the rest of his life behind bars for bludgeoning three children and his pregnant partner to death with a claw hammer in Killamarsh, Derbyshire, in September last year.
Three months earlier, he had escaped with a suspended 17-month sentence for arson from Judge Jason Taylor KC, despite his extensive history of violent offending.
The Telegraph last week disclosed how a probation officer who assessed Bendall’s record for the judge was sacked for gross misconduct after miscategorising him as “medium risk” rather than “high risk” in a pre-sentence report. It was among a string of blunders that prompted the Ministry of Justice to order the probation inspectorate to carry out a full review of the case, amid concern Bendall should never have been free to kill.
Lacey Bennett, Connie Gent and John Paul Bennett were killed by Damien Bendall at a house in Derbyshire
Now, this newspaper can reveal that the sentencing judge believed the violent drug addict to be a reformed character when he chose not to jail him for pouring petrol over a “random” BMW and torching it. A transcript of the 19-minute sentencing hearing at Swindon Crown Court, obtained by The Telegraph, showed the judge was swayed by personal mitigation “set out in the pre-sentence report”.
What the pre-sentence report did not include, however, were crucial details about Bendall’s troubling past which the probation officer had failed to access and feed into the risk-assessment system. It allowed the judge to conclude that the arson appeared to be “an isolated incident” and hail the thug’s “brave decision” to move away from Swindon to “start afresh” with his partner, Terri Harris. “That is probably, frankly, the best decision you have ever made,” he told the defendant.
The judge said he believed Bendall was “genuinely remorseful” and had taken steps to address his problems with substance abuse. But in reality, Bendall continued to be a heavy drug user. He was fuelled by cocaine when he savagely killed Ms Harris, 35, her children John Bennett, 13, Lacey Bennett, 11, and Lacey’s friend Connie Gent, 11, who was sleeping over.
He then raped Lacey while she lay dying, before taking a taxi to Sheffield to exchange John’s Xbox for more drugs.
Three months earlier, as the sentencing hearing concluded, the judge had told him: “I do not think for a second you are going to come back to court. “I really hope now you have turned a new leaf and I hope you can carry on with the new chapter in your life.” He then added: “You can leave court.”
Earlier in the hearing, Rhianna Fricker, the prosecuting barrister, urged the court to consider the offence as “high culpability” and recommended the judge set the starting point for sentence at two years’ imprisonment. Emma Hillier, Bendall’s solicitor, said the defendant had been taking prescribed medication, for a “mass at the back of his head which affected his nerves”, that mixed badly with alcohol. He did not remember the offence, she said.
At his sentencing hearing for the murders, Vanessa Marshall KC, Bendall’s defence barrister, would again say that he had no memory of his crimes. Ms Hillier said the arson, which took place in the early hours of May 9 2020, was “completely” random and Bendall did not know the owner of the car. She then described how Bendall had “cut ties” with his past and moved up to live with his newly-pregnant partner, Ms Harris, adding that “he looks after” her two children.
Last week, Mr Justice Sweeney said one of those children, Lacey, was raped “as her young life was ebbing away” in the “grossest breach of trust” by Bendall. Bendall was also said to have been “abusive and controlling” in his relationship with Ms Harris. Terri Harris was pregnant at the time of her death. He had “a significant background of violent offending”, including a three-year sentence for robbery in 2011, a three-year sentence for attempted robbery and possession of a knife in 2015 and a 54-month sentence for grievous bodily harm and actual bodily harm in 2017.
The sentencing hearing for the murders was also told how Bendall killed a dog by battering it with a brick because his friend could not afford medical bills.
The Telegraph previously revealed that a second probation officer, who took over Bendall’s case when he moved to the East Midlands, had been found guilty of misconduct for putting a trainee in charge of monitoring him. The supervisor has been suspended but is understood to be mounting an appeal against the misconduct finding.
Last week, a Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “These were appalling crimes and our thoughts remain with the victims’ families.
A judge told a triple child killer he did not think “for a second” that he would be back in court again as he released him just months before the murders, The Telegraph can reveal.
Damien Bendall, 32, was last week condemned to spend the rest of his life behind bars for bludgeoning three children and his pregnant partner to death with a claw hammer in Killamarsh, Derbyshire, in September last year.
Three months earlier, he had escaped with a suspended 17-month sentence for arson from Judge Jason Taylor KC, despite his extensive history of violent offending.
The Telegraph last week disclosed how a probation officer who assessed Bendall’s record for the judge was sacked for gross misconduct after miscategorising him as “medium risk” rather than “high risk” in a pre-sentence report. It was among a string of blunders that prompted the Ministry of Justice to order the probation inspectorate to carry out a full review of the case, amid concern Bendall should never have been free to kill.
Lacey Bennett, Connie Gent and John Paul Bennett were killed by Damien Bendall at a house in Derbyshire
Now, this newspaper can reveal that the sentencing judge believed the violent drug addict to be a reformed character when he chose not to jail him for pouring petrol over a “random” BMW and torching it. A transcript of the 19-minute sentencing hearing at Swindon Crown Court, obtained by The Telegraph, showed the judge was swayed by personal mitigation “set out in the pre-sentence report”.
What the pre-sentence report did not include, however, were crucial details about Bendall’s troubling past which the probation officer had failed to access and feed into the risk-assessment system. It allowed the judge to conclude that the arson appeared to be “an isolated incident” and hail the thug’s “brave decision” to move away from Swindon to “start afresh” with his partner, Terri Harris. “That is probably, frankly, the best decision you have ever made,” he told the defendant.
The judge said he believed Bendall was “genuinely remorseful” and had taken steps to address his problems with substance abuse. But in reality, Bendall continued to be a heavy drug user. He was fuelled by cocaine when he savagely killed Ms Harris, 35, her children John Bennett, 13, Lacey Bennett, 11, and Lacey’s friend Connie Gent, 11, who was sleeping over.
He then raped Lacey while she lay dying, before taking a taxi to Sheffield to exchange John’s Xbox for more drugs.
Three months earlier, as the sentencing hearing concluded, the judge had told him: “I do not think for a second you are going to come back to court. “I really hope now you have turned a new leaf and I hope you can carry on with the new chapter in your life.” He then added: “You can leave court.”
Earlier in the hearing, Rhianna Fricker, the prosecuting barrister, urged the court to consider the offence as “high culpability” and recommended the judge set the starting point for sentence at two years’ imprisonment. Emma Hillier, Bendall’s solicitor, said the defendant had been taking prescribed medication, for a “mass at the back of his head which affected his nerves”, that mixed badly with alcohol. He did not remember the offence, she said.
At his sentencing hearing for the murders, Vanessa Marshall KC, Bendall’s defence barrister, would again say that he had no memory of his crimes. Ms Hillier said the arson, which took place in the early hours of May 9 2020, was “completely” random and Bendall did not know the owner of the car. She then described how Bendall had “cut ties” with his past and moved up to live with his newly-pregnant partner, Ms Harris, adding that “he looks after” her two children.
Last week, Mr Justice Sweeney said one of those children, Lacey, was raped “as her young life was ebbing away” in the “grossest breach of trust” by Bendall. Bendall was also said to have been “abusive and controlling” in his relationship with Ms Harris. Terri Harris was pregnant at the time of her death. He had “a significant background of violent offending”, including a three-year sentence for robbery in 2011, a three-year sentence for attempted robbery and possession of a knife in 2015 and a 54-month sentence for grievous bodily harm and actual bodily harm in 2017.
The sentencing hearing for the murders was also told how Bendall killed a dog by battering it with a brick because his friend could not afford medical bills.
The Telegraph previously revealed that a second probation officer, who took over Bendall’s case when he moved to the East Midlands, had been found guilty of misconduct for putting a trainee in charge of monitoring him. The supervisor has been suspended but is understood to be mounting an appeal against the misconduct finding.
Last week, a Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “These were appalling crimes and our thoughts remain with the victims’ families.
The PSR author needs investigating. Clear lack of professional curiosity.
ReplyDeleteAlso the judge statements of endorsement without a full antecedents. Where were the police and the court team making sure the information was there.
DeleteLeaving aside the actions of the probation officer, it is astonishing that after 20 years of OASys, there is not a risk assessment system in place that can be accessed by any probation officer, anywhere in the country, at the touch of a button. It should not be the case that for every pre-sentence report, the author must information gather anew, as all the risk information should be readily available in the digital record: OAsys. There is an obsession to blame individuals and overlook the systems failure of an antiquated case record system. The police, anywhere, can access a criminal record through a PNC number, by now probation should be able to similarly access a case record. It seems for all the talk about risk, there has been a lack of investment in providing a fit for purpose risk assessment tool.
DeleteYes, agree completely. This data sharing with quality of systems has been an issue for YEARS. Certainly it was something which concerned me when I resigned Probation in despair in 2017 (a privatised CRC overseen by Sodexo) worried and with no trust in the $hit-$how it had become by then! The information exchange could be a software and data protection matter. It's surely in the interests of EVERYONE likely to be impacted. It's relatively cheap and simple to get this sort of thing implemented and user-friendly. Also, it is NEVER going to be possible to 100% accurately predict risk where people are involved.
DeleteHere’s an old article by a social work academic which argues for a systems approach to learning from failures. If following a failure, nothing changes apart from sacking individuals, it’s likely that history goes on repeating itself.
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/nov/03/serious-case-review-child-protection
This is a case that is so serious, so horrendous, that the normal parameters of an SFO review should be expanded to include not just the people directly involved in the case, but the whole service itself.
ReplyDeleteFor years inspectorate reports have been damning of probation services across the country, and warnings that cases such as this are likely to occur if things aren't changed.
Undoubtedly, individuals will be attributed the blame for their personal failings, but the reality is it's a failure by the system itself.
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/media/press-releases/2022/05/jsc-statement/
'Getafix
‘Chronic’ staff shortages ‘severely hampering’ Probation Service
DeleteThe Chief Inspector of Probation, Justin Russell, says key areas of probation must be ‘addressed urgently’ following recent disappointing inspection ratings.
The unified Probation Service began in June 2021, affecting some 220,000 people on probation and 16,000 staff. HM Inspectorate of Probation has completed six inspections since this time, covering Wales and Kent, Surrey and Sussex East of England regions.
Mr Russell, speaking ahead of an appearance before the Justice Select Committee on Tuesday 17 May, said in a statement:
“In June last year I said that unification of the Probation Service within the public sector would not be a magic bullet for the deep underlying problems within the service. Our first six inspections since then – the latest published this morning – bear this out. We are seeing all the warning signs of a Probation Service in survival mode. Too many of the areas we have inspected this year – both in England and Wales – have shown weaknesses in nearly all aspects of their work. Chronic staff shortages, high workloads and the ongoing impacts of the pandemic are severely hampering their ability to effectively divert people on probation away from crime and, vitally, to properly protect the public from further risk of harm.”
Disappointing inspection ratings
“Of the six inspections we have published since unification, we have rated four probation services ‘Inadequate’ and two as ‘Requires improvement’. Two of the services – West Kent and Essex North – scored just one point out of a possible 27. We knew services were struggling, given the impact of Covid-19 and the demands of unification, but these results are worse than I feared. There is a long road ahead if they are to meet the standards that should be expected – and secure a future where they can thrive, not just survive.”
‘Chronic’ staff shortages
“Many services are experiencing exceptional staff shortages, with a half of positions in key grades in some areas unfilled. Staff tell us their workloads are unmanageable and high vacancies at manager level mean poor supervision too. And this is feeding through into the quality of supervision people on probation receive. Of the 350 cases we have inspected since unification, 60 per cent or more were unsatisfactory in terms of the quality of work undertaken to manage risks to the public.
“Recruitment is further hampered by substantial delays across regions in obtaining security clearance for newly appointed staff, often in excess of four months. But much of this is outside each local area’s control. I recommend the Probation Service and HMPPS review what can be done to resolve this as soon as possible.
“To their credit, many staff we spoke to during inspections were positive and ambitious to improve their service. Such commitment must be supported and developed. It would be disastrous if these dedicated probation officers were lost due to poor leadership, high caseloads and lack of regional and national support.”
That's as maybe but gtx is right a fuller accounting of the directors who allowed their staff to be over worked under resourced must be held to account for unsafe practices where they are found. What it does is remind me of the incredible failings of the crcs. The privateers blamed inherited cases from trusts. Then they had far too many themselves and blamed a lack of finance . They are all despicable and experts at avoiding responsibility.
DeleteThe lack of professional curiosity, judges comments is what happens when the whole CJS is failing. Delays in sentencing, quick turn around for pre sentence reports, safeguards/ checks delayed due to strains on partner agencies / resources. The judge would have been aware of pre cons and looks like Bendell could not long have finished his licence? Suggesting previous info was available to probation staff? Tight timelines on transfers add to pressures as well and when staffing levels are so reliant on new staff and trainees these things are inevitable. Agreed the whole system requires a review. This is not down to individuals and HMIP need a reality check. Aspirations and good practice compared to hopeless reality of caseload numbers, staffing and sickness levels. TR dumbed down risk assessing at pre sentencing stage to limit legacy NPS caseloads- this needs to be reviewed immediately.
ReplyDeleteThe organisation is in poor health, too little investment in the staff, training (reduced to childlike computer applications and endless clicks), poor pay and unmanageable caseloads. Add this to the average OM spending virtually every working hour inputting data endlessly into delis and oasys, you are left with a workforce unable to spend quality time face to face with clients. There will be another SFO of this type very soon, this year, next year and so on. The probation service is now a flawed organisation with piss port senior management and a government who themselves who have caused the downfall of a once world respected organisation. The only option that will work to bring about meaningful change is a top down review, free up OMs to enable them to build relationships with clients and some form of independence.
ReplyDeleteAn extract from an article in the Sunday Times by the Secret Barrister.
Delete"No more gimmicks
Politicians have a duty to engage sincerely and honestly with the public about our justice system. They must end the pretence that the only thing needed to fix criminal justice is “tougher prison sentences” and abandon headline-chasing gimmicks in favour of evidence-based policy. Reconfiguring the priorities of the system in favour of rehabilitation and crime prevention, and away from ever-lengthening custodial sentences served in dangerous, underfunded prisons, is a necessary first step. Removing powers of imprisonment from volunteer magistrates for less serious crimes and embracing problem-solving courts for drug offences are the type of radical ideas that a government serious about public protection would be discussing, instead of yet another demand to increase prison sentences for people whom our collapsing system can’t even put on trial."
'Getafix
Do not think this story is about one PO, one office, one perpetrator or one set of victims.
ReplyDeleteIn past times a PSR would have required a suitable period of adjournment, a complete set of CPS papers, an up-to-date set of precons, access to past probation (& YOT/social services where relevant) records & at least one hour of interview with the defendant - often longer for more serious offences; sometimes two interviews were deemed necessary. The final report would be subject to second reading within the local team and a pre-submission read-through by a dedicated court team member at whatever court was dealing with the case.
"A transcript of the 19-minute sentencing hearing at Swindon Crown Court, obtained by The Telegraph, showed the judge was swayed by personal mitigation 'set out in the pre-sentence report'."
This sounds like a carefully crafted, orchestrated effort to finally stitch up the probation profession & place it at the mercy of uber-bully Raab's HMPPS, remove any notion of professional practice & effectively automate every probation action in the image of this right-wing government.
Grayling, TR, Romeo, Rees, Copple & the recent parole directive were but amuses bouche compared to the control-&-command you are about to experience.
Oh yes 1815 with you all the way in this. Your assesment led me both ways a thought of returning to 7 hours prep for a proper PSR. Then you bumped us back to the continued savagery of probation pearing down to a script of meaningless computer jargon. Then I read some staff are currently proud of what they do now. No wonder we won't go back this mass of new pquip staff could not I interact with people not when their screens are lit up waiting for meaningless dross of oasys. I think sadly more controls is the direction as returning to the past the current staffing is nowhere near up to that task. I cannot go so far as to see why the report was so atrocious but do get raab will hold this new stick to beat us. That's said let's hope his own investigation delivers him to the wolves he runs with.
DeleteStill doesn't alter the fact that the judge is free to accept or jettison any information in the PSR. The PO did not give him the SSO- the judge did. Instead of worrying about the culture of Probation work- SPOs are told to make concerned enquires about how a PO's workload is being managed- not because of a duty of care, but to mitigate against high case loads, which are the preserve of the organisation, but are shoved onto the responsibility of the PO, so the blame game is clear. If you're not getting your work done in a timely manner: it's your fault. Not the amount of work, but your approach to it. Which abdicates responsibility for the daily elephant in the room. It would be nice if the enquiry came from a place of support, but it doesn't. This appalling incident could lead to over assessing, so more become high risk. It seems this is the only mitigation a PO has to protect themselves. I've put a red on his risk, my job is done. I couldn't predict what he/she did next. My defensible decision is that I don't want to be the scapegoat. I don't think this is anymore helpful than under assessing risk, but then risk is fluid and it's not an exact science. Give POs the space and latitude to do the job right, rather than tick box and then on to the next one. If the outcomes can potentially be this serious, then caseloads need reducing or overseen by someone- but this is impractical-there just isn't enough time to have someone assessed and shoved in front of the judge for the dispatching of 'justice'. It's either worth doing well or it's not. The public requiring protecting and the service user's needs need addressing. If we can't do this, then Probation isn't fit for purpose. Maybe that's the intention all along, run it down, morph it into the prison culture and have Probation play an auxiliary role in criminal justice.
DeletePreviously a home visit and related enquiries were essential back to when I started training in 1973. If that was not possible or further interview time was needed, it was my practice and those of colleagues, to state that in a conclusion, possibly stressing the enquiry is incomplete, making it clear the sentencer(s) and subsequent users, like the parole board know.
DeleteI think most of us live in fear of an sfo, we know we cannot effectively manage our high caseloads. Having previously had an sfo the investigation was not interested in the conditions we were working in, or the non existent senior management. Risk assessment has become skewed following the split and now with reunification. The huge changes with reunification with little time for training. Sign posting to crs, who is overseeing their work, what is they do? What happened to the promise of reducing red tape its constant. Toolkits that we have not been trained to deliver and frequently dont fit with individuals.
ReplyDeleteToo much focus on hanging the Probation Officer out to dry. This is the bottom line and a significant point that mustn’t be ignored.
ReplyDelete“the directors who allowed their staff to be over worked under resourced must be held to account for unsafe practices” Anon 17:35
And then all those that had a hand in privatising, unifying and OneHMPPS’ing the Probation Service.
https://www.russellwebster.com/probation-needs-to-learn-lessons-from-serious-further-offences/
DeleteAnd when did Russell Webster become an authority on probation? It is not probation that needs to learn, it is those in charge of probation that need to listen.
Delete2117 I wholley agree with your point on all of them. You will also appreciate the multi layer is there to protect them while the lower sector falls on the edge of a sharp blade. The truth is in the 80s on I knew of many serious new offences we all did and they were managed much better as teams dealt with a local approach and the management at hq backed up their press statements with what we did and could have done to learn. Local teams are now at the mercy of the SFO label and that means the blame game. Nps had to take back full probation as you can see when these sorts of horrendous crimes occur it would have been down to crcs claiming not enough contract money. We know that was a lie. It is about workloads too but also what we are doing these days is not going to identify such offenders let alone get to know them and then form assesments on the real risk they pose. Old lags on here developed a sense for a liar an understanding of the obtuse with ways to manage them. Good officers sensed a lot from body language non verbals and looking clearly at who says what and they picked up the real issues. Saw the truth and quite often recalled some of them just for making threats. In a day or a morning . Officers had real people skills and today you only need to IT literate. The reasons why some people say they are proud of today's job is just off the chart. I know there is not any pquip or recently trained officer in the last decade will be capable of demonstrating the sort of forensic interviewing skills the reducing po generation had. It's no competition either it's is a simple truth of a different selection for a mature skillset. Being in a room for an hour's interview of discussion gave many officers enough red lights to do something and in days gone by they did. They had authority confidence . Not forgetting the home visits I recall a great officer saying what you could learn from a place and a partner or even the
DeleteLaundry would tell it's own story and who made the tea matters. In those days a po could ring the council and get the support required almost immediately. Settling people reduced risk provided targets goals and with the right help achieve. Sign posting all we do today we achieve nothing and hope Soon there will not be many of us who will recall what we are best deployed to deliver. Sorry my meander of better memories. Without these skills deployed on every offender in a structured way ensuring they are compliant
and responsive then there will be a lot more sfos and we continue to miss the engagement required to arrest more these awful tragedies to prevent them occuring.
Well said - 17.00
DeleteAND also all the little wrinkles we learned from older more experienced colleagues just by being at court doing cell interviews getting alongside the court clerks and custody officers - they have been privatised as well.
A tiny thing I learned when I was called to answer a question as a court duty officer
Hey lad said the old lag - don't take the whole file into the witness box - a clever mitigator will be asking you about stuff you have not had time to look up.
Just take one piece of paper- that'll do and do not be afraid to say I do not know.
I recall my very first experience on being asked about an SER at Crown Court - it was about a week before I ended my last student placement & knew I was to be a 1st year officer at the same office - a tricky judge and barrister wanting to justify (judges are scared of media too) why he was not going to send a body to prison - almost 1st offender - I had written in report - no work needed to justify supervision - or such-like and it had been monitored by my SPO.
Between these two they had me exactly contradicting what I had put in the report.
You say he has no problems a probation order might tackle
Yes Your Honour,
But he is unemployed - is that not a problem - Yes Your H - well is that not a problem he might be helped with in supervision?
Yes Your H -
So after all you agree a probation order is a good idea - YES.
I was too new to say - but thousands of youngsters are unemployed in Liverpool - this was 1975 - Probation is NOT the Labour Exchange!
So he and I had to put up with meeting once a fortnight for best part of two years - I do not recall much about it - but like many others he did not get a job.
It was such a powerful learning experience - that 50 years on - I remember what a clot I felt.
I sharpened up a bit after that especially when I was court duty officer for about 18 months in the stipendiary magistrate's court in Liverpool where most sentencing was done.
The SFO process with how the service investiagtes / reports needs a complete overhaul. The service internally writing SFO reviews is not independant or transparent from bias from its own service with internal managers reviewing their own regions SFOs. Front line practitioners are often hung out to dry / scapegoated for the organisational failings. The service state they have learnt from these organisational failings from high profile SFO under grayling reforms it hasn't the same themes of organisational failings keep occurring and they repeatedly say they will learn from them to the more recent SFOs. The organisation hasn't recovered from the transforming rehabilitation agenda, staff shortages, inadequate allocation of cases to inexperienced staff, a staff retention problem where newly qualified staff and experienced staff are leaving in droves. Until the service starts giving staff a safer work environment, looking after its staff, adequate caseloads, giving staff the quality time to do the job they were trained to do the organisational problems will remain.
ReplyDeletesaid on here many times by many contributors
DeleteMy view is a serious further offence review needs an independent panel of people from a broad church of relevant disciplines, e.g. probation, police, social services, health, lawyer - all unconnected to the office/area. No sfo occurs in isolation in the probation environment. Tagging companies fail to communicate; police keep "intel" to themselves; social services might not share key information; health staff can use "patient confidentiality" as a block to sharing; probation staff might have missed or failed to record something
From Twitter:-
Delete"Sounds a good idea more independent approach to SFOs, as you said it’s a difficult and lonely experience to go through, we certainly don’t come into the job to neglect victims and cases. Such a difficult job which comes with experience of case management and oversight."