Friday 23 December 2022

Will The Dots Be Joined Up?

This case can now be fully reported and is going to raise some very uncomfortable issues for both the MoJ and HMPPS that cannot simply be sorted by throwing staff under the bus. HMI Justin Russell has been asked for a Review. Today's Telegraph:- 

Murderer was left free to kill after probation blunders

Violent offender who went on to kill Terri Harris and children John Bennett, Lacey Bennett and Connie Gent classed as ‘medium risk’. A multiple child murderer was left free to kill after “appalling” blunders by the Probation Service, The Telegraph can reveal.

Damien Bendall, 32, was given a whole-life sentence this week for killing three children and his pregnant partner with a hammer in Killamarsh, Derbyshire, last September, three months after receiving a suspended sentence for arson. It can now be disclosed that a probation officer who assessed Bendall’s record for the sentencing judge in the arson case has been sacked for gross misconduct after miscategorising him as “medium risk” rather than “high risk”.

Probation officials believe it is unlikely that Bendall – who had a history of violent offending – would have been free to carry out one of the most grotesque child murder rampages in recent decades if the pre-sentence report had accurately reflected his risk. The probation officer in question is understood to have spent a lot of time working from home, meaning other members of the team did not get the usual opportunities to offer advice on or read the report.

Bendall’s probation supervision was subsequently passed from Swindon, where the arson took place, to the East Midlands, where another officer has separately been found guilty of misconduct for allocating his case to a trainee. The catalogue of errors has prompted the Ministry of Justice to order the Chief Inspector of Probation to carry out a full review of the case, which sources said is likely to be released in the new year.

The revelations raise fresh questions about the adequacy of Britain’s Probation Service after a report in September found that around 500 serious offences a year were being committed by offenders under supervision. The agency has also been beset by high-profile scandals including that of Joseph McCann, who went on a rampage of sexual violence across the country while under supervision, and Usman Khan, a terrorist who murdered two people in Fishmongers’ Hall, London, while being monitored.

Sir Robert Buckland, who served as justice secretary until three days before the Killamarsh killings, told The Telegraph on Thursday night: “I think we have to acknowledge that such an error is just an appalling failure. The ministry has to be as open and transparent as possible about why it happened, and most importantly to make sure the risk of that happening again is kept to a minimum, if not eliminated. Frankly, there should be processes in place that means various thresholds and tests would be met before that sort of fundamental mistake could be made.”

Sir Mike Penning, another former justice secretary, said: “People’s lives have been lost because the system has failed them. The probation officer’s pre-sentencing report has failed them, the system has failed them.”

Some staff ‘looked for shortcuts’

Sources told The Telegraph that probation officers are required to spend eight or nine hours entering details into the convoluted Offender Assessment System (Oasys) to calculate an offender’s risk, leading some staff to “look for shortcuts”. The officer who prepared the pre-sentence report in Swindon failed to access all the background information about Bendall and consequently did not enter crucial details into the Oasys system, it is understood.

A probation source said: “The risk assessment came out lower than it should have been. He should have been flagged as ‘high risk of harm’ but he was graded ‘medium risk’ instead. As a result, he was allocated to a trainee – it wouldn’t have happened if he’d been ‘high risk’.” 

To make matters worse, the source added that probation officers in the Swindon region at the time were not allowed to recommend custody in their pre-sentence reports. A probation inspection of the region in July last year found that “well over half of the reports we inspected did not draw on all available sources of information”.

Bendall was allowed to return to the home of his partner, Terri Harris, in Killamarsh on the condition that he wore an electronic tag and regularly met the trainee probation officer. His trial heard, however, that he had been using drugs heavily and was fuelled by cocaine when he bludgeoned to death Ms Harris, her children John Bennett, 13, Lacey Bennett, 11, and Lacey’s friend Connie Gent, also 11, who was sleeping over. Bendall raped Lacey as she lay dying before taking a taxi to Sheffield to exchange John’s Xbox for more drugs.

Sources said the supervisor found guilty of misconduct in the East Midlands had not done all the background reading into Bendall before allocating his case to a trainee. A more experienced probation officer would have been better equipped to spot possible signs of his spiralling drug use and any concerning patterns of behaviour. The supervisor is understood to be appealing against the findings of misconduct, as they had responsibility for overseeing around 30 officers because of staff shortages in the region. The individual did not lose their job.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “These were appalling crimes, and our thoughts remain with the victims’ families. The Deputy Prime Minister asked the Chief Inspector of Probation to conduct a review of this case, and we will respond further once this is published.”

The Government invested in an extra 1,000 trainee probation officers in 2020, followed by a further 1,500 the following year in a move designed to ease caseloads on individual officers and manage the risk of offenders more effectively. It is hoped an additional 1,500 officers will be recruited by March next year.

99 comments:

  1. As a PSO OM I received almost zero training. I spotted one of my medium cases had an historical arson conviction. The only reason I knew this meant he was high risk was from my previous training as a police officer. Training in Probation is woefully lacking. My heart goes out to all involved.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A dreadful scenario in so many ways, but let me guess what Justin will say...

    ... meantime, not a single "excellent leader" at any level has lost their job, i.e. business as usual, its all perfectly normal - its ALL the responsibility of one individual.

    "The supervisor is understood to be appealing against the findings of misconduct, as they had responsibility for overseeing around 30 officers because of staff shortages in the region."

    And how many cases did the supervising PO have because of staff shortages in the region?

    Comments offered not to excuse pisspoor practice, but to highlight the ongoing two-tier bollocks that plagues the delivery of probation services. i.e. you're either an "excellent leader" (& promoted to plum jobs, regardless of how useless you are) or tyre fodder for the next set of bus wheels (regardless of how stressed, undermined & unsupported you are).

    So deaths, terror-filled experiences & utter grief of more victims offer yet another opportunity for Justin to tell it how it really is; to prove to probation staff & the wider world that he's not just a HMPPS patsy with a tippex pen.

    Will he finally & explicitly call out the failures of management at every level?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This could happen anywhere in all areas a case of this kind is possible. The job has changed so much now there will be more. We did not protect the role properly it is that clear . To many CRC unqualified managers and the job plummeted . No indent no intelligence. Well done the decline and continued spiraling down.

      Delete
  3. Well this PO was thrown so far under the bus…

    “The probation officer who judged Damien Bendall, who has been jailed for life for murdering three children and his pregnant partner, to be “medium” rather than “high risk” has reportedly been sacked for gross misconduct.”

    “Sources within the probation service told the Telegraph that the officer who compiled the pre-sentence report failed to access all the available background information on Bendall.

    Details are entered on to the Offender Assessment System (Oasys), which calculates an offender’s risk. It can take up to eight or nine hours to carry out.”

    https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/22/probation-officer-who-assessed-killamarsh-murderer-reportedly-sacked

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How the heck does OASYS "calculate an offenders risk"?...the last time I looked it requires us to enter in shit and then guess....exactly how would his sentence have differed whether he was assessed to be high risk? The judge knew what the offence was and sentenced him to electronic monitoring...so why should that offence recieve a more onerous sentence due to a historical offence if arson? Why would anyone have made the link between a historical arson offence and bludgeoning his partner and children? As usual none of this makes sense, and the lack of anything making sense means people leave out of fear....presumably this officer did "police and social services checks and had the home owners consent" ...and yet STILL we couldn't predict what he would go on to do...the whole system is a joke

      Delete
  4. …. Should that not read ‘probation officials said risk can never be accurately predicted, pre-sentence reports are not an integral part of probation officer training, and he would not have committed the murders at that time if the sentencing judge had sent him to prison for arson?

    “he was given a suspended sentence for arson. The probation officer had prepared a file for the sentencing judge that categorised Bendall as “medium risk”, according to a report by the Daily Telegraph. Some probation officials told the newspaper they believed it was unlikely Bendall would have been able to carry out the murders if the pre-sentence report had accurately reflected the danger that he posed.”

    https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/22/probation-officer-who-assessed-killamarsh-murderer-reportedly-sacked

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The probation officer who judged Damien Bendall, who has been jailed for life for murdering three children and his pregnant partner, to be “medium” rather than “high risk” has reportedly been sacked for gross misconduct.

      Bendall, 32, was sentenced to five whole-life sentences this week for the killings in Killamarsh, Derbyshire last September, which took place three months after he was given a suspended sentence for arson.

      The probation officer had prepared a file for the sentencing judge that categorised Bendall as “medium risk”, according to a report by the Daily Telegraph. Some probation officials told the newspaper they believed it was unlikely Bendall would have been able to carry out the murders if the pre-sentence report had accurately reflected the danger that he posed.

      The chief inspector of probation has been asked to carry out a full review of the case by the Ministry of Justice. It is believed the report will be published in the new year.

      Bendall killed his partner, Terri Harris, 35, with a hammer, as well as her children John Paul Bennett, 13, Lacey Bennett, 11, and Lacey’s friend Connie Gent, 11, who was staying at the house.

      Bendall also raped Lacey as she lay dying. He admitted the charges at Derby crown court on Wednesday.

      Sir Robert Buckland, who was justice secretary until three days before the Killamarsh murders, said: “I think we have to acknowledge that such an error is just an appalling failure.

      “The ministry has to be as open and transparent as possible about why it happened, and most importantly to make sure the risk of that happening again is kept to a minimum, if not eliminated.

      “Frankly, there should be processes in place that means various thresholds and tests would be met before that sort of fundamental mistake could be made.”

      Sources within the probation service told the Telegraph that the officer who compiled the pre-sentence report failed to access all the available background information on Bendall.

      Details are entered on to the Offender Assessment System (Oasys), which calculates an offender’s risk. It can take up to eight or nine hours to carry out.

      A source within the probation service said: “The risk assessment came out lower than it should have been. He should have been flagged as ‘high risk of harm’ but he was graded ‘medium risk’ instead. As a result, he was allocated to a trainee – it wouldn’t have happened if he’d been ‘high risk’.”

      A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “These were appalling crimes, and our thoughts remain with the victims’ families. The deputy prime minister asked the chief inspector of probation to conduct a review of this case, and we will respond further once this is published.”

      Delete
  5. Why would anyone who as any gumption stay in this organisation ? You must me mad , poor pay, bullying, no career development , de professionalised , the list goes on

    ReplyDelete
  6. “the source added that probation officers in the Swindon region at the time were not allowed to recommend custody in their pre-sentence reports. A probation inspection of the region in July last year found that “well over half of the reports we inspected did not draw on all available sources of information”.

    And that’s why you keep all those emails of management instructions telling you not to follow procedures.

    ReplyDelete
  7. “The Government invested in an extra 1,000 trainee probation officers in 2020, followed by a further 1,500 the following year in a move designed to ease caseloads on individual officers and manage the risk of offenders more effectively. It is hoped an additional 1,500 officers will be recruited by March next year.”

    Utter lies. Where are these new recruits?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most recent MOJ statistical bulletin on workforce (spreadsheet including PQIP figures) shows that in the last 12 months this recruitment has resulted in an additional 8 FTE POs. I fail to understand why NAPO are not using such information which is clearly in the public domain to counter the ‘recruitment as the answer’ gaslighting being peddled by senior leaders

      Delete
    2. So according to the Ministry of Justice and HMPPS there’s been “investment” 2500 Probation Officers since 2020. While official statistics put the figure at 8 full time POs. Let’s all reflect on that for a while!

      Delete
    3. Why was Chris Grayling and Co never held to account for his decision to split the probation service, which caused havoc and wasted a huge amount of money. I would think that every probation office is under staffed and particularly with POs.

      Delete
  8. As a team manager in a CRC I had 15-18 staff to line manage, this was extremely challenging. Having 30 staff is way too many. Probation under TR was a disaster, it's a bit better now but still we struggle to retain good staff. The operating environment is challenging. Political decisions are definitely relevant in Probation.
    Court backlogs, unworked UPW hours, lack
    of experienced POs, civil service bureaucracy, messy and multi-layered IT systems are ever present.
    Still, it's a worthwhile job and profession, I have huge respect for most colleagues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “Still, it's a worthwhile job and profession‘

      No it’s not. Not under these conditions and blame culture. Then there’s the poor pay. I’ve been ask to attend a recruitment event. I refused as couldn’t dupe people into joining such a bad organisation.

      Delete
  9. "He should have been flagged as ‘high risk of harm’ but he was graded ‘medium risk’ instead. As a result, he was allocated to a trainee – it wouldn’t have happened if he’d been ‘high risk’.”

    High risk or medium risk, I fail to see how probation could have prevented these awful events.
    There's far too much emphasis placed on computer generated risk assessments, and far too little autonomy given to qualified and professional probation officers to work with those in their charge.
    What I am certain of is that probation as a service has not only lost its identity, but it's also being dishonestly presented to the public as to what it's there for, and what it realistically can achieve.
    Probation can only mitigate to 'TRY' and prevent these awful things from happening it can't prevent them in totality.
    Risk is dynamic, it can change hour by hour.
    Probation can only 'assist' in conjunction with other agencies the dangers some people pose to society. It can't wear the mantle of pubic protector, because it's just not possible to do.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The public don't get the fluctuation of risk as a dynamic factor gtx. The service is choco block full of sun reading enthusiasts these days and the common theme is a continual degenerate of skills autonomy and assesments. Why has the aco spo not been mentioned as lines for dismissal or inquiry. Of course it's left on the door of the mule. This means it's just us on the line above is all cotton wool. The service needs the old skills back with an emphasis on care and assesments based off a pc and back to understanding the client. Oh and that means qualified probation officers with reduced case load and time to asses these monsters as murderers and not guess.

      Delete
    2. To be fair, low, med or high risk of harm on the oasys risk assessment is a matter of opinion. Three people could easily pick three different risk levels. Given the staffing situation, even if categorised higher it would have probably been allocated to the same probation officer. Disgusting that “probation officials” so easily throw probation staff under the bus. If everyone should have predicted he was that risky then why was he given a suspended sentence and why isn’t the judge and the court spo on the naughty step too?

      Delete
    3. Yes exactly right blame the worker not the management who allowed this situation

      Delete
  10. As some may know I am not a fan probation at the moment but I can't see why you should all be Mystic Meg. The service spends ludicrous amounts of time over managing the highly compliant and caseloads are such you can't see the wood for the trees. There's a lot that needs to change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not Sox a fan some of us dont know.

      Delete
  11. This is not, and never has been about individual probation officers. Somebody can easily be at the high end of ‘Medium,’ and be as risky as another person at the ‘Low,’ end of High. ( assessing risk as broad brush strokes.)
    It’s about training, resources, management,experience, supervision, team working and most importantly as has been expressed on multiple occasions, the relationship between the supervising officer and the person on probation.
    This case was probably allocated to a trainee because the wiser, more experienced, properly trained and qualified staff have left the service for the reasons we are all to familiar with.
    It would be interesting to see the pen pictures of the staff involved, length of service, posts held prior to promotion, experience in the job etc.
    Similarly, it would be beneficial to see what was said of the senior managers prior to these events other than the standard, ‘excellent leaders.’
    Incidental to all of this, nobody has ever defined what it is we do with people once we have assessed their level of risk now that probation is a signposting agency and doesn’t actually engage any more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look I agree to a point but let's not be blinkered here. Oasys is the magic as far as managed by the top. However it is flawed by professionals. It was really the panacea to use all the low skill pso grades to make cases a manageable number by fewer professionals. It all went wrong as the CRC idiocy of the likes of all areas appointing unqualified pso managers. It's has not been arrested since. The cold facts are it does not matter what the training is lately it still won't prevent staff doing the job who just are not up to it. Whether there is a blame culture or not many staff can't do this role.

      Delete
  12. The Regional Probation Directors are:

    Martin Davies for East Midlands
    Angela Cossins for South West

    Isn’t this where the buck stops? Why haven’t they been sacked for gross misconduct?

    Instead we heard them on the recent all staff call telling us everything is hunky dory!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of those two is well known for irreverent pathetic tweeting on themselves and food hardly got time.to manage the job or do anything properly. Not surprised.

      Delete
  13. The limited information on this and detail re the risk assessment is misleading. The arson offence, judges sentencing etc are all relevant. Safeguarding checks? Risk to who, how and why etc etc. My sympathies go the victims and their families, but also to all officers involved. Until resources meet the need, funding and staffing / training improved Sadly these events will continue. Damien Bendell is the person who is wholly responsible for these horrific crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bottom line is that poor practice was found and the right procedure was executed. I trust the process which would have known all the facts. The service cannot carry negligent staff not doing the job. We all have them in our teams and we secretly despise that their poor practice is never called out. The fact a trainee is supervising someone with a record like that, with the manager having 30 staff to supervise, tells me all I need to know as to what was going on (or not going going on) in that Division!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t trust the sfo process, never have. It’s a blame culture and if there is a buck then it stops with the director of the region who steered the ship off course through the staffing crisis and endorsed all the resulting practices.

      Delete
    2. Managers are supposed to manage poor performance that is their main role

      Delete
    3. The buck stops with the person doing the job. Not some big wig well up the line

      Delete
    4. Actually with the deputy pm ordering a review it’s not looking too good for the directors.

      Delete
    5. Well no it should not. Paid a staggering rate to posture tweeting and flapping. The serious side is a reality but the fantasy world of the director it has all just got real. They will resign on deals before they are pushed.

      Delete
  15. Will there be less cake and compliment Tweets from Probation bosses than is usual at this time of the year|?

    ReplyDelete
  16. If you take short cuts, you get shortcomings. This is why we have processes. Trust the process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The service cannot carry negligent staff not doing the job. So true and if the directors mentioned above faced the SFO aswell there would be a different leadership that's a certainty. I doubt either of them will have a bright future now with this stench. Bloody awful case an argument here for capital punishment sickening. The whole line of authority needs to go. They let it happen while singing a happy tune they are accountable.

      Delete
    2. I want to know, what he set fire to in the arson case and what were the sentencing guidelines? Also we get 4 hours to write and assess a FDR, what kind of report was ordered from the court?

      Lastly Probation is not allowed to offer anything other than a community based sentence even when the custodial threshold has been surpassed. Tell the public the whole truth.

      Delete
    3. Try to understand how it works. They throw the probation frontline worker under the bus at the first opportunity. Thats how the senior managers and directors keep their Teflon suits intact. It’s an awful case, but without knowing the facts I wouldn’t be calling any probation officer “negligent” when the entire service is grossly overworked and underpaid.

      Delete
    4. In any job. If you’re negligent, you’re let go. Sad, sometimes unfair, but it’s how it is. Why would you appeal or want to come back to a profession when you’re responsible for overseeing someone who has committed the ultimate despicable acts and your practice is shown to have been massively short on expectations. I pray for the families.

      Delete
  17. commentator getafix makes an excellent observation:

    "What I am certain of is that probation as a service has not only lost its identity, but it's also being dishonestly presented to the public as to what it's there for, and what it realistically can achieve."

    The horseshit deception has been developing since the Choreography of 2000. It blossomed during the Trust years & was set in stone with TR.

    Probation services have been increasingly used as a political pawn for social control, which has led to the misinformed public welcoming the command/control structures as a means of rectifying the soft lefty social work approach, has been the clarion call to "trust the process" & allowed the false hope of pseudoscience aka "risk management", the organisational smokescreen.

    I wouldn't think that a single probation officer of whatever grade or experience was, is, or will ever be the reason someone does or doesn't commit an horrendous crime. Shit happens in peoples' lives, people react to that shit & they do shitty things. Anyone & everyone is capable of doing shitty things without warning. OASys or any other risk assessment format will not stop those things happening, however much the organisation's bullies tell you it will.

    OK, its possible OASys might suggest X is more likely than K to take drugs, become disinhibited & lose his/her shit with someone because they've done it before. So its a tool of limited use, a means of highlighting possible futures. And that's all it is. A tool. As are all of the other measures. Tools of the trade. Tools that need to be used properly within the limitations of their capability. All tools are dangerous if misused.

    Would it be reasonable to say that the best means of gaining an understanding of someone is to get to know them? To see them regularly, develop a working relationship, a sense of how they respond to situations, to stress, to criticism, to praise? To garner some sense of how they feel about those they live with, about the world in which they live?

    But guess what.... you can't do that with a caseload of 150, of 100, or even 50. You can't do that when the organisation requires innumerable hours' of your time filling in computer screens & tick boxes. You can't do that when you're inundated with thousands of emails, pulled & pushed in all directions by management directives...

    You have 7.5 hours each day - approx 150 hours each month: what can be achieved that is meaningful & effective with a caseload of 150? One hour/month per person? 12 hours a year per person?

    Oh, you've only got 75 on your caseload? So that's 24 hours a year.

    There are 8,760 hours in a year.

    At best, a total stranger seeing someone 2 hours every month is going to achieve what?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like this analogy of hours. So you all know it means the directors are old enough to have been on the original training qualified in the old job and most certainly have abandoned those known practice for this hot house crap. When will they be held to account for their passivity.

      Delete
  18. With experienced POs drowning in cases, numerous more cases at allocated to trainee staff, quite simply, because there is no one else to allocate them to. A supervisor having 30 staff to manage, many who have little or no experience, all with very high caseloads themselves: is it any wonder poor choices and allocations are made. The inspector should look at institutional failings and poor leadership that led to this dreadful position unfolding.

    ReplyDelete
  19. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64083802

    "Workers over 50 encouraged to end early retirement... In response the Department for Work and Pensions said it has already expanded its Jobcentre midlife MoT service... A public information campaign focusing on people over the age of 50 could begin as early as spring."

    "midlife MoT service"
    "public information campaign"

    But there isn't any money to pay public sector staff a decent living wage.

    Liars. Charlatans. Thieves.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It's all too easy to sack the PSR writer because they're the easiest target and the most expendable in terms of being able to be let go. But Probation managers and PTAs constantly go on about "what will you do when you have 50 cases" (if you can't manage 35). It's not 'the Godfather'- you can leave if it's getting too much. It's not inevitable that you get 50 cases. But these managers and PTAs have been told to blame the trainee or the qualified PO for their failure to manage their time; their cases. I can't remember how many times my SPO would tell me to get off my computer at 9pm because I working. The intention wasn't wellbeing- but backside covering. The organisation refuses to look at the problems at the grassroots and as such this is likely to occur over and over again. But blaming the staff member is incredibly short-sighted and is an abdication of responsibility from managers who are supposed to be leaders. Instead of telling us to "have that conversation" they need to do that amongst themselves rather than have surveys (Probation Pravda) about what we think- they already know. This blog is probably more truthful a temperature gager than the cosmetic and corporate mechanism that never chimes with the staff- yet they keep marketing it as "your voice"- then listen to us! Prevention is better than cure and maybe this offender was assessed 'under-risked'- but if you treat offenders like tick boxes and warehouse them, you only have yourselves to blame. That's the fault of the culture, not someone who, I suspect, had PSRs coming out of their backside. What happened to oversight by the Court SPO?; the judge didn't have to accept the recommendation of the PSR- he/she, in their judgment, could politely override or decline the information. Most mistakes can be kept in house- but not high profile ones that are picked up by right-wing media- then someone has to be sacrificed. But POs of all grades and experiences are just trying to do their best. It's now a lottery of sheer bad luck, overwork and lack of oversight that can be the difference between a job and being sacked; rather than their competence and that is deeply troubling. Ultimately, if this offender had been assessed as high risk and we're not, as Probation, supposed to recommend custody, then it wouldn't have mattered. The judge handed him the SSO for arson, not the PSR writer. A red 'high risk' registration would not have stopped him from committing this brutal crime. He may of have a period in custody to reflect for the arson- but if his substance misuse wasn't dealt with- and he clearly had deep seated misuse and mental health and probable personality disorder- then no one could have stopped him doing what he did, other than himself. And, yes, I know of a colleague given a case where the history of the offender was high risk and she was a trainee and the offender was medium risk when my trainee colleague got the case and an SFO occurred. But she did all she could and as a trainee she was protected and luckily for her there were no HR issues. She shouldn't have been given the case. Her SPO at the time was one of the most experienced in the profession. Even the supposedly most experienced make mistakes. We are human. Let's remember that and be kinder to each other and RIP to the victims' in this appalling case. The book by former SPO Alison Moss on the Leroy Campbell case (also a Whole Life Order) is a cautionary tale of being thrown under the bus and is recommended, if alarming, reading. Available on Amazon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The psychiatric assessment indicates he was of sound mind and wasn’t diagnosed with any MH or PD. It was his spiralling drug misuse coupled with entrenched violent attitudes, behaviours and feelings of control. With his history he should never have been tagged to an address of a woman he’d only known 5 minutes. That’s basic risk assessing imo

      Delete
    2. The set-in-stone certainty of some posts are beyond my comprehension.

      They're not representative of the profession I signed up for.

      But that was many moons ago, so I imagine I'd be very unwelcome today.

      So much for experienced staff being encouraged to return.

      I'm staying well clear, irrespective of the generous incentives (there's no money for pay rises but...)

      Delete
  21. We do not know what the psr author did. While I totally agree with critiques around TR, workload, civil service etc, they may also have been lazy, incompetent or uncaring. I’m not saying that’s the case, I’m saying we don’t know. Now some of the things that make people behave that we include workload etc but we all know of poor staff who shouldn’t be in the job. While management have a lot to answer for, people posting on here with great certainty saying “psr author is taking the rap” don’t actually know the facts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dismissal for gross misconduct must include a willful aspect to deliberately knowingly do something wrong.

      Delete
    2. Don’t think it has to be wilful. Very serious lack of care could be gross misconduct

      Delete
    3. No your wrong a lack of care is a competency issue even neglect based on many factors are protected by training development support .The capability proceedings kick in . Need to know the process .

      Delete
  22. Look, we work in the civil service. We all know that this means that rules MUST be followed. No one gets sacked unless there is absolute just cause for fear of being taken to court. It must have been a clear cut case of negligence to have been sacked. The conduct and disciplinary policy is really clear on this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't ya just love the new mindset! Probation stalwarts like Bill McWilliams will be turning in their graves.

      Delete
    2. “No one gets sacked unless there is absolute just cause for fear of being taken to court.”

      Probation staff get sacked all the time for less than nothing. That’s how corrupt organisations work. Stay around a while and you’ll realise that.

      Delete
    3. I have been around a very long time thanks seen many attempts to Dave staff using the procedures or making it up. There are proper process and these managed well protect staff . The employer may take the view can no longer be tolerated in the workplace but to fairly arrive at such a conclusion a staged investigation must take place. This has to properly conducted. A heating a panel a conclusion. Then appeal process. There are no good reps these days so who knows. What they did to dismiss. The fear of court is just rubbish talk. Staff need a proper capable union.

      Delete
    4. Who is Bill McWilliams? My point still stands. Rules must be followed in the civil service. Equip must be used. they are there to help us!

      Delete
    5. Biggest smile of the day: "Who is Bill McWilliams?"

      Read 'em & weep...

      Delete
    6. You’re not a better practitioner cos u know some guy and I don’t. I’m a PO proud of what we do. Proud of the current service. You’re too judgemental and peddle division. You’ve been told

      Delete
    7. Sorry type errors Dave is drive hearing not heating. The use of equip and scl is to remove po structures making employment decesions. Believe it or not being a po doesn't make you an HR specialist. In the past too many sympathetic exits were provided. Early retirements instead of disciplinary or capability. The use of these ultra hard-line HR bods is to attack staff out them and protect from employment tribunals. They are here now because it was so corrupted the other way. Bother extremes have been unfair and bad for all staff.

      Delete
  23. Have to say I often feel we get risk assessment wrong. We over assess sex offending and under assess domestic violence. This is in keeping with cultural norms in wider society

    ReplyDelete
  24. Firstly, god rest the souls of all the victims taken by this horrendous individual. My thoughts are with all the families. Secondly, probation is drowning in inexperience, ridiculous caseloads and staff who are now taught to tick boxes and meet pointless targets. However if a risk assessment is done well and u look under every stone for the risks in that case, u will be able to design a stringent plan to protect the public. All the old school ways of working have disappeared in probation and been replaced with diversity strategies and ways to write delius entries and so on. 20 years ago we used to do unannounced home visits, we’d get to know the families and would invest in wrap around services to stabilise the risks presented before us. I have new OM’s who can barely put an oasys together because the training they’re having is appalling. If we keep cutting corners, ticking boxes and focusing on everything apart from risk then this will just keep happening. Wake up probation - the service is broken and it needs fixing asap. Appeal to all of the experienced staff u have lost and get some solid boots on the ground. And stop promoting people to SPO status that have little to no experience in the job. Some haven’t even held a Mappa case. Honestly it needs a massive overhaul. Risk and public protection are the most important parts of the job - not designing acronyms on whether to call offenders offenders and all the rubbish we are having to implement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “if a risk assessment is done well and u look under every stone for the risks in that case, u will be able to design a stringent plan to protect the public.”

      That is absolute rubbish. It’s the type of rubbish these inexperienced SPO’s spout. Fundamentally probation work is not about “risk and public protection”. It’s a flawed thinking that believes a few parrot lines on a risk management plan would have changed the outcome.

      Delete
  25. "Risk and public protection are the most important parts of the job" - oh really? That was the line fed to us by NOMS back in the noughties, the pseudoscience they used to undermine probation, mixed with the emotional melon-twisting of political speechwriters: "We are an enforcement agency..."

    "we used to do unannounced home visits, we’d get to know the families and would invest in wrap around services to stabilise the risks presented" - much closer to the job I originally trained to do, but it was based around manageable caseloads, admin support & intelligent, motivated staff. It also required social services & a range of other professionals to be available as part of the wrapping.

    Now? We're just dumbed-down cannon fodder for whoever wants to score political points, receive a gong or slide sideways into a nice comfy pre-retirement armchair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree - back then we were tight teams with manageable caseloads and amples of support to help us do the job we trained for. True we are now just fodder feeding political agendas with little to no support and a blame culture when the shit hits the fan.

      Delete
  26. I found the following pretty interesting, (sorry if it's already been flagged.)
    It's asking a question about how much remote working may have contributed to this SFO.
    I found Bob Neil's comments of particular interest. He basically says that if you're not physically engaging with someone then you're missing things that could be of great importance.
    The comments above describe high caseloads and being chained to the computer which leaves little time for face to face contact or engagement outside of the interview room.
    I wonder if this terrible case might be the one that changes the way probation is delivered?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/23/probation-officers-shouldnt-work-home-says-justice-committee/

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The headline shows how idiotic and headline grabbing Bob Neil is. Working from home or not wouldn’t have changed the outcome. The problem with the probation service is not enough staff and resources. Not enough pay to keep experienced probation employed and at work. Not enough decent working conditions and funding for quality work to be undertaken.

      Delete
    2. .. and what he should be saying is that Probation Officers should be allowed to be Probation Officers. Not Community Offender Managers, Probation Practitioners or whatever other stupid names in use. Not agents of the police, prisons or HMPPS. Not pen pushing keyboard junkies either.

      Delete
    3. Bespoke person centred pen pushers....

      Delete
    4. And yes, spot on re lack of resources. Its criminal how badly underfunded such important services are, and its the working class communities that seem to take the brunt of that. Thanks Tories and Labour.

      Delete
  27. Working in the region that this pop was supervised by a pquip (trainee) and the pquip was supervised by an experienced NPS SPO who never worked for CRC. I feel too much emphasis is put on workload, when mistakes have clearly been made and cannot be justified. I am pretty sure these horrendous acts could never have been predicted by any risk assessment tool but maybe an experienced officer would have spotted this, reading in-between the lines there are many indicators that should not have been ignored. If the SPO in question had put as much effort to managing risk as dying her hair then maybe we would all be a little bit safer!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh wowie sounds familiar across the board but factors like this are so bad to read. It mitigates any errors of the pquip as the manager is responsible for the oversighting. No real gatekeeping anymore.

      Delete
    2. “I am pretty sure these horrendous acts could never have been predicted by any risk assessment tool but maybe an experienced officer would have spotted this, reading in-between the lines there are many indicators that should not have been ignored.”

      Either the risk was predictable or it wasn’t. Without knowing the case it’s reasonable to say it would be difficult to predict an arsonist serving a suspended sentence would go on to commit murder and rape.

      Leave aside your personal and slimy attack on the SPO. Look across probation and you’ll find many cases that could probably be assessed at a higher risk allocated to PSOs, trainees and inexperienced POs. Pre sentence reports have been dumbed down for many years in terms of time and investigation. Cases and workloads are a mess due to the staffing crisis HMPPS caused upon probation.

      Delete
    3. Hey it's not personal it's is fact however a pquip is not an experienced or qualified officer. It is a fact the manager or at the least an appropriate other should be gate keeping to protect them all. Slimey no upfront and looking above not just the spo it's how the place is run which your comment deals with well.

      Delete
    4. One of the most stupid comments I have seen on this blog.

      Delete
    5. Oh so grouchy stupid slimey I don't understand the aggression are you defending something. No one accepts the system they implement is wrong in management.
      All staff are propping it up and attempting to deliver a task against the realities is like a defence of just following orders. Your wrong not to appreciate arson is an obvious high risk indicator. Any fire setting. You don't accept wider contribution . Your response is a taunt, a weak opinion.

      Delete
    6. Take note 10:18 your misjudgment as the management have taken action in the line of incompetant or reckless.

      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.

      Delete
    7. Sorry, I made the original comment and the SPO in question is a really nice person, I didn't mean to sound snipey and I completely understand nobody could have predicted what happened. However mistakes must have happened because SPO's are never normally held accountable. Nobody has to be a Probation Officer, it is a choice.

      Delete
  28. Well said Getafix at 24 December 2022 at 19.35.

    It is too easily forgotten that most communication is non verbal - thus to "get the feel" of folk and for them to "feel" us we need to be in the same room.

    Strangely, I personally feel more connected in a telephone call than via a screen conversation (not that I have had many of those) but I am convinced there is no substitute for actually meeting folk and on more than one occasion, if possible in different settings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally disagree. This is 2022, speaking on the phone is normal. To use a mix of phone calls and office visits is good.

      Delete
  29. In spite of the shitty state of the world, may I wish a Merry Xmas to you, JB, & all readers/contributors

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 06:43 I'd like to echo your sentiment and wish all readers and contributors a very Happy Christmas. The blog had been falling into a gentle slumber prior to this terrible story breaking, but notwithstanding all the festive preparations, viewing figures once again soared to 2,200 on the 23rd and even 1,261 yesterday, Christmas Eve. Take care everyone.

      Delete
    2. Yea well it's all too risky these days and this blog is the only voice place left for intelligent exchange for many. This case sounds awful a public inquiry into the staffing structures and probation process will expose them. That needs to be sought. Face book is the secretive Napo clique awful attitudes from them and Twitter is full of directors watching eachother us and and their self promotion is a few words. I have two for them it's not happy Christmass either . It's f@ß< off. As for the jb set, good cheer despite the misery.

      Delete
    3. Only an idiot would post in that Facebook group. Either it’s Napo reps whinging or incompetents that can’t locate information you can easily Google. Managers and their PAs are all in there watching and recording. Be smart, be careful. Civil service rules mean anonymity is required. Long may this blog continue. It’s the only neutral and ‘safe’ to voice, share and vent place after the unions, the Probation Institute and the Probation Service itself all miserably failed to be the voice of probation.

      Delete
    4. I love it when someone logs into Facebook to ask the phone number of Warrington office or Canterbury childrens services

      Delete
  30. Reciprocations @JimBrownBlog and ALL readers.

    This blog feels like a lifeline of traditional probation values employing the discipline of Social Work that generated those traditions back to Felix Biestek and beyond even to Fredic Rainer and John Augustus.

    I wish there were more regular readers, but guess too many associated with probation in England and Wales nowadays, avoid this blog to minimise their sense of dissonance.

    ReplyDelete
  31. It’s sad to read the dog eat dog comments here. So called probation colleagues passing mob judgement and further throwing their colleagues under the bus. Hardly a comment about the sentencers that passed a suspended sentence, of Sonia Flynn that once gave a direction that probation officers cannot recommend custody in PSR’s, of Dominic Raab who directed probation officers cannot recommend offenders remain in prison or be released, of Regional Probation Directors who oversaw the demise of probation that cut the time probation officers spend on PSR’s, risk assessment, training and development, and are complicit in rolling out Amy ‘Crisp white shirts’ Rees’ orders to restrict pay, to manage without sufficient staff and to be subservient to prisons and the police.

    Everyone knows the probation service has a staffing crisis, a lack of resources and has been dragged from pulled to post by HMPPS, NOMS and the MoJ over the past 10 years. Mistakes will be made, information will be missed and cases will be poorly assessed and managed. That’s what happens when you take an important public service and slash its pay, dumb down the training and undermine its authority and autonomy. The Mayor of London said it 8 years ago;

    “ t is a shocking state of affairs, which could have catastrophic consequences for public safety.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/probation-service-privatisation-plans-chris-grayling

    Merry Christmas one and all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probation is a less well-known branch of our justice system, compared with, say, police and prisons, but that doesn't make it any less important. Hundreds of thousands of offenders each year are rehabilitated back into society by probation, which is crucial for the public's safety. That's why the government's half-baked, reckless plans to privatise and break up probation should worry us all.

      Over recent weeks, as we head towards the 1 June key milestone in the government's plans this weekend, I've heard some truly alarming reports on the chaos privatisation is causing: staff shortages caused by rocketing sickness levels and dozens of unfilled vacancies are crippling the service.

      As a result, a backlog of cases is building up, including offenders who have committed serious, violent crimes like domestic violence. Oversight of sex offenders has been handed to staff without the right expertise. High-risk cases aren't receiving sufficient supervision. Court reports are going unwritten. Senior management time has been sucked into restructuring, neglecting day-to-day duties rehabilitating offenders. New software designed to assess the risk that offenders pose to the public was rushed into service without adequate staff training. It is a shocking state of affairs, which could have catastrophic consequences for public safety.

      It needn't be like this. No one questions the need for the probation service to reform and that more needs to be done to keep our communities safe. It's a scandal that those coming out of jail on short sentences are being left to their own devices.

      We know that probation works best when the service has close relationships with the police, prisons, local authorities and health service, enabling resources to be pooled and priorities aligned around the specific circumstances of the offenders most at risk of reoffending.

      Instead, what we see from the government is ideologically fuelled, evidence-free codswallop. They're heading in precisely the opposite direction, replicating the failing work programme, outsourcing service delivery to a handful of large private providers while local probation trusts are abolished and long-established working relationships ripped apart. All of this is being done without any piloting or testing to see if it works and doesn't endanger the public.

      Experts – including the chief inspector of probation and even justice secretary Chris Grayling's own officials – have warned that the plans are a massive gamble. They fear that confusion caused by a lack of clear responsibility for those on probation will lead to dangerous offenders falling between two stools. What's more, the public will no longer be able to find out information on any failings and hold providers to account as most of probation will be out of scope of freedom of information laws.


      None of this worries Grayling. He boasts of trusting his gut instinct over evidence. Perhaps I'm old-fashioned, but I think the need to maintain public safety demands something more than a chemical signal given off by a mix of juices in the secretary of state's stomach.

      It's also unacceptable, in an election year, for Grayling to sign away a whole swath of the justice system on 10-year contracts. It's undemocratic, binding the next secretary of state, whoever they may be, to this policy and reducing their ability to choose an alternative route to reform.

      Delete
    2. I am demanding the £6bn contracts aren't signed this late in the parliament. And if agreements are made they must include get-out clauses to allow a change of government to walk away free of financial penalty. If contracts remain unsigned at the next election – and Labour wins – I will bin them. If anything is in place by May 2015, I will get the best legal minds to find all possible ways to get out of them.

      Labour's alternative vision builds on strong, local, publicly run probation trusts, close to those they're supervising. Trusts have told me they'd take on supervising short-sentence prisoners within existing budgets. This makes a mockery of government claims that privatisation is necessary to free up resources to cope with prisoners serving less than 12 months.

      We would set tough new targets to cut reoffending and have zero tolerance of failure. Trusts would be free to decide how to meet these targets, capturing the expertise and innovation of local charities and companies without the need for wholesale privatisation. Real change happens when the people responsible on the ground are empowered, not micromanaged from Whitehall.

      The probation service has a fundamental role in keeping our communities safe. Yes, it can do better but instead of gambling with public safety, we must build on what works.

      Delete
  32. What’s the SPOs hair colour got to do with risk assessments or managing a team? Unprofessional comment

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The inference was clear probably bottle blonde late 20s low experience early promotion of the over represented groups in probation management.

      Delete
    2. Quite agree, a disgraceful personal attack on a longstanding and dedicated SPO who, from what I have read, was drowning in regard to having too many staff, many, if not all were trainees, all with too many cases of their own to learn and manage, with the SPO flagging up this situation before this dreadful situation occurred.

      Senior management look for scapegoats in regard to SFOs. Got the T-shirt!

      Delete
    3. Complete disregard to gross misconduct finding

      Delete
  33. Oh dear, looks like someone's toys are out of the pram before 8pm on Christmas evening.

    Monopoly pieces strewn across the living room floor, warm beaker of milk lying on its side on the sofa, plump red-faced child in the corner with tears welling up, chocolate around a pouting mouth, shouting at the wall before stomping up the apples-&-pears:

    "You’re not a better practitioner cos u know some guy and I don’t. I’m a PO proud of what we do. Proud of the current service. You’re too judgemental and peddle division. You’ve been told"

    Welcome to the current Probation Service for England & Wales.

    ReplyDelete
  34. 8.57 you’ve too much time on your hands.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How can anybody be proud of the current service?

      Delete
    2. Sounds like you need a new job if that’s how you see things.

      Delete
    3. I think 21:22 is also 08:57 if not they are both along the same lines deluded. However I recognise many recent engagements to training or 5 years service this is their time and they believe in the way it is now not how great it once was but lost.

      Delete
    4. If 21 is 22 & 8 isn't 57, but 6 is 9 & 2 is 2, then do we believe in the way it is not now?

      What's going on here? Its like the riddles of the sphincter.

      The leaks & media coverage of the whole bendall case are merely the trojan horse for widespread & total Hmpps control of the work probation staff do. You have been collectively disarmed by this, & now you've been professionally neutered raab is going to pile on the pain. His loyal lieutenants won't hesitate to identify, isolate & punish those who show dissent.

      Those who eagerly stand to attention, who squeal & point, will likely be rewarded with some bullshit trinket or special duty.

      It was a great job once.
      The shiny suited shitweasels, liars, bullies & lickspittles ruined it.

      Delete
    5. Just read both comments and think 2122 was expressing that commenting on the colour of someone’s hair as a measure of ability was a stupid comment.

      We should come together at times like this

      Delete
    6. I was an Offender Manager /Drug Practitioner for 17 years in the South East of England Kent. I received excellent training when I first joined in 2004. However, over the years
      with all the negative changes within the Probation Service, including corrupt management just looking after themselves, nothing does surprise me, whereever you are in the Country. The Probation Service do not respect or support their staff. Everything is done by computer, you only manage or supervise offenders, you dont help them to rehabilitate nowdays. Meeting stats is the one key issue in Probation. If you don't, your out the door. I could write a book on the failings of the Probation Service from petty theft to double murder. Believe me ! "And that's only the staff"

      Delete