Monday 20 February 2023

Parole Board on TV

This from the BBC Media Centre gives us a flavour of what we're likely to see in the TV series starting tonight on BBC2 at 9pm. I wonder to what degree probation will feature? Should be interesting folks.

BBC Factual series Parole takes audiences deep into the heart of the Criminal Justice System
We hope that, from watching the series, viewers will understand more about the complexity of the decisions made by the Parole Board and the breadth of expertise that they and the other professionals bring.— Alice Mayhall, Series Producer
Filmed over a year with Parole Boards from across England & Wales, and with unique access to their members, prisoners and some of the victims/their families, this series tackles the fundamental questions underlying the British justice system, around crime, punishment, reform, rehabilitation, repentance, and morality, and ultimately puts the viewer at the centre of the debate. What would you decide?.

Every year in England and Wales, around 16,000 of the potentially most dangerous criminals are considered for parole before the end of their sentence. 4,000 of them are released onto our streets and into our communities. Charged with deciding who gets released from prison and who stays locked up are the 346 members of the Parole Board.

In an independent court like process, hearings are held in front of a panel of one, two or three members, depending on the kind of case. These panels are made up mainly of judges, police and probation, psychologists, psychiatrists and can also include independent members with no previous experience of the Criminal Justice System. Witnesses who know the prisoner including probation and prison staff give oral evidence to help the Parole Board decide if the prisoner has met the legal ‘test for release’.

No stone is left unturned in the search for clues about whether a prisoner has really changed, as they, more often than not, say they have. Dossiers, containing the prisoners’ life stories, sometimes running to a thousand pages of evidence, help the panel to make their decision. Difficult childhood upbringings, chaotic lifestyles, past offences, and rehabilitative prison courses can all be discussed and considered. As part of the hearing an impact statement from the victim or their loved one, who is often desperate for the prisoner not to be released, can be presented.

Oral hearings can go on for hours, and, in some cases, days. Different evidence can sway panels from one decision to another. But in each case, after an intense period of questioning both the prisoner and the witnesses, the Parole Board must make a crucial decision - whether it is necessary, for the protection of the public, to keep a prisoner locked up. Get it wrong, release a criminal who then reoffends, and the consequences could be fatal.

After the hearing, the Parole Board have 14 days to consider the evidence and make their decision. When panels can’t decide, they may need further evidence to help them. But with decision day, can come a life changing moment. “Release” and the prisoner will walk out the prison door, “no release” and it could be another two years before they have another parole hearing.

Waiting in the wings are those that parole can affect the most - the prisoners’ families, who desperately want them home - and the victims or their loved ones, who often want them kept in.

Q&A with Alice Mayhall, Series Producer

What can you tell us about the series?

Parole is a new series, made by Raw TV, that x. The series looks at the life changing moment that Parole Boards decide whether it is necessary for the protection of the public to keep a prisoner confined. These decisions are not taken lightly – they take months of preparation and evidence gathering before the big day of the hearing. Hearings can last a full day or sometimes extend longer. For many prisoners it’s the most important day of their sentence, a chance for freedom and a new life. But it’s also an enormously difficult day for victims, as it may mean the offender is released back into the community.

The Parole Board’s work is often controversial and some of their decisions can be unpopular especially to victims and their families. But the Parole Board operate within a set of rules set by Government and within a Criminal Justice System that offers people the chance for rehabilitation, repentance and hope.

The series follows the detailed decision-making process that determines which criminals are safe to walk free - and which will remain behind bars. What do you hope the viewers will take away from it?

There is so much misunderstanding about what the Parole Board do, for example people get them mixed up with the Probation Service, or they think that the Parole Board are responsible for most prisoners’ releases – which they aren’t. We hope that, from watching the series, viewers will understand more about the complexity of the decisions made by the Parole Board and the breadth of expertise that they and the other professionals bring. We hope that victims will be given more insight into and understanding of the decision-making process. But we also hope that viewers, through hearing the Parole Board’s members thinking, for the first time, will be able to draw their own conclusions about what they would do if they were in their shoes.

What challenges did you face in making the series?

We expected that it would be a challenge to get access to prisons, probation teams and Victim Liaison Units, because of the sensitive nature of their work, but everyone was very welcoming and supportive of the idea of the series and increasing public understanding of what they do. Our aim was always to get a 360 degree perspective of the parole hearings but this was not always easy or possible, due to the complexities of the work.

Q&A with Rob McKeon, Parole Board member and Panel Chair

What does your role as a Panel Chair entail?

As Panel Chair, I oversee the review of a case once it has been directed to an oral hearing. This includes reviewing and directing written evidence, identifying whether the witness list is sufficient, dealing with complex issues that might arise, and ensuring the case is ready to be heard. At the hearing, I am responsible for the effective management of the review and ensuring that the hearing is fair and that it follows the Parole Board rules and relevant legislation. I’ll lead the discussions with panel members and am required to produce the written draft of any decision. Sometimes, as a Panel Chair, I sit and consider cases alone as a single member panel.

Why did you decide to join the Parole Board?

The simple answer is it seemed interesting, although there was little information available publicly about the work of the Parole Board. On reflection, it is one of the best roles I have ever been fortunate to do. Whether it be chairing Parole hearings, or addressing specific problems within a case, the work is always challenging, interesting and rewarding.

You must make life changing decisions and the responsibility is huge. What do you look for when assessing individual cases?

Every case is focussed on an assessment of risk. I want to be sure that there is sufficient evidence to allow for a full, fair and accurate decision to be made. My role is often trying to find out what we don’t know about a particular case, so that every aspect of risk can be explored. Parole reviews will often go through the entire life of a prisoner, going back to their childhood – if there is something to explore, I will ask the necessary questions, even when topics may be very personal or very difficult to deal with. These are very important decisions, I don’t lose sight of the responsibility and I don’t back away from asking difficult questions.

When you’re face to face with a prisoner and find out more about their offences and circumstances, how hard is it to control your emotions and any moral judgement?

Parole Board members deal with the most serious crimes in the country, that is the nature of our work. I make decisions based on the facts of the case and cannot allow emotions to influence that decision making. It isn’t for me to pass moral judgement on any prisoner’s past actions and to do so would likely compromise the level of information that is often disclosed. Cases can be troubling, they can be difficult to read, but if I’m to do my job properly then I must (and do) stick to the evidence.

Why did you agree to take part in the documentary series?

I’m keen on the Parole Board being transparent about its work and the decisions it makes. Parole Board panels make informed decisions based on the evidence before them. I hope this documentary series is enlightening and encourages more discussion about the work of the Parole Board.

How did you find having cameras filming parole hearings?

The documentary team worked hard to make sure we didn’t notice them, in fact on the first recording I nearly left the prison still wearing the radio microphone because I’d forgotten I had it. I was always focussed on the Parole review of the prisoner being the priority and the filming came second.

Why do you think it is important that members of the public have an insight into the decision making process?

So that there can be greater understanding of and engagement with what we do. I welcome debate, but the starting point must be based on what we actually do and not what some people might think we do. I also hope it provides clarity for the victims of offences that come before the Parole Board so that they can have confidence in the decisions we make, even if it can be difficult at times to accept them.

It is complex work you do and the Parole Board is often under intense scrutiny. What do you hope people will take from watching this series?

These are some of the most serious offences, often involving serious violence or serious sexual offending. Our role is not to decide whether someone has been punished enough for the offences they committed – it is to make decisions about risk, ensuring public protection and sometimes those decisions can be unpopular. However, we come to our conclusions based on the evidence and must direct release if the legal test is met - in fact only one in four prisoners meet the strict test for release.

Q&A with Noreen Shami – Specialist member, Forensic Psychologist

What does your role as a forensic psychologist entail?

My role as a forensic psychologist involves assessing and treating people who have committed crimes (or been the victims of crime), by applying psychological theory to try and understand what led to the offending behaviour. This involves looking at a person’s full history from childhood to the present day, any significant life events and experiences such as trauma, neglect, mental health or cognitive difficulties. As well as identifying the things that trigger and maintain their behaviours, I develop treatment plans to provide targeted interventions to help prevent further reoffending.

I support the work of other parole board members by providing advice and guidance on any psychological issues or concerns which non psychologists may need assistance with. I also review any psychological assessments, reports and post intervention reports to gain an understanding of the psychological issues that are relevant to the offender and which treatment needs to focus on. I also provide guidance on whether certain traits are evident which may merit further exploration, such as possible Autism or mental illness.

What do you look for when assessing individual cases? What are the main challenges?

When assessing individual cases we have to look at whether the person meets the test for release. This involves looking at how much a person has changed since committing the offences, how much they have reduced their risk and whether they have addressed all the issues and treatment targets that were relevant to their offending. It is a challenge when professional witnesses have different opinions about what the prisoner needs to do next, as this can be the difference between someone being released and remaining in custody. On occasion, panel members have strong opposing views about whether the offender meets the test for release.

When you find out more about an individual’s circumstances, how hard is it to control your emotions and any moral judgement?

When finding out more about an individual’s circumstances, it can be difficult to control your emotions and moral judgements, but the job of a Parole Board member is to consider whether a prisoner has met the test for release. This is particularly when someone has committed a horrific, devastating and brutal offence, yet they may be well over tariff and have completed everything that was required of them and there is a consensus amongst professional witnesses that the individual has reduced their risk sufficiently.

The public often feel outrage about offenders being released even after many years; huge evidence of change; and often a great deal of time in the community. However, it is important to remember that the Parole Board’s test for release is set by parliament, and states that a prisoner is eligible to be considered for release once they have served the period set for punishment by the courts.

Why did you agree to take part in the documentary series

I agreed to take part in the documentary because I believe the public have a misperception of how the parole process works and can often have a very punitive view towards offenders. I felt it was important for people to gain an insight into this work and the challenges that are faced.

How did you find the experience of having cameras filming you? Do you think it is important members of the public have an insight into the decision making process?

I did not mind the cameras filming - however I was conscious that they were and that this is a highly controversial and emotive topic.

9 comments:

  1. BBC2 - 20 February 2023
    59 minutes
    Episode 1 - Parole
    Series 1 - Episode 1 of 5

    Fifty-four-year-old Colin committed a brutal murder following a pub fight. Twenty-five years later, he has a chance to be released from prison. With his victim's widow waiting anxiously at home for the decision, will the parole board decide that he is safe to be let back into the community?

    Fifty-eight-year-old David spent 40 years swindling thousands of pounds out of women he dated. A serial fraudster, he left a stream of women not only financially damaged, but in some cases psychologically affected too. Can he convince the parole board he is a changed man, or does the panel think they are just being shown his skills of persuasion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Danny Shaw: "Strongly recommend this series on @Parole_Board , having seen the first, riveting, episode at a preview screening.

      Getting approval for access to parole hearings & permission from all those affected is a huge undertaking. It’s taken 5 years, in total."

      Delete
  2. Just noticed this question sent in today, but on a blog post over 10 years old!

    "Can a probation officer keep a life sentence prisoner on monthly reporting forever?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. can't speak for today's service provision, but in 90's I 'inherited' a lifer case who had been reporting monthly for years. It wasn't a case of "keeping" them on monthly reporting because *they* didn't want to lose that contact, even though there was a change of supervising PO, so I kept it going. When I left for another role they'd been on monthly reporting for 9+ years. The meetings varied between 10 mins & 2 hours depending on what was going on at the time. Everyone seemed perfectly happy with the arrangement.

      I guess the question is more about imposing a formal requirement than on providing a resource.

      Delete
    2. Yes it does happen. I have known Lifers that have been supervised for over 20-30 years and more. They can pass away when supervision is active. There’s also many elderly prisoners serving life and long sentences for serious and historical offences. To some even a short licence will effectively be forever. As with the above comment, I too have known those that wanted to keep attending probation.

      Delete
  3. I would hope that IPP cases are well represented in the series, and not just cases that are are likely to evoke emotive responses from viewers.
    We live in a society where 'deserve' seems to have been inserted when talking about justice. He/she/they, want the justice they 'deserve'. We'll fight for the justice we 'deserve' etc.
    I think we are all of us never really satisfied when someone else decides what we are actually 'deserving' of and what's fair and just.
    Crime is an emotive subject, and I hope this series can portray that our institutions, like courts and tribunals have a duty and an obligation to both sides of the argument, and why they sometimes make decisions that are not very popular with public opinion.

    As an aside...
    Some interesting stuff in the following, but I fear it will mean more people being funneled through an already struggling probation system.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/domestic-abusers-face-crackdown-in-raft-of-new-measures

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And so we circle back to Ayn Rand, talking tough, etc etc:

      “There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws.”

      I see @RobCanton1 has offered a comment about the "Labour is the party of law & order" guff:

      Hyman Gross reflected ‘... we are tempted to adopt barbarous measures out of disappointment, or foolish ones of out despair, simply because we fail to achieve what we have no right to hope for in the first place.’

      Hyman Gross is the sometime Arthur Goodhart Professor of Legal Science and a Fellow of Corpus Christi College, University of Cambridge.

      "Are crimes morally wrong? Yes and no; it depends. It's easy to think we know what we're talking about when we ask this question. But do we? We need to know what we mean by 'crimes'. And we need to know what we mean by 'morally wrong'. This turns out to be trickier than we may at first think.

      It is generally assumed that we are justified in punishing criminals because they have committed a morally wrongful act. Determining when criminal liability should be imposed calls for a moral assessment of the conduct in question, with criminal liability tracking as closely as possible the contours of morality. Versions of this view are frequently argued for in philosophical accounts of crime and punishment, and seem to be presumed by lawyers and policy makers working in the criminal justice system."

      Delete
  4. Can’t think of anything worse to watch. I see enough criminal justice stuff at work. The parole board are such a boring set of people too. For years they made their decisions on the back of our probation reports. Now we’re not allowed to make recommendations and they’ve become the VIP’s.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Is everybody in? Is everybody in? Is everybody in? The ceremony is about to begin."

    For @18:20 - please see Danny Shaw comment above @11:08... "its taken 5 years" to make these programmes. Pity no-one felt it worth investing that much time & effort into accurately documenting probation service provision.

    But it will be interesting to see if Raab's psycho-justice approach is addressed.

    ReplyDelete