Tuesday, 7 April 2026

Kind-hearted Probation?

Yet again our ace contributor 'Getafix was alert to the following article published yesterday in the Daily Telegraph. The pesky paywall makes it difficult to access, but due to its importance and 'Getafix's efforts at extracting it on his mobile, I think it's worth piecing it together here. PSR's used to be a vital part of a PO's job and their demise has been a shocking loss to the profession's usefulness.  

How Britain’s ‘kind-hearted’ probation service is letting killers go free.


Inexperienced officers with an aversion to imprisonment are fuelling a surge in serious reoffending. Is this soft system costing lives?"

Damien Bendall is one of Britain’s most dangerous prisoners. The 36-year-old is serving a “whole life” order for murdering his pregnant partner and three children. In February, he was given another life sentence for attempting to bludgeon a fellow inmate to death with a claw hammer at HMP Frankland in Durham.Given Bendall’s savage behaviour, it is almost impossible to believe that a few years ago, before his murderous spree in Derbyshire, he was classified by a probation officer as posing only a low to medium risk of reoffending – and was recommended for a non-custodial community order.

The catastrophic miscalculation of Bendall’s risk serves as a reminder of the underlying flaws within England and Wales’s probation service when it comes to public safety, and the apparent aversion to imprisonment.

A series of damning inspections has highlighted weaknesses in the advice given by probation officers to the courts when offenders are sentenced, in documents known as pre-sentence reports (PSRs). Public safety is often the greatest casualty under a probation system that is now facing acute additional pressures due to the early release from prison of thousands of offenders.

In 2024-25, a record 872 criminals under probation supervision were charged with a serious further offence (SFO), including murder, manslaughter and rape. The number of these repeat offences has climbed by an extraordinary 75 per cent in four years, adding to a sense that the service has become too soft on offenders.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures show that non-custodial community sentences – often involving unpaid work – are 10 times more likely to be suggested by probation officers than imprisonment in the reports they write for the courts, with 85,376 recommended in the 12 months to September 2025, accounting for 88 per cent of the total number of probation reports. Custody was proposed in 7,571 cases (eight per cent).

Tellingly, in just over half of the cases where probation staff called for community penalties, judges ignored their advice, instead imposing a jail term, a suspended sentence or a fine. MoJ statistics also show that, over the past 13 years, judges have become more likely to jail offenders when a community punishment has been proposed.

According to some barristers, the frequency with which probation staff advocate against prison sentences has made judges dismissive of their recommendations.

“Every criminal practitioner will have had cases where probation has recommended a sentence which is wholly inappropriate,” says Thom Dyke, a leading criminal barrister. “The effect of that is that the PSR effectively loses credibility with the judge. So where there may actually be useful information in a report, if the overall conclusion is hopelessly unrealistic, the judge is going to pay less attention to the contents of the report overall.”

PSRs, which are typically up to 12 pages long, contain information about an offender’s background and criminal record, as well as a risk assessment and a proposed sentence. But the quality of the reports has been a source of deep concern for many years.

In 2018, defence lawyers at Forrest Williams noted a “worrying trend of completely unrealistic pre-sentence reports in cases where immediate custody is inevitable and yet the PSR recommends a community order”. The lawyers cited one case where sentencing guidelines had suggested a “realistic and fair” prison sentence of eight to 10 years, but where the PSR had recommended a community order.

It was described by the judge as “not worth the paper it’s written on”, the firm said. Although the reports are undoubtedly “written with the best of intentions by kind-hearted people who genuinely hope the decent individuals sitting before them are given a community order... they are dangerous”, they added.

An inspection of pre-sentencing probation reports in 2024 found “considerable gaps”, with fewer than half of those examined judged to be “sufficiently analytical and personalised to the individual”. The standard of the reports has deteriorated further since then, with a grading of “inadequate” in the six areas of England and Wales that were inspected, accounting for almost half the country.

Some of the problems are believed to be due to the greater use of “fast delivery” PSRs, which take less than a week to put together. But Dyke, who is based at Deka Chambers in London, believes magistrates are also to blame for giving probation staff instructions before they write the reports that are too “vague”.

In Bendall’s case, when he was sentenced for committing arson in June 2021, a probation officer did not recommend imprisonment, even though he already had an appalling record of violence, but instead suggested he carry out unpaid work in the community, undergo treatment for an alcohol problem, and be tagged and subject to a curfew.

Three months later, Bendall murdered Terri Harris, 35, who was pregnant with his child; her son, John Bennett, 13; and her daughter, Lacey Bennett, 11, whom he raped as she lay dying. Bendall also murdered Lacey’s 11-year-old friend, Connie Gent. A review of the case said the probation service’s assessment and management of the former cage fighter were “unacceptable” and “far below what was required”.

There are few signs, however, that the lessons from the tragedy have been learnt, with fears that probation staff are still too often prepared to give offenders the benefit of the doubt.

David Ford, national chair of the Magistrates’ Association, says probation officers get it right “most of the time”, but he acknowledges that calculating the risk posed by defendants is far from an exact science. “You are taking a leap of faith with risk – it’s a real worry,” says Ford, a magistrate for 32 years.

Risk assessment has long been the Achilles heel of probation, not only at the point of sentence, but also when offenders are managed in the community. Among the most egregious cases was that of the career criminal, Jordan McSweeney, who raped and murdered 35-year-old Zara Aleena as she walked home from a night out in east London in 2022.

A review concluded that McSweeney, who had 28 previous convictions for 69 crimes, should have been categorised by probation as a high-risk offender when he was released from prison nine days before the murder. Had he been, he would have been more closely monitored by senior staff under more stringent licence conditions.

The chief inspector of probation, Martin Jones, has been so alarmed by the service’s failure to gauge risk and keep people safe from the 240,000 offenders under its supervision that he has launched a series of “dynamic” inspections to bring about improvements.

“What we see across all of our inspections is that public protection work is the lowest-rated area that we’ve assessed, and that’s driven, I think, by significant staffing deficits and the level of inexperience... the majority of staff have less than five years’ experience in the job, some only one or two,” Jones tells The Telegraph.

A probation recruitment campaign is underway, but the service is still 1,700 officers short of its target staffing figure, while most of those taken on tend to be young graduates. More than 10,000 staff are in their twenties and thirties – 46 per cent of the total.

“Quite often, it’s more experienced probation officers who spot those small warning signs that something may be going wrong in somebody’s life, and actually then act upon them, following their nose,” says Jones. “It’s the professional curiosity to say, ‘I need to pick up the telephone, talk to the probation service, talk to the police service, talk to social services about what may be going on, because my alarm bells are going off, given the history that this individual has.’ And there’s not enough of that happening at the frontline.”

The chief probation officer of England and Wales, Kim Thornden-Edwards, has said the service needs to employ more older people and those with different life experiences, and increase the number of male staff. Three-quarters of probation staff are women, despite recent attempts to recruit more male officers, including through advertisements on Sky Sports and gaming channels.

“It might be really good for a woman to be leading on a domestic abuse case, but it might also be good for a man to be challenging those kinds of issues around masculinity and power from a male perspective,” Thornden-Edwards said.

“The majority of frontline probation officers at the moment are young women... and they’re managing a complex group of men in the community, quite often much older,” says Jones. “And I think that makes part of the job challenging.”

There is no proven link between a female-dominated, largely inexperienced probation workforce and a service that underplays risk, and leans towards community-based punishments. But Jake Phillips, associate professor at the Institute of Criminology at the University of Cambridge, says inexperience could make probation staff more risk-averse, as well as leading to “naivety”, which makes them less inclined to recommend prison.

However, Phillips, who edits the academic publication Probation Journal, believes there is also an ideological issue at play. For most of the 20th century, the service was regarded as a form of social work, helping criminals tackle their underlying problems. Although there was a greater emphasis on controlling and monitoring offenders after a moral panic about crime in the mid-1990s, the tendency of probation officers to favour alternatives to imprisonment still lingers to this day.

There has always been a fairly strong anti-custodial sentiment in the probation profession,” says Phillips. “Although I suspect that has shifted in the last couple of decades, it is probably still there strongly enough to dissuade some probation officers from recommending custody, or at least to make them think twice about doing so.”

21 comments:

  1. Sad the loss of psr sir set. Once there was a keep probation public campaign. Then an expansion of poso grades. Then open court verbal reports then it was psos doing them too. It was asked many times of probation staff to identify professional tasks and they never could or did. Still today po couldn't tell you what defines the professional role. What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A typically British kneejerk reaction to an outlier case from which there is little/nothing to learn from. No amount of form filling will ever lead a normal human being to conclude 'I think this man will go on to murder his partner and 3 children' and I doubt anyone would expect them too.

    I am glad to see recognition that the service needs more men but the problem isn't being addressed urgently enough. There should be be a total ban of hiring women until the disparity is corrected, this would happen if the problem is the other way round.
    sox

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly s and the remainder get brushed with tar. Gone is the thoughtful inquisitive standard bearing po who had both written intelligence with compassionate caring capabilities whilst managing ricocheting personalities obviously offenders but the managers are a bit frenzied these days .

      Delete
    2. Ignoring the issue of gender, here's a bbc report from way back when (I think its been posted here before?) which shows that a probation officer made a clear & uambiguous risk assessment - perhaps surprisingly frank for its time? - but her/his report didn't stop further tragedy from occurring. What it might have done is stop the probation service from being nailed to yet another cross, not least because it featured in the news report. I wonder if s/he was hailed & promoted?

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/4277869.stm

      But that shouldn't have meant throwing the baby, the bath & the whole contents of the house out. Sadly that's what happened when every politically motivated iteration was enacted/enabled by the accompanying legal/policy changes, e.g. noms/trusts/tr/hmpps/etc .

      Spiteful malcontents - often from a right-leaning perspective (and yes, that includes bliar, straw, etc) - have chipped away at the probation service for decades. The result is a mess, an utter shambles that is not fit for purpose... but the spin doctors are trying to prove that tech is a perfectly suitable replacement. It won't end well.

      Delete
    3. Maybe the solution is to recruit more women as judges and give Magistrates Social Work training and they would send less people to prison.

      Delete
    4. Jesus loves a pedant

      Delete
  3. The PSR to my mind has always been about giving context to both the offence and the offender. Its the foundation that informs the pathways the offender should be put on whatever their journey through the Criminal Justice System should be whether community based or custodial.
    I feel that 'Social Inquiry Report' is a far better description then 'Pre Sentence Report'. The focus is on the individual that has committed the offence, rather then on the offence by itself.
    The more the 'one size fits all' approach to Criminal Justice is applied, the less thought is giver to rehabilitation and the great value of the things that can promote and effect rehabilitation (like a comprehensive PSR) becme lost.

    https://revolving-doors.org.uk/pre-sentence-reports-work-why-is-the-government-blocking-them/

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  4. “There should be be a total ban of hiring women until the disparity is corrected, this would happen if the problem is the other way round.”. Umm you’re kidding right ………. Police, prison , boardrooms, etc
    And feminisation of services is linked to poor pay . Maybe improve pay and conditions . Oh and whilst there are less men in probation there are proportionately more men in senior positions ……
    And regarding Bendal I agree no one could have predicted his hideous offence but it really was a shocking failure regarding his assessment at court - not blaming individual officer but indicative of failures with the system that needed addressing

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding Bendal-the HMIP report was damning of the way he was assessed at court, declaring him suitable for a curfew without having done basic checks, and completing the report over the phone (as well as taking his claims about his health at face value with no analysis).

      While the individual officer is in no way responsible for what Bendall went on to do, the officer was responsible for doing a sub-standard report that was indefensible.

      With that said the telegraph is very much appealing to its base here. No, Probation is not responsible for the high crime rate, there are systemic problems in every sector of society that's causing that.

      Delete
    2. Those being supervised by probation are predominantly male.
      Those working in probation are predominantly female.
      If that was colour, ethnicity, religious beliefs etc it would represent a signifigant bias.

      Delete
    3. No one is saying it is not a significant bias but to argue if it was the other way round it would be addressed is just nonsense

      Delete
    4. And in the 1980’s it was two thirds men - when pay and position were ”good”

      Delete
    5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537121001378 US study but pertinent

      Delete
  5. Younger women tended to over estimate the risks posed whereas men tended to slightly underestimate them. Having trained POs for many years I always found that the middle aged,usually second career, women made very good officers. And I don’t recall KTE ever saying that we need more male officers before the Inspectorate said it !

    ReplyDelete
  6. “Three-quarters of probation staff are women, despite recent attempts to recruit more male officers, including through advertisements on Sky Sports and gaming channels.”

    So is that the new criteria for probation officers in 2026 — gamers and couch potatoes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A pretty misguided approach and arguably insulting to men. It leans on outdated stereotypes and says nothing positive about the skills or personality required. We wouldn’t frame recruitment for women around daytime TV or cooking channels.

      Delete
  7. The rise in SFO's can't in my mind be linked to shit reports, they've been crap for donkeys years. What's changed is a decline in the country as a whole, NHS waiting lists, mental health inaccessible, Police numbers decimated, Prisons turned to cattle pens fuelling violence, drug use etc, social media poisoning everyone but especially young men, no youth clubs, no sure start, schools have no money for sports or after school clubs, sod all jobs that don't require degrees which young men used to do ( mining, steel works etc which were hard but paid well). And finally probation, shafted along with everything else, we just collect data and process people, those at the top don't care about real outcomes. The talk about the need for more male officers has been going on for the last 10 years but the pay and training and culture is suited to women, the government loves a man in uniform

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completly agree 19:23.
      Managed decline and the eradication of professionalism across the social piste. Everything is now about quantity, and quality is just an obstacle in that pursuit.
      Its not about getting the best any more, it's about getting the most!
      Dumb down the training for everything and you can get more people doing it. More people ticking boxes, more outcomes achieved. Bingo!
      The following may be of interest to you. It relates to the decline in social work, but you can easily exchange social work for probation in the text and it would read just the same. In fact you could exchange social work in the text for almost any profession and it would read just as well.

      https://basw.co.uk/about-social-work/psw-magazine/articles/once-upon-time-social-work-profession-under-siege

      'Getafix

      Delete
  8. Forgot to say the push from Government's to us via the Moj is to not send people to prison, courts have been told to limit how many people they send to custody, they have dumped thousands of offenders into the community based on bugger all and continue to do so whilst limiting our ability to recall, but no, let's blame report writers...

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Telegraph piece is a classic misdirection.

    Label it “kind-hearted probation” and suddenly the problem becomes individual officers being too soft rather than a system that has been systematically stripped of time, experience and professional capacity.

    Risk has never been predictable. Not now, not 20 years ago, not ever. What has changed is the environment in which those decisions are being made.

    We now have
       •   fewer experienced staff
       •   higher caseloads
       •   less time for proper assessment
       •   rushed “fast delivery” reports replacing full PSRs
       •   constant restructuring and policy churn

    Then act surprised when things go wrong.

    Bendall is being used as a symbol, but no system, however robust, is going to reliably predict something of that magnitude. What can be expected is a properly resourced service capable of doing thorough, defensible assessments. That’s what’s been eroded.

    And it’s convenient, isn’t it?

    At the same time as:
       •   thousands are being released early
       •   courts are under pressure on custody
       •   probation is being reshaped around efficiency and technology

    …the narrative becomes “probation is too soft”.

    That’s not analysis. That’s blame-shifting.

    PSRs were never about being lenient they were about informing the court with professional judgement and context. Undermine that, rush it, hollow it out and then question its credibility.

    You can’t dismantle a system and then criticise it for not working.

    And when that narrative sticks, it becomes the justification for the next round of change- more control, more monitoring, less trust in professional judgement.

    At that point, probation isn’t failing, it's already been replaced.

    ReplyDelete