"It's far greater & more complex than untrained coppers making a bad call:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8jnrk4xlvdo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70g18vpwxvo
- Scotland Yard downgraded Levy's risk to women upon his release in 2024
- The Met took three years to investigate and charge Levy with the sexual assault of the prison officer
- British Transport Police's (BTP) investigation into Levy's sexual assaults meant he was not charged for more than six months, despite being filmed carrying out an attack
- The Met and BTP both gave Levy back a stolen travelcard which let him travel without paying and commit crimes, including the first murder
- The CPS has apologised for "shortcomings" in its attempts to have Levy remanded in custody.
"they down graded the high risker... a po would not have downgraded him."
Everything's a mess. The entirety of the justice system (police, courts, probation, prisons, victim work) has been severely maltreated for decades, eroded & corroded by financial & moral starvation, ridiculed by the political class, mismanaged by Whitehall & hung out to dry by the media. The culture & nature of justice has been distorted.
We now seem to have a model that, with the rapid expansion of social media, means victims & their advocates have direct access & influence over government policy. That might not be a bad thing in & of itself, of course, but it has meant that the new government has been doing embarassingly poor public cartwheels over the Sentencing Act.
Sadly the last twenty or so years have seen some of the most contentious & damaging changes imposed upon the justice system, with frontline staff in all departments having little to no say; indeed, saying "it's shit & won't work" but being ignored, only to be proved right some time later, time & time again.
Even more sadly, those who sat in remote offices in Whitehall doing the sums, drafting the spreadsheets & writing the glossy reports promoting pointless change have never & will never been held to account for their wilful vandalism to public services & the massive holes they made in public finances. £Billions have been wasted on any number of vanity projects.
But hold up a sign saying "Plastacine Action", sit in a road blocking weapons destined for a genocidal state or daub paint on a statue & you'll be remanded into custody for months on terrorism charges."
The Sex Offender Register has distorted everything and needs to be abolished. There are so many on it now police and probation can't see the wood for the trees. Dangerous multiple reoffenders are downgraded to save work whilst thousands of low to no risk ex offenders are monitored for decades after their conviction is spent. Only known and proven recidivists should be on a register.
ReplyDeletesox
Yes,yes and yes to 10:08……..and while you’re at it push for written questions at parole hearings, I’m sick of ex coppers who never forget that they are ex coppers…..going off on tangents that are not relevant
ReplyDeleteJim, I knew you couldn’t stay away!
ReplyDeleteI can’t comment on the specifics of this case, but at least he’s off the streets and hopefully for good. The article does mention probation and makes clear that his sentence had ended. No doubt some poor PO will be thrown under the bus anyway. That’s usually the easiest thing to do when the system fails. And it does show failings, but not by probation.
One of the worst things probation has done in recent years is become far too cosy with the police. IOM, Public Protection Units, RSO teams, VISOR, MAPPA and all the rest of it. Where has it actually got us? We’ve blurred the lines between two overstretched organisations that are supposed to have very different roles. Probation is not the police. We don’t need to become the police-lite version of the police. Yet there are plenty of POs and SPOs who seem to secretly fantasise about having powers of arrest and a pair of handcuffs.
The irony is that probation has spent years being told to be more “professional”, while simultaneously being dragged closer and closer towards policing. They are fundamentally different professions and should remain so, which won’t be realised with the £700m of tagging and monitoring responsibilities about to be forced upon us. And with plenty of its problems with racism, sexism and misogyny within policing we just seem to ignore, so since probation has it’s own problems becoming even more closely aligned with them hardly seems like a brilliant strategy.
OMIC aligned us more with prisons, and TR with private companies, look where that got us. The problem is the wider system and the pen pushing idiots designing and reforming it.
Anon 11:09 That'll teach me not to read or copy and paste the article!
DeleteI agree. I've previously been based in a Police Station. Never again. Your face has to fit to thrive there.
Deletehttps://www.probation-institute.org/news/independent-statutory-regulation-of-probation-practitioners
ReplyDelete,Getafix
The Probation Institute welcomes the formal consultation by HMPPS on independent external regulation of the probation service. We have pressed for this for many years. This consultation seeks views on who should be included in independent professional registration, frequency of registration and the type of organisation that should become the regulator.
DeleteWe will be responding to this important consultation and we would love to hear members views on the specific questions to inform our discussions. Please respond directly online or send us an email to admin@probation-institute.org
The consultation is open until 8th October.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/independent-statutory-regulation-of-probation-practitioners
About time, because what does “registered” even mean at present? There are plenty of “registered” probation officers who haven’t done actual probation work for eons.
ReplyDeleteAt the moment we’ve got about 15 different names for essentially the same job — probation officer, probation practitioner, responsible officer, offender manager, community offender manager, etc. — while the actual qualification has been dumbed down to the point where an 18-year-old with one A level, zero life experience and little interest in the profession can sign up and become a probation officer in 15 months.
And then we’re told it’s a “recognisable qualification” with “transferable skills”. It’s essentially HND/first-year university level, yet somehow we’re pretending it represents a meaningful professional qualification or career pathway. PQiP and probation officer status increasingly looks like a dead-end job with nowhere meaningful to go.
Then there was last year’s farce of jumping through hoops with that abysmal mandatory Red Snapper training to become “registered”, followed by a manager signing you off as long as you hadn’t upset anyone and had passed POLICE vetting. What an absolutely ridiculous way to define professional registration.
So yes, it’s about time there was proper statutory regulation and a credible probation practice regulatory council. And, frankly, the last thing it needs is ANY current or former probation employee who has been SPO, Deputy, Head of PDU, RPD or above anywhere near it. We’ve seen enough of that model already.
I’d probably give the regulatory role to the Probation Institute — although they’ve always seemed rather more interested in romancing Justice Ministers and so-called charity organisations than actually regulating the profession. And Napo doesn’t know its aris from its elbow when it comes to probation practice.
I Googled this and AI explains the current state of probation as being in such dire need of regulation that England is now considered an outlier in the UK, Europe and internationally — we seem to have lost Wales too:
“…… The phrase ‘Outlier England’ refers to a July 2025 post on the On Probation Blog, which discusses how England’s probation delivery model risks becoming an isolated and criticised outlier compared to other progressive European systems and developments in Wales.”
So, Jim, since you’ve already coined the phrase “Outlier England”, perhaps you should be the regulator and help fix it? At least the job description is already written.
https://probationmatters.blogspot.com/2025/07/outlier-england.html?m=1
… and who could argue with Fergus McNeill and Gerry McNally - get them on the regulatory panel too!!
DeleteAnon 12:58 Talking of AI, I asked it what the standing of the blog was and got this:-
DeleteThe On Probation Blog is widely respected within the UK justice sector as an insightful, authentic commentary on the criminal justice system. However, rather than an objective news source, it functions as a platform for critique, personal experience, and advocacy.
Key Aspects to Consider
Author Credentials: The blog is written by Jim Brown, an experienced, CQSW-trained, veteran probation officer who has worked in the North of England for many years.
Industry Recognition: His insider perspectives are highly valued by criminal justice experts and have been spotlighted by authoritative justice sector commentators like Russell Webster.
Editorial Stance: Jim Brown writes from a distinctly "old school" practitioner perspective. The blog is highly critical of recent decades of privatization, government reorganization, and the metric-driven, bureaucratic nature of modern probation.
Community Consensus: The blog hosts active comment threads. In discussions surrounding the degradation of working conditions and the struggles of front-line practitioners, readers largely agree with his assessments of the sector.
How to Use It
The blog is an excellent, trusted source if you are looking for on-the-ground experiences, critical analysis of probation policy, and the day-to-day realities of casework. If you are looking for impartial policy statistics or official government data, you should cross-reference his observations with the HM Inspectorate of Probation
Well, Jim, if AI is describing the blog as an influential platform for practitioner critique, personal experience and advocacy, then you’re already doing half the job of the regulator!
DeleteSeriously though, the “Outlier England” point is pretty relevant to this consultation. A lot of the questions raised there about probation’s purpose, identity, rehabilitation, risk and where it was heading were arguably ahead of their time, and we’re now having those very conversations.
If we’re deciding who should be professionally registered, how often and who should regulate probation, those involved need to recognise that “Outlier England” is largely what has been created over many years. Any regulator needs to be genuinely independent and willing to challenge the current model, not simply regulate it. So perhaps, Jim, you’ll take up the mantle and become the regulator! At least the blog has already written your job description.
Do not let “ANY current or former probation employee who has been SPO, Deputy, Head of PDU, RPD or above anywhere near it.”
DeleteHear hear!
The relationship between police and probation has now become one akin to a sub and a dom with the sub bending over backwards to please the dom……at every opportunity
ReplyDeleteAnyone want a job?
Deletehttps://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/26444498.moj-looking-lie-detector-examiner-east-lancashire/
If the role is basically that of a PO why on earth is the pay better?
Deletethe more fascistic & controlling the role, the better the pay... they have to reward their acolytes
DeleteConsidering the UK legal system's official position mirrors the science, ie polygraphs aren't reliable enough to prove someone is lying, which is why they're kept out of criminal courts, I've never understood why Probation uses them, they measure stress, not whether someone is lying or not, which is why you can be trained to beat them. It's just another Probation tool to fool ourselves we are assessing risk accurately
Deletesome people just love knowing how stressed other people are though
DeleteDoes the NSD still start its officers off on band 5?
Deletememo to jess phillips mp: I heard your anger on the radio today. You are right to be angry AND you are right to point out that the frontline staff - courts, probation, police, whoever - are NOT the culprits (mostly, anyway).
ReplyDeleteThe problems lie deep in Whitehall & parliament, where ideologues with power & influence create idiotic vainglorious projects to embed their power within 'the establishment'. Those from particular institutions know the rules of the rigged game & play it so well. Nothing significant changes because they don't want it to. It doesn't suit their ongoing agenda for maintained power & wealth to expose their pecadilloes, the nepotism, their career-ending follies.
YOU will know this better than many. You will have had glimpses inside the filthy machine, the shadowy acts, corruption, bullying, and abuse of power in general. Mostly by men. For their own gratification. At the expense of women And you will also know there are women who collude, who take the shilling to be quiet, who facilitate the abuse of their sisters for their own benefit.
So what is the choice? Does remaining a member of that parliament require you to hush your mouth? Are you prepared to walk & dish the dirt? Will that see you silenced in other ways?
epstein, al-fayed - both were responsible for the vile abuse & deaths of numerous women. They demanded, expected & received silence which enabled their crimes to persist unstopped for decades. Governments are silent for fear of being brought down, while women are trafficked & traded & killed. Rapists within the Met; and the Police more broadly. Serious sexual & violent offenders who roam our streets, protected by others' silence. Incompetence doesn't help, but the rot is at the heart of government, & whitehall, & the gentlemans clubs & the culture of powerful men. How does trump remain in power?
THEY are the issues that need t be addressed, NOT another fucking lesson to be learned or report or review or set of guidelines or policy documents.
To be very clear here, Jess, its not YOUR fault. Its the fault of the establishment, the system, the 'centre'.
* If anyone is in contact with Ms Phillips, please fwd this to her.
Filth machine brilliant that culture remains in Napo the senior management the police and their ilk.
DeleteMost PO’s would love booking the punters up to a lie detector every week
ReplyDeleteHooking
ReplyDeletePqip is nonsense it’s not a proper qualification if anyone can convince try McDonald’s probation
ReplyDeleteIndeed once they abandoned social work principles probation finished. We only have a certified bunch of automatons who deliver
DeleteJack shi** of anything valuable and who have no analytical skills.
I am too long away from current practitioners to provide an assessment of all probation workers.
DeleteWhilst many will have come in without social work training or (in 1973 even an awareness of the discipline of social work) I know that many through their experiences of front-line probation and the prompts they get from whatever training they are exposed to it is very likely that many become competent (good enough) social workers - as I hope I became.
I remember that it was my predecessors who requested training and so consequently the Rainer House process began via the Inspectorate and various academic establishments introduced social work type training and then the Home Office seconded folk like me to those courses of which they approved and we got to a universal system where the CQSW or equivalent was mandated. That led to the DIPSW and eventually probation officer aspirants were offered an alternative route.
"Rainer House! Those were the days, my friends.
Before generic social work expanded our vision.
JACK PORTER
Sheffield"
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epdf/10.1177/026455058303000422
Being registered as a Probation Officer, has, ironically, or not, meant much less autonomy, not more. Much less respect from other agencies and still a lack of identity and proper purpose. It's a rebranding or attempt at assurance and being prideful that does neither.
ReplyDeleteProbation Mickey Mouse
ReplyDeleteI noticed an edit to the contributor's comment in the blog.
ReplyDeleteThey had originally written *But hold up a sign saying "Plasticine Action"*.
Was the edit yours, or a function of auto-correct, I wonder?
I am, of course, presuming the contributor intended to write 'Plasticine'.
Anon 08:49 Correct and amended. Thanks.
DeleteI can't help but wonder if our current CJS has reached a point where it now beyond repair, and a whole new system needs to be created across the board?
ReplyDeleteApart from the chaos of the early release scheme, I read this week that prison wings are being closed under the guise of renovation to hide staff shortages and high levels of sick days being taken.
I read too that the MoJ may have to close down more prison space because of dangerous levels of radon that is effecting several of our victorian prisons as the building materials used are starting to decay through age.
I also read that whilst the MoJ are struggling to release prisoners early, they have at the same time decided to increase prison punishments, increasing the number of added days a prisoner can be awarded from 42 days to 84 days.
https://insidetime.org/information/mean-spirited-and-unjust-why-the-mojs-new-rules-risk-undermining-rehabilitation/
It seems that every policy that is introduced has an alternative policy that works against it.
Within my social group there is a retired probation office ((CQSW) who is very left wing in their views. There is also a retired prison officer (10 years a block screw) and extremely right wing in their views. There is also a couple of ex-cons (old lags now and also long retired) who's views stretch in betwwen.
However, regardless of political opinion, everyone is on the same page with the CJS. It was never perfect, but it worked well. More importantly, it was respected.
The police caught the offenders and brought them before the courts. The courts heard the case, weighed up all the circumstances and decided on the most appropriate punishment. If that happend to be imprisonment then the convicted person would serve two thirds of the total sentence and be released without any post sentence supervision. For those sentenced to two years or longer the possibility of being granted parole after one third existed, and if granted release came with the provision to engage with probation services. No consent, no parole.
The public respected this process. Their was never any outcry that someone hadn't been given long enough, or someone was being released early on parole. There was never any media or victims making headlines demanding that someone serve the amount of time that they wanted to see them serve. The system was respected. The sword and the scales, and what ever decision the courts arrived at, or who ever the parole board released was just acceped as part of the overall process.
Probation was respected too. It worked to resettle and rehabitate those being released on parole, not by enforcement and control, but by support and encouragement.
The CJS needs to go back to somewhere near to what it was. Each agency needs the freedom to do it's own job and achieve its own specific purpose, what it was designed to do.
The CJS needs to assert itself and not be driven by the court of public opinion because pandering to one group will always upset another group.
It may not of been perfect, but there was a time when it all worked so well, and its really not all that long ago.
'Getafix
Basically I think Blairs labour government laid down hundreds and hundreds of new laws and sentence options increasing the complexity of the whole system, they then laid the foundations for privatisation of the Probation Service which the Conservatives gladly delivered (to its downfall). Much like this country's tax system everyone always adds to it but never looks to simplify the system. More layers of management are then needed, plus 'experts', analysts, specialised units, teams etc etc all just to try and work out what the frick is going on half the time. Just Slim the machine down and like you say go back to doing the basics brilliantly
DeleteDon't think it straw left the open door in law for full dismemberment the Tories took it up. Clauses like that were well known cross party plans.
DeleteAs for SW values all long gone and you have to see why. Alcohol homelessness disorganised and shoplifter no fill out caseloads. We are not help any longer. We manage more danger serious risk and volatile nasty people and SE for this group goes down badly. Why be ause they are in the main in route to heavy end offending. DV is no joke torturing abusing women children is not the mark of a possible fix. Trying this on with the management these days is a waste of time none of them have ground roots up experience. They count number contact and demographics. Maintaing anti this or that. The population is very brown today or mixed as you see it and these cultures are not what probation originally was able to assist fix and produce great outcome stories. The aggression in community based case work says it all. Recent violence to our colleagues and the new security measures could not have been envisaged in 78. Doing our daily on a computer than popping over to court as routine . All the role posts have changed and to deliver the core of today no SW case is required . Shout outs about only pi can do the job is farcical because none of the senior government have any idea on doing the job we do but still decide what they believe they want us to provide. They think they could do any job as does most po titled staff when in fact anyone marginally able to file can do the simple and now with ai assistance most difficult summaries to manage any difficult case. I'm sorry to say it but these are our current realities. Until we define what cases in the types of offending we see can be worked with we won't shift. That requires the re imagined professional work of writing a proper psr sir whatever label you like.
Apologies for the bad type errors above and delete editor I don't intend to aggravate just frustrated how we got to this job not the job I was recruited for.
DeleteI have heard similar about dangerous staffing levels at major prisons as well as closing wings under the pretence of restructuring…………every move made by central has been the wrong one, local control now is the only answer……
ReplyDeleteAndrew’s comment led me to this one. Where do I sign up? What a gem ….
ReplyDeletePROBATION FORUM
SALARIES AND SERVICE
Going home early—still daylight—on the false New Year’s Eve of 30th December 1977 with a three day week behind me and a four day week in prospect, I contemplated the pleasure of leisure.
My musings took account of the needs of youth and age and suddenly there came to me a solution to the problem of the single salary scale. Pay everybody the same all the time, but let energetic, ambitious and creative young people fill most of their time with important work. Their elders, by degrees, could be fulfilled by less active work but remain fully engaged in important but less stressful roles, yet retain a full dignity and sense of responsibility.
I propose, therefore, a sliding scale of working days a week. There would be six days a week for those in their 20s, then five for the 30 plus group, four for the 40s, three for the 50s, two for the 60s and finally, one day a week for those over 70.
Explained simply and applied to the Probation Service, the scheme would work like this. Assuming newcomers with a CQS joined the service at around the age of 23 to 24, there would be normal confirmation a year later. There would follow several years intensive experience at six days a week. During this time all officers would have to cover and master the full range of work being undertaken by the service. Then, soon after the 29th birthday, each individual would undergo a rigorous evaluation by the 40 plus age group. The standard would be exacting and doubtful contenders dismissed but others at age 30 would work five days a week at what is now termed top management level. Rather like Plato’s guardians they would be above acrimony and strive to think great thoughts. Their vigour and drive, supplemented by their brief but wide and recent experience would turn their visions into actions. The tendency to arrogance would be tempered by the knowledge that no individual power could last for more than ten years yet the continual renewal of the management team would ensure that it never stagnated.
At 40, tired perhaps by so much responsibility, officers would welcome a four day week, back with clients but giving much time to supervising, observing and selecting the 20 year olds. The mature 50s and 60s could give of their knowledge and skills to clients and their wisdom to the management. Then for one day a week, the septuagenarians could do some gentle counselling and supportive work. Finally, if at 80 anybody wished to offer services, there could be an honorary ancillary role. Think of the possibilities of an integrated team!
There would be no emotional scenes at retirements. Just simple ceremonies every decade with some group experience or rites du passage organised by those with training in anthropology to denote the transition in responsibility.
The difficulty over salary scale vanishes. The age/days a week formula would be applied to a total “kitty” or Wages Fund and all staff would receive the same. Amounts due to the elderly as superannuation or retirement pension would be allocated to the fertile young as children’s allowance. The details would have to be worked out just as special provisions would have to be devised for those joining after their early 20s. Possibly as a concession to spouses and children, permission could be given to start at 30.
First published March 1978
Probation Forum
Jack Porter, Robert Waters, Martin Wright and W.A. Griffiths
Probation Journal
Volume 25, Issue 1
https://doi.org/10.1177/026455057802500109
a fine piece of creative thinking uncovered at a critical point in time! I'd be happy with 2 days a week.
DeleteMe too - 3 days a week would be perfect!
Deletehttps://www.hellorayo.co.uk/hits-radio/kent/news/safer-kent-probation-services-need-bolstering
ReplyDeletehttps://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/ipp-prison-injustice-vera-baird-b3029977.html
Deletehmpps - the torture (and the misinformation) never stops
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgxjdlzy9xo
"The family of a 13-year-old boy killed in a hit-and-run say they are "devastated" after being told the driver who caused his death has had his sentence reduced.
Whiteman was originally sentenced to six years and nine months in prison and banned from driving for eight years and four months but, after Kaylan's family appealed, High Court judges increased the sentence to nine years.
Now, the family has been told Whiteman can be released under licence as early as this autumn as part of the UK government's Sentencing Act early release scheme."
Then it reads:
"We've had a letter from the prison service, saying his sentence is being reviewed as part of the Sentencing Act 2026, where there's been a remodel, and as a result of that his sentence has been reduced to four years, of which he has to serve at least half."
So is this article really saying that an initial sentence of 6 yrs 9 mths was INCREASED to 9 yrs at the High Court, but REDUCED to 4yrs by the Sentencing Act 2026?
* May 2024: "Whiteman was sentenced to six years and nine months' detention in a young offender institution for death by dangerous driving after pleading guilty at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court on Tuesday, April 30."
* July 2024: "Harley Whiteman, 20, from Hirwaun, South Wales, has had his six years and nine months’ sentence quashed and a nine years’ detention imposed after it was referred under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme."
* Aug 2026: "Kaylan's family say they have since been informed Whiteman has had his sentence reduced to four years, and is due to be released on licence in the autumn."
___________________________________________________________
"Under the previous rules, most adult offenders served either 40% or 50% of their sentence in prison before being released to serve the rest of their sentence in the community under licence conditions... Offenders convicted of some of the most serious offences generally served two-thirds of their sentence before release...
... From 2 September 2026, these release points change. Most adult offenders will now be released after serving one-third of their sentence in prison, while those who would previously have served two-thirds will instead be released after serving half of their sentence."
For a sentence of 9 years in 2024:
40% ~ 43 months = est release approx. Oct '27
apply SA26: 33% ~ 36 mths = est release approx.May '27
How does any of this add up?
The High Court must be pretty pissed off.
oh, forgot to look at the 2/3 model:
Delete9 years at 66% = approx 6 years or ~2030
Apply SA26 & 9 years at 50% = 4.5 years or ~2028