Here you go Marmite. No sooner than you ask how long before the start of the backlash...... 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2095484/Ken-Clarke-sparks-anger-opposition-longer-jail-terms.html

 

Don't mean to repeat you with this link Arv but just to make the link live.

What's happened to a filtering system for old and minor offences?

Yea i have just seen this on the BBC news tonight. It sounds good news but then again its been leaked out to the public so i wont count my chickens just yet. It is only words no action yet.

---

Only 2'699 days left on my SOPO,ROA,SOR

We all accept our crimes but should we be punished more for it?

Ben230

I for one am afraid that the proposed changes will be shot down in the press.

Yes I all so think this as well

---

Only 2'699 days left on my SOPO,ROA,SOR

We all accept our crimes but should we be punished more for it?

Reading some of the comments on the Sun and Mail papers is very shocking.

Very true, last year my son who is a sparky worked at Cardiff jail a new wing was built....Each prisoner, had his own cell, sky, dvd/cd player, Tv, heated cells....Man these mp's r living in a land of make believe....Put oaps in jail as they will get 4 meals a day and no heating bills 2 pay.

4 meals a day / sky tv / heated cells I did not get this when I was in prison. where was he then HMP Savoy

---

Only 2'699 days left on my SOPO,ROA,SOR

We all accept our crimes but should we be punished more for it?

Hi all,
It looks like someone with a 2 or 3 year community order (12M from end of order) will have longer to wait than someone who is imprisoned for 6 months (12M from end of sentence)! Is seems ludicrouse that an offence not deemed suitable for imprisonment remains declareable for longer than one that is!

Any thoughts?

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2010-2012/0109/amend/su109-viib.htm
Government finally introduces the changes to LAPSO BILL.
Not sure what happens to the suspended sentences.
Anyone knows?

But screw your courage to the sticking place, And well not fail.
AT

Heres a link to the suns reporting on the subject if you haven't seen it yet

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4105946/Anger-as-Ken-Clarke-goes-soft-on-cons.html

Post Edited (crabbies) : 03/02/2012 12:10:08 GMT

No my mistake, should be ok now.

Dear Andy,

Thank you. I expected it. Thats the reason I decided to scoot. Can earn wonderfully elsewhere than wait for these tossers! I will be back. I will get my passport without a doubt. But I take this as a challenge. Again being on a lucrative post overseas will do no harm on return. Rather than live with a stigma of a CRB check and worry.
cheers
RG

Atleas its a start. Hopefully they will amend it to the lines of Dholakia Amendment. In France once the debt to society is paid back thats it. UK is more socialist in many things than many countries
RG

Dear XL,

The French laws are amazing. There is a clear cut distinction between minor incidents(Crimes) and their treatment of suspended sentences is far more fair than in UK. There are separate courts to deal with different crimes.

I have read a lot on their Laws. Their suspended sentences are strict. But If you comply with their conditions and do not re offend during the operational period which could go upto 3 years, the sentence is erased. But if you reoffend unlike in UK, they will make sure you will have to serve custody, no more suspensions.

Now incidentally the LASPO bill amendments will also open a Pandora's box. I am sure many of the members of this forum would have witnessed, from their time in Probation that a lot of petty repeat offenders could be seen doing unpaid work. I saw a group smoke weed and even offered me weed. To such folks whether a sentence is spent or not makes no difference. I spoke to many out of curiosity. Some gun runners, some dope peddlers, some petty thiefs, some part of gangs that had terrific experience on how to run rings around the probation supervisors.

I had to do 60hours unpaid work and finished it up quickly so that I could escape from that mad , deluded world. I was taken to a club to mow the lawns. Most of the chaps sat in the club house smoking pot. The supervisor was with a newspaper. I was out with a mover trying to do something. A lot of them shouting at me to stop. One said they aint gonna pay you m8! The supervisor ''Take it easy man!''. Then a few breaks for food, coffee, chatting. Its a joke. The whole system.

I was treated specially because I helped fix the supervisors' laptop problems. Great Britain is where it is because of all these things.
RG

Dear XL,

Please check the next thread by Chris Stacey where I posted by mistake more info. Short term sentences do not figure in their CRB disclosure at all. And ones which have been expressly ordered by the courts, alone get disclosed.
cheers
RG

Post Edited (RG) : 08/02/2012 14:03:54 GMT

Dear Captain Sensible,

Yes but atleast they are thinking change now after 37 years. Unless spent convictions are wiped clean and strict rules to prevent employers from using conviction info to discriminate for posts which do not involve working directly with children and vulnerable adults happens its pretty much the same story.

Talking of violence there is no distinction between summary sentences and ABH and GBH . All attract the same rehab periods even though the law says summary offense should carry their own rehabilitation periods.

Take my case for disciplining my son, I was accused of Battery u/s 39 but the consequences are as bad as any other. I found a person who received a community sentence, I know another who received a fine, another a suspended sentence for similar ''Offence''. Until serious change comes about we have to endure.

cheers
RG

Dear Peter,

Thank you for agreeing with it. Its incredible, this country. I am not criticizing. On the one hand they say people have to get back into jobs and today there was a headline highlighting the huge number of households without any working individuals as the cause of the recession and gloom.

Then red tape, new rules, health and ****ty (apologies for the pun), so many direct and indirect hurdles prevent people from leading a free life. It has been an eye opener. Necessity is the mother of all invention. The system is what it is. The lack of a sense of urgency speaks for itself. I do not expect any major changes to be ushered in. After these rules kick in May 2013, maybe they will wait for a few years to analyze the changes before even thinking of what needs to be done. By that time a generation would have lost their earning potential and prime time.
cheers
RG

Rash,

This is just not enough, how on earth does the government expect ex offenders to regain control over their lives??? They are totally against discrimination, but when it comes to someone who comitted an offense and served his/her time discrimination goes out the window, along with everything else. People should be made aware, that anyone who has spent time in prison is persecuted for the rest of their lives, but it is not just the ex offender, it is also his/her family that also suffers, if you ask me, offenders are better off in prison, they are protected there, when they come out the HELL begins. Where is the justice in this, the way the law is now gives no insentive for an offender not to re-offend. I feel better for getting this off my chest

---

by sharing a problem it gets less, sharing love it grows

by sharing a problem it gets less, sharing love it grows

Hi Christopher Stacy

The difference pre-96/7 was that the CRB question was rarely if ever asked by employers (eduction and training). In some cases you had to sign a Consent Form on acceptance of a job but this was not necessarily followed up. Perhaps they just wanted the option if you turned out to be a "problem".

The absolutely huge difference was that in those "golden" days your "Spent" convictions did not show up!!! Can you even begin to imagine how joyous that was? I happened to work in education and training (with young and vunerable people) pre conviction; during the time the conviction was live, and then with the "spent" convictions for over a decade, without incident. I was employed in FE until I left in 2002 to raise a family. It was some 5 years later when I tried to return to work that I realised it was now impossible to even secure an interview if you ticked the "yes I have spent convictions" box. If however you answered "no" to that question, you would get an interview, and you'd then go through the charade of explaining it when you were offered the job.

My gripe is that the 96/7 change has effectively ruined my otherwise successful and blemish-free career. Even though I have good references etc etc I feel like I am just not prepared to go through the "game" with employers, and have to drag up and relive something that happened over 25 years ago. The Taxpayer has subsidised my part-time education up to Masters level, and yet this small change in the law prevents me from putting something back into the community. I would not "volunteer" on principle. And I will not accept a "Mac Job". So it looks like I will be a burden on the Taxpayer for life. I just don't care any more. I could not have done more to establish myself as a good, hard-working trustworthy person. My record of promotions at work supports this. So to be suddenly "written off" halfway through your working life, 25 years post-conviction is really hard to stomach. I have zero faith in the State and almost wish I hadn't bothered with wasting my life studying and working.

This doesn't actually achieve anything. If your record becomes "spent" sooner that's very nice - but there are still over 45 occupational fields where your spent convictions will be disclosed due to full disclosure rules, and that includes pretty much every career, profession or aspirational job, even data processing in public sector as clearly you cannot be trusted with personal data!!!

So great if you're happy with a Mac-Job but of no help whatsoever to those who really want to make a change and have a good career. Rest assured Employers will discriminate as soon as you tick "Yes" to the 'I have Spent Convictions" box. This question should not be allowed on Application Forms. It should only be asked when a job offer is made, thus making it harder for employers to discriminate.

The real "elephant in the room" is whether spent convictions should be disclosed. If they are spent then that should be the end of the matter unless you reoffend. I think convictions for violence are possibly never spent - so that leaves stuff like petty theft and someone with a spent conviction for petty theft hardly poses the same risk as someone like Ian Huntley.

Until this is addressed there are millions of "reformed" people who are unable to find decent jobs. And these people were told in Court (pre 96) that after a period of time "it would be as if it never happened" - the state has moved the goalposts and gone back on its word here. If these people are in effect denied a chance to start again and follow their career aspirations then is it surprising if they spend a life on benefits or return to crime? How many teachers, doctors, lawyers, nurses took or still take drugs? How many have convictions for minor theft? If they have been in continuous employment since pre-96 they are free to carry on, but if they take a career break or try to change jobs they will find they can no longer work in their chosen profession.

I've emailed the first 250 MPs (alphabetically) and I have received a reply from ONE ! No-one is making this point clearly or loudly enough and if we don't make our voices heard we will "miss the boat".