theForum

The PPU


https://forum.unlock.org.uk/Topic28200.aspx

By xDanx - 15 Jul 20 11:33 PM

So I have been debating for a while now to contact my PPU, request information from him, ask him what risk he believes I pose and to discuss some of the things I am concerned about such as the conditions on my orders. But I have been hesitant to do so and I can not explain why. Am I scared? Very much so yes. Why? Because of the level of control he has over my life? The fact he could potentially make up anything he wants in order to make my life worse if he believes I am not following his "orders"? What ever reason it may be, either way it triggers my anxiety which makes it extremely difficult to focus and ask the right questions and to keep my composure.

I have been writing down many things I want to question and go through with him but I am always questioning if I should or not.
Should I question him about the conditions on my orders making note to the case law that ruled the conditions must be proportionate? I have in the past but I always get the same answers (he does not believe anything needs to change)
Should I challenge his previous statements? "If its not in your order then there is no restriction"
Should I include complaints on the basis that I have not seen a single shred of evidence and give quotes from the code of practice?
Should I request more information such as who drafted my SHPO and when exactly it was drafted?

Many things are going around in my head which is making it difficult to concentrate on my uni work, so any advice on this would be massively appreciated.



By JASB - 21 Aug 20 4:44 PM

Was - 21 Aug 20 3:22 PM
punter99 - 21 Aug 20 11:33 AM
The politicians brought this on themselves by insisting that every SO must be monitored, irrespective of offence type or risk level. It's their own fault.

Whilst I'd agree that the "something must be done" mentality is at the feet of politicians, the SOR is not particularly onerous. It's the excessive SHPO conditions which are the problem and manpower intensive. They are the direct result of the police and the CPS's behaviour in court looking for a "win", so they reap what they sow. I have no sympathy for any officer crying "austerity" when they have brought it on themselves.

I was told accidentally on their first visit that they viewed me as "extremely high risk". This is more down to my IT skills than anything else, as my probation report correctly identified me as very low risk. But if they want to waste time and manpower on me, that is not my problem.

Hi Was

 "extremely high risk". This is more down to my IT skills 

As someone who has been in IT since 1989 I find it interesting the uncertainty with the Police when talking about IT. I have learnt in my long life that no one knows everything about any subject as it is so vast.
The main issue with anyone when discussing IT with someone that has taken the time to study some small part of it; be that excel, web design in its basics or how to set a printer up, they do not want to be seen as not compitatant or overshadowed.

Whilst at HMP Whatton I was allowed to use skills I was recognised to have, to actually develop a system for the IT Learning centre. I also was asked to evaluate the access database application used by the kitchen staff to record inmates menu choices and for analysis / forecast requirements. My OM was really upset when the head of Kitchens contacted him to say he wanted me out of normal work hours to work on the application as he saw this as being applauded / rewarded and no imate should treated so.

Basically in the end I have learnt to offer an explanation in a polite manner if I see they are not understanding or showing confusion over an explanation.  That way they learn something, probably double check back in the office which is not a problem as importantly they start to see you in a better manner.

In the end no matter who we interface with, if the other individual lacks the information to fully understand the conversation, it is a reflection on you on the level of knowledge they leave with. I believe the PPU should also consider this when ending a "home visit"