Prisoner releases

punter99 - 15 Aug 26 10:51 AM

JASB - 14 Aug 26 1:36 PM

punter99 - 12 Aug 26 11:46 AM

The other day I heard something remarkable. The victims commissioner said that releasing prisoners based on how we feel emotionally about their victims is not a sensible approach. It gets right to the heart of the issue around prisoner releases and how the focus is not really on how dangerous they are, or their risk of re offending. It is all about emotional manipulation of the public.

Many of them were going to be released at the half way point anyway, until the last govt changed the rules to make them serve two thirds instead. Now the current govt has changed it back to half way again and the public are outraged. The PC Harper case is symbolic, not of how the system works, but how people think it works.

We have no way of knowing if the two men involved have changed or been rehabilitated, because we do not have a risk based release system. Instead we now have proposals to release IPP prisoners and women as an alternative, because they are seen as less controversial. Only they are not.

I have seen so many commentators on the TV saying release all women, because they are all in prison for not paying their TV licence and other such nonsense. What about Rose West and all the others found guilty of horrific child neglect and cruelty? I am sure the newspapers would quickly turn their attention to those victims once they have finished securing a u turn on PC Harpers killers.

As for the IPPs. There is no question they have suffered an injustice, but most that are still in prison are there because they have incurable personality disorders and serious mental health issues that make them potentially far more dangerous than regular prisoners. If protecting the public really is the priority then they will need proper risk assessments first,not just a blanket release scheme. If just one of them re offends, then the newspapers will demand that they are all recalled.

Oh, and we can forget about deporting foreign prisoners, because no country will agree to take them back.

The govt is running scared of the tabloids, u turning again and again on this, to buy time. But eventually they are going to have to face reality.

Hi
first you have highlighted the points well that are generally dismissed as they are not vote winners.

I have always tried to understand the "consequences" of any action; just a pity I did not do so before my offence but that is another discussion.

Much has been said about this "early release" and the pressures it will place on the systems within the "outside" services ie monitoring etc.

Most who have read my posts understand my circumstances and how 2 years ago the authorities stated they do not wish to visit me etc so my risk level is as any other individual in society.

Therefore I have to ask why will they not remove me (and others) from an indefinite SOR requirement which has gone passed the 15 year period and now having to "repeat the time period held at HMP?

I have been classed as low risk of reoffending since before my sentencing, and now the Police are not interested in me, but there time is taken up at various times within the year! This seems to be a waste of their time.
If is only an hour per month, so 12 hours a year, then multiple that by how many others are in my position, then how many man days would a simple change that was presented in a recent independent report save? Then convert that to money savings!

Slightly different issue, but still relevant. I was stunned by some of the revelations in the Simon Levy case too. Apparently his devices were full of material that suggested he was a risk, so what were the PPU doing about it? Was he classified as high risk or medium risk, did he have an SHPO, how often was he being visited? What is the point of monitoring/SOR/SHPO/MAPPA if they cannot stop people like that?

Police are trying to shift the blame on to the CPS for not prosecuting him, but it was the police who bailed him. They have a variety of options including sexual risk orders, covert surveillance and so on to keep an eye on SO, even if they are not behind bars. Outside of terrorists, we are the most heavily policed group of offenders in the country, despite 50% of all SO being categorised as low risk.