The reporting of the u-turn by the government on early release of prisoners has certainly been confusing, if not misleading. The government can only blame themselves as they tried to spin the story from the off and no-one really understood what they were announcing. It seems that prison overcrowding has now reached an unmanageable level (even allowing for those prisoners they are loosing) so they are going to release up to 25000 prisoners in the next year in order to free up 1800 places.
But this is been a problem that has been waiting to happen. The government have been repeatedly warned and, just a month ago, were still saying that early release was not an option. Now, days before Gordon takes over, they have had to change tack. Probably not the start he wanted.
The idea of the prisoners being released early seems shocking at first. They have been given a sentence, they should serve it. On closer inspection it appears that they will only be released 18 days early (and, according to the Lord Chancellor they are still "under licence" although it is difficult to see how that will be effective). 18 days doesn't seem bad, after all, if you have served 4 years what is two weeks between friends. However, for those on shorter sentences it becomes more important, 18 days might not sound much but if you have been sentenced to 4 weeks then it is half your sentence. More worryingly is the precedent it sets, if 18 days why not 3 weeks, then why not a month etc.
Now, you see, if I was a judge I would simply start tacking an extra 18 days onto every sentence I set.
3 comments:
Sorry it would appear I'm doing it again. Ok its always good to start with the facts. This is the ruling currently as it stands and I quote "New release arrangements introduced in April 2005 mean that those prisoners serving standard determinate custodial sentences of 12 months or more will serve half of the sentence in custody and the second half on licence in the community. During the period of licence the offender may be recalled into custody if they commit a further offence or break the conditions of their licence."
So prisoners will get a further 18 days off this amount however, will still be under license as they would anyway. How does it well now we come to the root of the problem. Since the government changed probation rules i.e probatation officers can no longer use common sense but have to recall all who do as much as drop litter in the streets prison numbers have been going up. This again is knee jerk polotics reacting to the publics perseptions that ex offenders are running around our streets being a constant danger to society. Whilst I acknowledge some are we are using a sledge hanner to crack a nut. Example: 73 year old man suffering from alzheimers recalled to prison after his carer died and he therefore missed his probation appointment. Due to workload of probation service spent 4 months in prison till it was rectified. Still at least he did not know what day of the week it was let alone where he was. So you see not as simple as it first appears still these things rarely are. I do agree though a bit more joined up thinking is needed to solve the problems
Thank you Stuart. I was actually expecting/relying on you to add more detail and to explain a bit more of the background. I still feel however that if you are sentenced to 12 months then you should do 12 months in jail unless, as I suggested I would do, the judges are automatically doubling the sentence they hand down.
now I don't disagree with you that a sentance issued should be a sentance served. However, I do think that if we are to have a crimanal justice sytem that can both meet demand and provide punishment, deterrent and rehabilitation then perhaps we need to start thinking outside the box and consider alternatives to prison.
Post a Comment