Total Pageviews

Monday, 27 June 2016

Prisoners driven to self-harm by ‘no end’ sentences

The government cannot contradict them self by saying  Ipps are a risk  their no more a risk than any other prisoner.

Prison,s let out dangerous prisoners every single day,  murders etc .... how do they know  there not going to be a risk again.

The government are totally to blame:Parole board delays , poor resources and management means prisoners are being left languishing in jail with no end in sight.

(IPP) are turning to self-harm as they see no end to their detention, a new report has warned.

Figures show that for every 1,000 people serving an IPP there were 550 instances of self-harm – far higher than the rate for prisoners given fixed sentences, which is 324.

The controversial sentences were introduced in 2005 but scrapped seven years later by then justice secretary Ken Clarke who has described them as a “stain” on the justice system.

But more than 4,100 prisoners are still serving the “discredited sentences”, which mean they can only be released once a parole board is convinced they are no longer a danger to the public.

The Prison Reform Trust charity, which carried out the research, said a lack of resources, parole board delays and poor management means prisoners are being left languishing in jail with no end in sight.
The charity said four out of five convicts given the sentence have served their minimum terms but are still stuck behind bars.

Peter Dawson, incoming director of the Prison Reform Trust, said: “This report shows the growing toll of despair the IPP sentence is having on prisoners and their families, years after its abolition. Urgent action is needed.
“The Government should convert these discredited sentences into an equivalent determinate sentence, with a clear release date, and provide full support to people returning to their communities.

“Only then will the damaging legacy of this unjust sentence finally be confined to the history books.”
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “The number of IPP prisoners has reduced over the past year. 

However, we recognise there are problems in the system which is why the Justice Secretary has asked the Parole Board to urgently look at how we can improve the way these offenders are handled.
“Dedicated prison staff provide support to thousands of prisoners at risk of self-harm or suicide, including those on IPP sentences – often saving lives.”

Prisoners serving 'discredited' IPP sentences 'self-harming in despair'

Figures show that for every 1,000 people serving an IPP there were 550 instances of self- harm - far higher than the rate for prisoners given fixed sentences, which is 324.

The controversial sentences were introduced in 2005 but scrapped seven years later by then justice secretary Ken Clarke who has described them as a "stain" on the justice system.
But more than 4,100 prisoners are still serving the "discredited sentences", which mean they can only be released once a parole board is convinced they are no longer a danger to the public.
The Prison Reform Trust charity, which carried out the research, said a lack of resources, parole board delays and poor management means prisoners are being left languishing in jail with no end in sight.
The charity said four out of five convicts given the sentence have served their minimum terms but are still stuck behind bars.
Peter Dawson, incoming director of the Prison Reform Trust, said: "This report shows the growing toll of despair the IPP sentence is having on prisoners and their families, years after its abolition. Urgent action is needed.
"The Government should convert these discredited sentences into an equivalent determinate sentence, with a clear release date, and provide full support to people returning to their communities.
"Only then will the damaging legacy of this unjust sentence finally be confined to the history books."
Mr Dawson said it is time to "take a more radical approach" to dealing with the prisoners.
He told the BBC Radio 4 Today Programme: "This is a group of people which is uniquely disadvantaged in the system and those rates of self harm, although self harm is rising across the prison system, they are startlingly different from other groups of prisoners including other people serving life sentences."
He admitted some of the prisoners are people who "pose a risk" but said the criminal justice system should give them suitable but finite sentences.
He added: "This sentence was an aberration. What we do is we sentence people by the nature of the offence, by the seriousness of the offence, the only major exception to that are people who have committed murder.
"For everything else we say you must serve your time in relation to the seriousness of what you did, and when it comes to an end you are on licence and you are supervised and you can be recalled to prison.
"But we don't say we might keep you in prison for the rest of your life because we are not sure."
Indeterminate public protection sentences were introduced to keep dangerous criminals whose crimes were not serious enough to warrant a life sentence off the streets.
But far more were handed out than anticipated, swamping the parole board and leaving convicts "trapped in the system", Mr Dawson said.

Friday, 24 June 2016

ipp,whose brother is serving ten years for a ten-month sentence.Ministry of justice are talking the same story for the last number of years that we the families began to log evidence of letters past and present . Ministry of justice at the very top used the media to gloss over and mask the truth.

Indefinite prison terms 'psychological hell'

Thousands of prisoners in England and Wales have no idea when they will be released - even though they have served their minimum sentences.
It is because of Imprisonment for Public Protection - and although no new sentences have been handed down since they were scrapped in 2012, many prisoners are still serving them.
The BBC's Victoria Derbyshire has been speaking to Shaun Lloyd, who served three times his recommended prison sentence, and to April Ward, whose brother is serving ten years for a ten-month sentence.



Monday, 13 June 2016

Ipp Prison Sentences Ministry of Justice written question – answered on 9th June 2016.

Those working for us 

Andrew Selous demonstrating his lack of commitment and  conclude his only investment is in himself and what makes him look good!

Photo of Andrew Selous Andrew Selous Assistant Whip (HM Treasury), The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice

The sentence of IPP was introduced in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for offences committed after April 2005. They were abolished in 2012 by the Coalition Government.
The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) does not disaggregate spending on IPP prisoners from spending on all prisoners.
It is a priority for us to help remaining IPP prisoners progress towards release, when it is safe to do so, including by giving them opportunities to complete relevant interventions and work to reduce their risk of harm and risk of reoffending.
The ongoing work to improve progression opportunities is continuing to achieve results, with 512 IPP releases approved by the Parole Board in 2015, the highest number of annual releases since the sentence became available in 2005.
The release dates of prisoners serving IPP sentences, once they have completed their tariff, is entirely a matter for the independent Parole Board. The Board will direct release only if prisoners’ risks have been reduced to a level that may be safely managed in the community.


Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 6 June 2016 to Question 38441, what estimate he has made of the date by which all prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection whose tariffs have expired will be released.

Photo of Andrew Slaughter Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice)

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 6 June 2016 to Question 38441, what additional resources have been allocated to the management of prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection in the last 24 months. 9 June 2016 

Friday, 10 June 2016

IPP.By Judge Dennis Challeen TO Michael GoveJustice Secretary !

A message to the new Justice Secretary Michael Gove

Michael Gove
We want them to have self worth, so we destroy their self worth
To be responsible, so we take away all responsibility
To be part of our community, so we isolate them from the community
To be positive and constructive, so we degrade them and make them useless
To be non violent, so we put them where there is violence all around
To be kind and loving people, so we subject them to hatred and cruelty
To quit being tough guys, so we put them where the tough guy is respected
To quit hanging around losers, so we put all the losers under one roof
To quit exploiting us, so we put them where they exploit each other
We want them to take control of their own lives own their own problems
and quit being parasites, so we make them totally dependent on us
Author -

Queens Speech: Biggest prison shake-up in England and Wales “since Victorian times”

Six new ‘reform’ prisons are to house 5,000 prisoners by end of the year. The designated reform prisons are: HMP Wandsworth, HMP Holme House, HMP Kirklevington Grange, HMP Coldingley, HMP High Down and HMP Ranby.
These prisons will give unprecedented freedoms to prison governors, including financial and legal freedoms, such as how the prison budget is spent and whether to opt-out of national contracts; and operational freedoms over education, the prison regime, family visits, and partnerships to provide prison work and rehabilitation services.
A new regime of transparency will hold governors to account, with comparable statistics to be published for each prison on reoffending, employment rates on release, and violence and self-harm.
The government will use legislation to extend these freedoms much further – enabling prisons to be established as independent legal entities with the power to enter into contracts; generate and retain income; and establish their own boards with external expertise. The proposed changes amount to the biggest structural reform of the prisons system for more than a century.
“Nowhere is reform needed more than in our prisons,” said Prime Minister David Cameron. “For too long, we have left our prisons to fester. Not only does that reinforce the cycle of crime, increasing the bills of social failure that taxpayers must pick up. It writes off thousands of people. So today, we start the long-overdue, long-needed change that our prisons need. No longer will they be warehouses for criminals; they will now be places where lives are changed.
 These new freedoms sit alongside the government’s commitment to replace decrepit, ageing prisons with modern establishments suitable for the needs of prisoners today – to be built with £1.3bn of investment announced at the Spending Review. More autonomous reform prisons will follow later this Parliament. And the 9 new-build prisons announced at the Spending Review will be established with similar freedoms.”
Responding to the Queens Speech, Justice Secretary Michael Gove said: “Prisons must do more to rehabilitate offenders. We will put governors in charge, giving them the autonomy they need to run prisons in the way they think best. By trusting governors to get on with the job, we can make sure prisons are places of education, work and purposeful activity. These reforms will reduce re-offending, cut crime and improve public safety.”
Penal reformers welcomed the proposed reforms but with caution. Frances Crook, Chief Executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “It is hugely encouraging to see that prison reform is at the front and centre of today’s Queen’s Speech. There is no public service in such disarray as the prisons, and the rising number of assaults, deaths by suicide, and incidents of self-injury show that the need for change is urgent.
“Ultimately, the success of these reforms will depend on whether the government introduces positive measures to tackle overcrowding by driving down prison numbers.”
Juliet Lyon, Director of the Prison Reform Trust, said: “It’s good that prison reform is at the top of the government’s agenda – for far too long prisons have been our most neglected, least visible public service. The most pressing priority is to restore prison safety and stem the catastrophic rise in suicides, violence and disorder.
More freedom for governors, long overdue access to modern IT, sensible plans for release on temporary license and constructive use of tagging to curtail liberty should all be part of a modern justice system.
But reform will run into the sand unless government is prepared to tackle prison numbers and introduce major sentencing reform as part of its groundbreaking Prisons Bill.”


Friday, 3 June 2016

IPP.There are so many problems with the sentence despair is not getting through to the government because of so many barriers .



Families are lobbying  the injustice of the IPP  sentence and informed that  they need a majority of a 100.000 before you can be heard in parliament to stand a chance of tabling questions to the house.This will be challenging  since  there are   4000 families .  The  UK  is not totally  aware of the sentence or its existence.

I question why the  FAMILYS have to  lobby since the  ipp sentence is an on going injustice the government are aware of little of the continuing problems surely they would want to know   but the  families are BATTLEING  to demonstrate  the suffering and despair  by having to continually lobby there MPs. 

What I found to more disgusting is    HUNDREDS of MPs ignoring letters of pleas from the family's and don't reply and a lot of the  Ministry of justice correspondence is repetitive with know transparency .

There has been  accounts of  Lords correspondence stating get a solicitor? The IPP is a specialist area and needs a barrister and but have they overlooked the government took away legal aid?

There are so many problems with the sentence it is causing  despair as the ples are not getting through  because of  the obstacles put in place and as a resulted had lead to a record of deaths and attempted suicides because there unable to cope with this everlasting sentence and no end date .

The author, Bob Knowles, August 2011 has served 9 years on the IMB at HMP Wandsworth. He wrote in a  in a personal capacity back then  The rise, impact and hoped-for death of IPPs
IndependentI was only vaguely aware of IPPs when they emerged from the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 2003 and were first implemented in 2005. It was reading the expressions of despair and anger they provoked in contributors to a blog that opened my eyes to what this law with its taunting hints of freedom can do to people’s minds. The writers were nearly all family members and friends of IPP prisoners, struggling in the limbo of not knowing when if ever their loved ones would be released. They wrote stark accounts of personal despair and familial breakdown which filled countless pages of this blog from 2007 onwards and made me think that, as a member of the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) in a large local prison with its own proportionate number of IPP prisoners, I could perhaps offer occasional support to these people, many of whom were clearly at their wits’ end.
Lord Hurd of Westwell refers to ‘… the havoc caused by a pre-occupation with risk and the resulting ill-thought- through legislation. Independent Monitoring Board, from insidetime issue August 2011

31 May 2016
Sickening injustice Kafkaesque conditions for the release of IPP prisoners | Letters 
Kafka could indeed have been invented for an indeterminate penalty of civil protection (IPP), but it is even more unjust as the article described in ( Defunct law that holds thousands of prison is branded absurd Clarke 
Not only the men, women and children to spend a few years back the tariff set by the judge, but when they are released in the license to live. Last year, 363 people were returned to prison after suffering years in prison, only to serve through the years throughout the parole process again.
Last week, I met with the prisoner’s family had been given the tariff for one year. After 13 years, he is still in prison. When he is released, probably a couple of years, he will be the life of the license and subjected to recall at any time. Only after another 10 years, he can apply to have the license removed. So far, no one has done this, so we do not know whether it will ever be granted.
We are mass incarceration in this country, not just the scale of the US, but not so very far away. We need to learn from the Americans, who deals with mass incarceration by reducing the excessively long prison sentences. IPP has been deleted, but is still with us – and will be for decades if we do not just get people released, but to deal with the validity of the license envisaged by legislation of Franz Kafka.
Frances Crook
CEO, Howard Federal Penal Reform
Guardian, the BBC, the reform of the prison Trust and Ken Clarke are performed an invaluable service re-exposing the injustice and inhumanity ever visited thousands of prisoners in England and Wales who have served the “punishment” period of time punishment, but still so far punished for crimes they can not prove they did not commit in the future if released – a kind of punitive, indefinite remand certainly unprecedented in a democracy for peace during. Ken Clarke, the Justice secretary to be removed for an indeterminate sentences of public protection (IPP) in 2012. The figures are the Ministry of Justice website either hopelessly out of date or do not distinguish between the IPP and the (very different) for life, or both, but the BBC says there are still about 4000 little hope of ever released, and that nearly 400 have served more than five times the time penalty of their sentences. proposed a simple solution to Ken Clarke before he was spinelessly sacked David Cameron is to abandon the Kafkaesque condition for release that the IPP prisoner must meet the Parole Board that he will not reoffend (naturally impossible task), and to replace the parole board an obligation to provide for release at the end of period penalty, unless it is specific, published reasons to believe that the prisoner poses a serious threat to the public if released.
If enough MPs to receive messages from constituents call on Parliament to make this simple and undeniable change immediately, there’s outside chance that disgusting injustice finally stopped. (Labour apparent silence of the matter is incomprehensible.)
Brian Bardera

Ken Clarke abolished imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences in the UK in 2012. ‘We have mass incarceration in this country, not quite on the US scale, but not so very far off,’ writes Frances Crook. Photograph: Felix Clay for the Guardian
Kafka could indeed have invented the indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP), but it is even more iniquitous than described in your article (Defunct law that keeps thousands in jail is branded absurd by Clarke, 31 May).
Not only are men, women and children spending years past the tariff imposed by the judge, but once released they are on licence for life. Last year 363 people were returned to prison after having served years in jail, only to serve more years to go through the whole parole process yet again.
Last week I met the family of a prisoner who had been given a tariff of one year. After 13 years, he is still in prison. When he is released, probably in another couple of years, he will be on life licence and subject to recall at any time. Only after another 10 years could he apply to have the licence lifted. As yet no one has done this, so we don’t know if it will ever be granted.
We have mass incarceration in this country, not quite on the US scale, but not so very far off. We have to learn from the Americans, who are addressing mass incarceration by cutting back on excessively long prison sentences. The IPP has been abolished, but is still with us – and will be for decades unless we not only get people released from prison but deal with the licence period imposed by legislation designed by Franz Kafka.

Frances Crook
Chief executive, The Howard League for Penal Reform
The Guardian, the BBC, the Prison Reform Trust and Ken Clarke have performed an invaluable service in again exposing the injustice and inhumanity still being visited on the thousands of prisoners in England and Wales who have served the “punishment” period of their sentences, but are still being indefinitely punished for crimes they can’t prove they won’t commit in the future if released – a form of punitive, indefinite preventive detention surely unprecedented in a democracy in peacetime. Ken Clarke as justice secretary abolished indeterminate sentences for public protection (IPPs) in 2012. Figures on the Ministry of Justice website are either hopelessly out of date, or fail to distinguish between IPPs and (quite different) life sentences, or both, but the BBC says there are still about 4,000 with little hope of ever being released, and that nearly 400 have served more than five times the period for punishment in their sentences. The simple solution proposed by Ken Clarke before he was spinelessly sacked by David Cameron is to abandon the Kafkaesque condition for release that the IPP prisoner must satisfy the parole board that he or she will not reoffend (an inherently impossible requirement), and substitute a parole board obligation to order release at the end of the punishment period unless it has specific, published reasons for believing that the prisoner will constitute a serious threat to the public if released.
If enough MPs receive messages from constituents calling on parliament to make this simple and uncontroversial change forthwith, there’s an outside chance that a sickening injustice will at long last be ended. (Labour’s apparent silence on the issue is incomprehensible.)
Brian Barder


Thursday, 2 June 2016

No One Knows, IPP Prisoners and those with leaning differences and those given no end date.

There does NOT seem to be any  procedure to ensure the particular support needs of individual in prison are  are  recognised.
I express concern that adults with learning disabilities and other impairments may not be receiving the right to a fair trial, enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as a result of their difficulties in understanding prison the legal and judicial process.
There needs to be routine screening and assessment to identify adults support needs .
Nothing is fair about a system where things are not explained or understood and where people are not properly represented or protected, and the adolescent mental health services, are limited. Staff seem to have no training to help identify when adults might have particular impairments and difficulties.
Adults with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND)
The impairments and difficulties are · Learning disabilities · Specific learning difficulties, dyspraxia ,dyslexia · Communication difficulties · Mental health problems · Low literacy levels/difficulties with literacy · Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) · Autistic spectrum disorder Can affect an adult or young person’s ability to learn. They can affect their: a snap shot being behaviour or ability to socialise, eg they struggle to make friends
  • reading and writing, eg because they have dyslexia
  • ability to understand things
  • concentration levels, eg because they have ADHD
  • physical ability
A request can also be made by anyone else who thinks an assessment may be necessary, including doctors, health visitors, prison parents and family friends. Commenting on the Criminal Justice Joint Inspectorate report,
Juliet Lyon, Director of the Prison Reform Trust, said: “This report reveals that at every turn people with learning disabilities caught up in the justice system are being let down by a failure to recognise and meet their needs. Often vulnerable and isolated, people with learning disabilities are getting little or no help to understand and navigate a scary and incomprehensible world of police stations ,courts and prison . “In light of this report, the government must honour its Care not Custody promise. 
While the two million-strong coalition, led by the WI and the Prison Reform Trust, welcomes the recent commitment to fund an extension of liaison and diversion trial sites in police stations and courts, it notes that resources have been reduced and the timescale for delivery for a full national service delayed from 2014 to 2017. “For too long people with a learning disability, many of whom should be diverted from police stations and courts into social care, have ended up in prison as a default option, while others are left without the support they need as they continue through the justice process.” Number serving are serving IPP sentences for relatively minor crimes such as burglary ABH with no release date. Numbers not been given courses to prove to the petrol board they are no longer a risk they have to prove they want reoffend , because there not allowed on the courses they have sentences with no release date. 
The prison reform trust 09/09 2015 The study heard from family members, including parents, grand-parents, siblings and partners of young people and adults with particular needs such as mental health problems, learning disabilities or autism in contact with criminal justice services. 20-30% of people in prison are estimated to have a learning disability or difficulty that interferes with their ability to cope with the criminal justice system. 26% of women and 16% of men said they had received treatment for a mental health problem in the year before custody.
Mental health and learning disability care25/11/2015 Sir, Far too often people with mental health needs or a learning disability become caught up in the criminal justice system. Dyslexia is a hidden disability thought to affect around 10% of the population, 4% severely. It is the most common of the Specific Learning Difficulties, a family of related conditions with considerable overlap or co-occurrence. Together these are believed to affect around 15% of people to a lesser or greater extent. Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLDs) affect the way information is learned and processed. They are neurological (rather than psychological), usually hereditary and occur independently of intelligence. 
They include:
Dyslexia. Contrary to popular misconception, Dyslexia is not only about literacy, although weaknesses in literacy are often the most visible sign. Dyslexia affects the way information is processed, stored and retrieved, with problems of memory, speed of processing, time perception, organisation and sequencing.
Dyspraxia Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD), also known as Dyspraxia in the UK, is a common disorder affecting fine and/or gross motor coordination in children and adults. This condition is formally recognised by international organisations including the World Health Organisation. DCD is distinct from other motor disorders such as cerebral palsy and stroke. The range of intellectual ability is in line with the general population. Individuals may vary in how their difficulties present; these may change over time depending on environmental demands and life experience, and will persist into adulthood. An individual’s coordination difficulties may affect participation and functioning of everyday life skills in education, work and employment. Children may present with difficulties with self-care, writing, typing, riding a bike, play as well as other educational and recreational activities. In adulthood many of these difficulties will continue, as well as learning new skills at home, in education and work, such as driving a car and DIY. There may be a range of co-occurring difficulties which can also have serious negative impacts on daily life. These include social emotional difficulties as well as problems with time management, planning and organisation and these may impact an adult’s education or employment experiences. 
Dyscalculia Dyscalculia is characterised by an inability to understand simple number concepts and to master basic numeracy skills. There are likely to be difficulties dealing with numbers at very elementary levels; this includes learning number facts and procedures, telling the time, time keeping, understanding quantity, prices and money. Difficulties with numeracy and maths are also common with dyslexia.
ADHD/ADD. Signs of Attention Deficit (Hyperactivity) Disorder include inattention, restlessness, impulsive, erratic, unpredictable and inappropriate behaviour, blurting out inappropriate comments or interrupting excessively. Some people come across unintentionally as aggressive. Most fail to make effective use of feedback. If no hyperactivity is present, the term Attention Deficit Disorder should be used: these individuals have particular problems remaining focused so may appear 'dreamy' and not to be paying attention. People with this condition are very easily distracted, lose track of what they are doing and have poor listening skills. By failing to pay attention to details, they may miss key points. Autistic characteristics can co-exist with the conditions described above. Those affected often demonstrate unusual behaviours due to inflexible thinking, over-reliance on routines, a lack of social and communication skills. People with Asperger Syndrome may have learned to largely conceal their problems but still find any social interaction very challenging and panic easily when they cannot cope. Since Specific Learning Difficulties are still not adequately understood in all schools many children and young people slip through education unidentified and unsupported.
Be aware that similar terminology can lead to confusion. For example, the term 'Learning Difficulties' is generally applied to people with generalised (as opposed to specific) difficulties who are of low intelligence and often lack mental capacity. Many people with Specific Learning Difficulties tend to refer to themselves as having a Specific Learning Difference (both generally abbreviated to SpLDs), while others regard a label containing the word 'Learning' as inappropriate when they are no longer in education.
Areas of typical difficulty for all Specific Learning Difficulties. Information Processing.
  • Difficulties with taking in information efficiently (this could be written or auditory).
  • Slow speed of information processing, such as a 'penny dropping' delay between hearing something and understanding and responding to it.
  • Poor short term memory for facts, events, times, dates.
  • Poor working memory; i.e. difficulty holding on to several pieces of information while undertaking a task e.g. taking notes as you listen, coping with compound questions.
  • Mistakes with routine information e.g. giving your age or the ages of your children.
  • Inability to hold on to information without referring to notes.
Communication skills.
  • Lack of verbal fluency and lack of precision in speech.
  • Word-finding problems.
  • Inability to work out what to say quickly enough.
  • Misunderstandings or misinterpretations during oral exchanges.
  • Over-loud speech (which may come across as aggressive) or murmuring that cannot be clearly heard.
  • Sometimes mispronunciations or a speech impediment may be evident.
  • Lateness or difficulty in acquiring reading and writing skills. Some dyslexic adults have severe literacy problems and may be functionally illiterate.
  • Where literacy has been mastered, residual problems generally remain such as erratic spelling, difficulty extracting the sense from written material, difficulty with unfamiliar words, an inability to scan or skim text.
  • Particular difficulty with unfamiliar types of language such as technical terminology, acronyms.
Sequencing, Organisation and Time Management.
  • Difficulty presenting a sequence of events in a logical, structured way.
  • Incorrect sequencing of number and letter strings.
  • Tendency to misplace items; chronic disorganisation.
  • Poor time management: particular difficulties in estimating the passage of time.
Direction and Navigation.
  • Difficulty with finding the way to places or navigating the way round an unfamiliar building.
  • Weak listening skills, a limited attention span, problems maintaining focus.
  • A tendency to be easily distracted, inability to remain focused.
Sensory Sensitivity.
  • A heightened sensitivity to
  • noise and visual stimuli.
  • Impaired ability to screen
  • out background noise or movement.
  • Sensations of mental
  • overload / switching off.
Lack of awareness.
  • Failure to realise the consequences of their speech or actions.
  • Failure to take account of body language.
  • Missing the implications of what they are told or interpreting it over-literally.
Visual Stress. Some people with dyslexic difficulties may experience visual stress when reading. Text can appear distorted and words or letters appear to move or become blurred. White paper or backgrounds can appear too dazzling and make print hard to decipher. Example of Visual Stress: Coping Strategies. It must be emphasised that individuals vary greatly in their Specific Learning Difficulties profile. Key variables are the severity of the difficulties and the ability of the individual to identify and understand their difficulties and successfully develop and implement coping strategies. By adulthood, many people with Specific Learning Difficulties are able to compensate through technology, reliance on others and an array of self-help mechanisms - the operation of which require sustained effort and energy. Unfortunately, these strategies are prone to break down under stressful conditions which impinge on areas of weakness. 
Effects of stress. Research and self-reporting both concur that people with Specific Learning Difficulties are particularly susceptible to stress, compared with the ordinary population, with the result that their impairments become even more pronounced. As a result of their difficulties, many people with Specific Learning Difficulties have little confidence and low self-esteem. Areas of Strength. On the positive side, Specific Learning Difficulties are also linked to a range of skills. These include 'big picture' thinking, problem-solving and lateral thinking abilities, an instinctive understanding of how things work, originality, creativity and exceptional visual-spatial skills. Famous individuals with Specific Learning Difficulties include Einstein, Churchill, JFK, Agatha Christie, Richard Branson, James Dyson, Sir Jackie Stewart, leading artists, architects, engineers, entrepreneurs, sportsmen and many stars of stage and screen. Not all people with dyslexia and related difficulties will have outstanding talents, but all will have comparative strengths and often demonstrate great perseverance and determination.
IPP Sentence
Despite its abolition in 2012, the effects of the disastrous IPP sentence continue to be felt by the 4,614 people still in prison, three-quarters of whom have already served their TIME, the minimum time they must spend in prison. A Parole Board facing significant resource pressures, and an increasing backlog of cases, means that many continue to be held years beyond what was anticipated, with little or no prospect of AN END OR release.
Firstly, many prisoners on IPPs have not committed the kind of crimes for which IPPs were designed, but less serious ones. Secondly, there was inconsistency in sentencing even for serious crimes – some prisoners who have committed identical crimes are IPP prisoners, some are not.
This is clearly unjust. Thirdly, IPP prisoners have “indeterminate” sentences, which means that they never know exactly when they will be released, unlike normal prisoners. The effect of living under this level of stress and uncertainty means that IPP prisoners are significantly more likely to suffer mental health issues than other prisoners.
Research indicates that they may be twice as likely to suffer such issues. Fourthly, many of the courses which IPP prisoners are required to complete before they have any chance of being released, are not easily available or not allowed on them . Not all prisons provide them, and / or there is a long waiting list for many courses. 
Through no fault of their own, therefore, many IPP prisoners are unable to “prove” that they are no longer a danger. Fifthly, IPP prisoners, even if released, are on licence for at least 10 years, and can be recalled to prison at any time for even minor offences. They are never allowed to put their crime behind them, because their licence can be extended indefinitely. Their official sentence length is 99 years.
So is anything being done about this?
The government abolished the IPP sentence on December 3rd 2012, so no more could be imposed after that. However, it did nothing at all about the 5-6000 prisoners still serving IPP sentences, and has consistently refused to tackle the problem, saying that more and more IPP prisoners are now being released. Unfortunately, the Parole Board has such a backlog of cases to be heard that according to the MOJ’s own figures, it will take about 9 years at the present rate, for all IPP prisoners to be released (currently around 4,700 in all) – by then all will be over their tariff. In 2012 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that indeterminate sentences breached prisoners’ human rights, because of the fact that rehabilitative courses were not being made available even after the tariff had been served, yet still the situation has not improved.
What are the alternatives?
  • The Government has the power to change the release test for IPP prisoners, in accordance with section 128 of LASPO 2012*
  • The law already provides for long licence periods for ordinary prisoners who need close monitoring on release, by “extended” sentences**. These could be applied to IPP prisoners.
This would give a definite release date, to end the injustice
*Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 **The judge decides how long the offender should stay in prison and also fixes the extended licence period up to a maximum of eight years. The offender will either be entitled to automatic release at the two thirds point of the custodial sentence or be entitled to apply for parole at that point. If parole is refused the offender will be released at the expiry of the prison term. Following release, the offender will be subject to the licence where he will remain under the supervision of the National Offender Management Service until the expiry of the extended period.
I further underlined what I would like to see change
  • To request the Secretary of State for Justice to exercise their power to change the release test for the IPP prisoners under Section 128 of the LASPO Act, for an effective system in place that works
  • and the IPP sentences to be converted into extended sentences, as changing the release test will not necessarily get rid of the "99-year-licence" problem.
  • (the Lord Chief Justice agrees that these are the options available for change)
At the very least, the Government must increase the number of Parole Board members, so that hearings can be held more frequently and reduce the current backlog and delays.
  • Learning disabilities. Investigate the failure to provide accommodation and aids for those with learning disabilities as a result have may serve longer custodial sentences than others convicted of comparable crimes. Limited supply with long queues for these and for Parole Board reviews. People who are mentally ill, on medication or have learning disabilities are effectively barred from these courses and barred from the only route out of this awful maze, does not the Disability discrimination Act apply in prison.
I would like your thoughts on "Lex posterior derogat priori"..... · "Lex posterior derogat priori"..... more recent law prevails over an inconsistent earlier law. Can this be applied to this situation, where the IPP has been abolished, but the earlier law is still in force for those who received an IPP before it was abolished?
Reasonable adjustments and adequate alternatives
High Court of Justice ruled that the Secretary of State had failed in its duty at providing reasonable adjustments and adequate alternatives for an prisoners effectively barred from the Thinking Skills Programme because his IQ fell below the required programme admission criteria.
Pipeline to Prison:
Special education too often leads to jail for ... bipolar disorder to learning disabilities like ... lead to more arrests and jail time, OFTEN SPENDING DOUBLE THE TIME comparable to others without DIFFERENCES?
Jez Owen Abit is concerned about them intergrating people with personality disorders into their so called Risk Assessments. Their risk assessments are perceived risk calculations and are fictitious anyway. So then to start intergrating yet more calculations based on most likely poorly diagnosed assessments of personality disorders will only create more victims of a system that discriminates, persecutes and causes undue trauma on both their subject and family. Best to give everyone an equal chance to get on with their life and stop trying to tell someone's future. There are millions of people with personality disorders and alot are successful business men and women. Don't judge a book by its cover. Thank you Jez you have a valid point .This is the same for those with dyslexia ,dyspraxia and other..... they see these as risk, and if your a risk your likely not to be released or spend double the time compered to others.
“One young man in an recent ruling was told by a judge unlikely see a release until his behavior is consistent.How can you one be consistent with impairments ? 
It is all good and well to demonstrating however it is lobbying that changes laws a majority vote we need and to get that means we  need an army Everyone we can get to post to there MP.
 What does lobbying?
Who is my Mp! Enter your postcode, on the right side of the link
“You can make a difference !
what can i do ?
Template letter for MP

Dear .........................................MP
As one of your constituents I would like to Lobby the ipp prisoners and those with learning disabilities , to table questions to the house regarding the injustice. I would be happy to talk to you further about my concerns in person.
I really care about this issue because ADD PERSONAL STORY HERE or add the line this issue has deeply affected my family.
Look forward to hearing from you soon
Yours sincerely,