Total Pageviews

Monday 11 January 2021

“The suffering caused by this disastrous sentence goes on... Seeking a reprieve can it be possible ?

14 December 2020 Aston Luff, solicitor, Hodge Jones & Allen, London.

Why is he in the news? The firm represented the family of Tommy Nicol, an IPP [Imprisonment for Public Protection] prisoner at HMP The Mount, who died in 2015. The family began a landmark claim alleging that the operation of the IPP sentence caused Tommy’s death, and the 

Administration of it constituted a breach of his right to life under the Human Rights Act. The Ministry of Justice has settled the claim.

Thoughts on the case: 

‘Despite the obvious injustices they cause, existing IPP sentences have proven   Tommy’s case, he was stuck in his IPP sentence, not for lack of effort or unwillingness to fulfil the requirements for his release. 

After repeated attempts to access the required rehabilitative courses, he conducted a hunger strike as a last resort. However, symptomatic of the IPP bureaucratic nightmare, this resulted in disciplinary hearings which denied him access to the very courses he was hoping to be accepted on.

 Like so many on IPP sentences, Tommy was stuck in a vicious cycle of bureaucracy and deteriorating mental health, caused by the sentence itself. Ultimately, he lost hope. Paying out damages does not guarantee that the government will get to grips with the human suffering caused by IPP sentences, so we hope that this settlement is a springboard for future change. 

The family have launched Ungripp, a campaign which sets out the changes that can be made to end the injustice.’

A prison service spokesperson said: ‘Our sympathies remain with the family and friends of Mr Nicol. 

Dealing with the media: ‘Even in the midst of their grief, Tommy’s family have always wanted to keep in mind the bigger picture, preventing others suffering as a result of the IPP sentence. Since the loss of her brother, Donna has been incredible. She has campaigned in the media, met with government ministers and supported families, to ensure that the stories of Tommy and other IPP prisoners are not forgotten as statistics. It was an important part of my role to support them in engaging with the media to help shine a spotlight on the injustice of the IPP regime.’

Why become a lawyer? ‘I previously worked at XLP, a brilliant youth work charity. Sadly, some of the young people and families we worked with were involved in court cases that left them feeling confused and helpless. I switched careers with the hope of supporting people amid tough times.’



UK government pays out to family of IPP prisoner who killed themself

"His family had begun a landmark claim in the high court, alleging the operation and administration of the IPP sentence constituted a breach of Nicol’s right to life under the Human Rights Act 1998, and led to his death. His time in prison was characterised by repeated setbacks with access to mental health care and rehabilitative courses that were crucial for him to progress his sentence and secure his release.The issues continue. n evidence seen by the Guardian, which would have been put to the high court, the consultant forensic psychiatrist Dr Dinesh Maganty said Nicol and many other IPP prisoners were caught in a vicious cycle where, in order to be released, they had to complete programmes that were not available in sufficient numbers. Together with hopelessness, led to his suicide.”

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/nov/30/uk-government-pays-out-to-family-of-ipp-prisoner-who-killed-himself-tommy-nicol?

Continue

CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR0RbzvBD9OX08fTyFRrEd7dZd5iUhE94EMxz45u4Eae_0tJu55j6d2FuDQ

Response
Such a terrible sentence; and once again the same reasons eg lack of or non availability of specific courses for IPPs to progress poor adminstration. A landmark case was brought against the government for exactly these reasons, I believe in 2012, and here we are 8 years on and nothing has changed. The judge was right  the government  admitting the sentence is wrong it's time to change it.

 ..........................................................................................................

 

Do you have a a question regarding the IPP sentence? Solicitor hope that this settlement is a springboard for future change.  is kindly hosting a free legal Q&A session for people serving the IPP Sentence

additionally  Family and advocates supporting those with a IPP sentence .

Wednesday 13th January 4pm-5pm. Read more and sign up here: LOCATION: Zoom - link to be sent following sign up , Dean Kingham who is an experienced solicitor from Swain and Co. He will talk about the current situation regarding the IPP sentence and answer any questions you may have.

Q & A Online Event: IPP Parole Hearings (google.com)

.................................................................................................................


The parole board call for more applications.

 Three IPP have had there life sentence lifted  and almost 200 are thought to eligible at present. Public appeal for former IPP prisoners to come forward and apply to have their licence terminated.   inside time,org

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1199419430458638&set=pcb.3528148893891148
................................................................................


Petition 35,581 of 40,000 signatures

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/free-the-remaining-ipp-prisoners   

Thank you for supporting this and signing this  petition. lets get this signed by the masses. Prisoners, Family, Friends, Advocates, Media, and Supporters not forgetting staff working for the Prisons ….                       

 

                   

Email

Hello, IPP Campaign group

I am an IPP who has been released over 5 years with no issues etc since being released. 

However, probation refuse to support me when it comes to my suspension of supervision. 

Do you have any contact details of legal firms that have actually successfully challenged probation and their client is no longer under supervision?

I have spoken to many solicitors and none of them know much about IPP and none of them have successfully challenged probation.

They say they can help etc and it will cost x amount. However, all they want is money and have no real interest at heart,which is why I want a proven professional to help me.

Thanks for your time and i appreciate anything you can do to help.

Kind regards

Charles

(Name change for privacy )

 

 

 Reply

Dear Charles

Before we give you any advice it is important for me to clarify that although we have a degree of legal knowledge, we are not solicitors and our opinions are just ours.  

We take great care in trying to ensure we give correct information but we cannot guarantee that we get everything right.

I am sorry to hear of your circumstances and I am afraid I am unable to bring you the news that I am sure you would welcome. 

The decision as to whether your supervision element of your licence can be cancelled (suspended) after 4 years is one for the LRRS (Lifer Review and Recall Section) and your probation officer.  It is not a decision that you can influence with legal counsel sadly, it is one purely for those relevant departments.   One possible avenue would be to ask for a formal reply on the matter and then to seek legal counsel for a judicial review concerning the issue but I wouldn’t hold your breath.   I should also clarify that legally all that is required is for cancellation to be considered.  The prison instruction 4700 gives a clear explanation of the process in chapter 13.9 Variation, Cancellation and Re-Imposition of Licence conditions (page 6-7) in the attached 31 page document titled PSO_4700. 

There are a few exceptions where an individual does not qualify which are covered on page 7, these relate to the type of index offence.

I obviously do not know how much you already know regarding this area.  The fact is that even if you were successful in getting the supervision element cancelled, it can be reactivated at any time if something happened.  For example, if you received a caution or a complaint was made or if relevant intelligence came to light.  Once reactivated you could be recalled or put back under supervision.

You mention that you have had five years under licence with no issues, which is really good news.  If you are not already aware you are entitled under section 31A of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 to apply for consideration to be given to terminating your IPP licence 10 years after your initial release.  

So be sure to keep the date of your very first release from prison under the IPP sentence clear in your mind.  There has been a revision to chapter 13 of the PSO4700 during September this year clarifying that the ten year countdown starts from the date of initial release, so on the date of that anniversary be sure to send a formal application direct to the Parole Board requesting that under the said mention rule they consider terminating your licence. 

 If you are unsuccessful then reapply every year thereafter.  I have attached the relevant revision (Annex A) for clarification.  I personally recommend that people send the requests to the parole board because it is your right to do so and it removes any potential hostility between you and your probation officer.  The parole board will direct her/him to supply the relevant dossier and assessments when they commence your request.  So there is no need to go through your probation officer at all to instigate the process and unlike the request to cancel the supervising aspect, if you are successful in this request the licence is terminated permanently and cannot be reactivated. 

In relation to legal counsel, it is not necessary in this area unless you are being denied your right under section 31A to apply for consideration to be given to terminating your licence.  Legal representation will have little effect on the parole board’s decision however if after a few attempts you are not able to secure the termination then it would be prudent to seek legal counsel.  You would then be in a position to give the previous decisions and reasoning to the solicitor who could then make an informed assessment as to how to proceed. 

Stephenson Solicitors had a dedicated team to handle issues regarding IPPs, I also know a very good barrister called Dean Kingham who works for Swain and Co Solicitors.  We always recommend good legal counsel where it is appropriate, especially when seeking release representation.  If you have not at any point challenged your IPP sentence then this would be a worthwhile area to look into because changes were made during the early years of the IPP sentence’s use to the qualifying remit.  Unless your sentence has been properly assessed by an IPP specialist solicitor like Dean Kingham then you may have been incorrectly issued the sentence by the sentencing judge in the first place.  A specialist solicitor could identify whether this is the likely case and if successfully challenged you could have that sentence obliterated. This would be a far more worthwhile area to spend money on if you are in a position to do so.

I hope we have been able to help in some way.

Best regards

IPP Campaign group.

 


 

Email 

Dec 10, 2021

I am a Clinical Psychologist working with a man who is currently wishing to appeal his IPP. We would really benefit from some guidance and support with this better and thinking through what his options might be. Would this be something you are able to help with?

Many thanks in advance 

Dr,  Mark Wakes  


Clinical Psychologist 
Project Lead
Project Future 

(Name changed for privacy )

 

 Reply

Dear Mark , 

Thank you for contacting us and yes I can give you some direction in this matter. 

It is most important that he gets in touch with a competent specialist solicitor who has experience in handling the IPP sentence.  If he did not appeal his sentence after it was issued there is a possibility that after proper reassessment he may be able to have the sentenced challenged.

There were changes made to the qualifying remit a few years after the sentence came into use because it quickly became evident it was being woefully over used. 

 One solicitor known to a member of the group is Dean Kingham, there are of course others.  I have put a link to his contact page below and a few other relevant solicitors.   Obviously it is wise to approach a number of specialist solicitors so tell him to have a good look through the Inside Time newspaper. 

 The first thing to do is probably the most difficult, that is for him to compile as much information about his conviction as he can but to put the information down as simplistically as possible, like a list of bulletin points.   You do not want to overwhelm the solicitors when you approach them initially but you want to provide quick and easy points to help them evaluate and respond reasonably quickly, they will ask for additional information as and when they need it.

.Vital information they will need:-

 

Name, prison number, location

Date of conviction, Court and ideally trial and sentencing judge

Type of conviction

Sentence minimum term

Whether the conviction was challenged

Did the sentence get challenged?

Any successful parole’s containing dates of release and recall

Date of last parole

In a short paragraph the reason given for his last parole refusal

 

Once he has done that and written out a good number of copies he is then ready to start sending them out to the relevant solicitors. 

Solicitors will take time to reply, he should however follow up each one with a polite chase letter containing a copy (if possible) of the original letter after 30 days if he receives no reply.  Be sure that he adds a degree of desperation in the chase letter and tells the solicitor how this sentence is affecting his mental health. 

I would also advice not informing them at this early stage whether he will need legal aid, this may switch some solicitors off straight away because of the complexities of handling cases under this provision.  They may ask this question in their reply which is fine but hopefully they will have given him an idea as to whether they are in a position to offer the specialist assistance he would need and if they do not deal with Legal Aid cases then he should always ask them for assistance in locating a suitable barrister that will.

I hope this helps.

Best regards

IPP Campaign group.


Links below to relevant solicitors

 https://www.swainandco.com/team-view/dean-kingham/

https://www.stephensons.co.uk/site/individuals/srvcriminal/appeal_solicitors/ipp_sentences/

https://forrestwilliamssolicitors.com/news/imprisonment-public-protection-ipp-solicitors/

https://www.hinesolicitors.com/services/prison-solicitor/ipp-prisoners/

https://www.tuckerssolicitors.com/prison-law/ipp-prisoners/

 

Email

Dear IPP Campaign group,

Thank you for this information, this is incredibly helpful. Thankfully we had started compiling most of the information you suggested and reached out to a couple of solicitors, with no luck so far. Your additional list of contacts is very helpful. Can I ask, from your experience are there solicitors/barristers who do consider legal aid for these matters? So far that has been the main challenge for this client.

Many thanks again

Mark Wakes 

(Name changed for privacy ) 

Reply pending 

And if anyone would like to write a list could be compiled in Thank you in advance. 


Email 

Dec1st, 2021

Hi Katherine 

My son is in his 12 year of an IPP currently at..........., withheld). he will be there for approx 2 more years before even being considered for open prison he getting old, my  sister raised my awareness of the the blog and petition and thank you for the good work you are doing my mother is 97 now and Jason phones her everyday as the likely hood is he will never see her again this is so wrong x

 


IPP Prisoners face cycle of release and recall.

Inside Time Reports11th December 2020

 

A growing number of people with Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences are stuck in a cycle of being released and recalled, being released and recalled ove and over ,a report has warned.

Of more than 8,000 people who were handed the indefinite sentences before they were abolished in 2012, there were 1,895 still in prison awaiting their first release as of September. However, this was almost matched by the 1,357 who were back in prison having been released and subsequently recalled.

Researchers from the Prison Reform Trust said the number on recall had almost tripled in five years and was likely to carry on rising due to difficulties faced by people after their release.

The findings, based on interviews with recalled IPP prisoners, probation officers and Parole Board members, pointed to problems including:

Licence conditions which prevent working or rebuilding family ties;

Lack of support from probation officers;

Recall for petty reasons when no further offence has been committed.

Once back in custody, IPP-sentenced prisoners faced difficulties in securing their re-release including not knowing what was required of them.

The report found that many people with IPP sentences suffered mental ill health due to their difficulty in coping with indefinite incarceration, yet felt unable to tell authorities about their difficulties because mental ill health could be cited by probation officers as a risk factor to justify a decision to recall.

One IPP-sentenced person is quoted in the report saying: “So long as I’m under IPP I have no life, no freedom, no future. I fear IPP will force me to commit suicide. I have lost all trust and hope in this justice system… Each day I feel more and more fear and dismay and I am starting to dislike life. . . . I have to suffer in prison in silence. Accept it or suicide. That’s my only options left.”

The report’s title – No Life, No Freedom, No Future – is taken from the quote.

The authors call on the Government to make the abolition of IPP sentences retrospective, with everyone still on one being resentenced. They also say IPP licences should be reviewed, and removed if they no longer needed, five years after a person is first released, rather than 10 years as under the present rules.

In a foreword to the report, Lord Brown of Eaton-Under-Heywood, a Justice of the Supreme Court from 2009 to 2012, states: “I have no hesitation in describing the continuing aftermath of the ill-starred IPP sentencing regime as the greatest single stain on our criminal justice system. As, moreover, this report demonstrates, it grows ever-wider.”

He says of the IPP prisoners still in custody: “Whether detained under their original sentences or recalled … they all now (together with their families) exist in a Kafkaesque world of uncertainty, despair and hopelessness, indefinitely detained unless and until they are able to satisfy the inevitably difficult test of persuading the Parole Board that they can safely be (re)released.”

 

The Prison and Probation Ombudsman (PPO) has investigated said 56 self-inflicted deaths of  prisoners serving the same sentence in different prisons  IPP sentences. What does that tell you?

…………………………………………………………………………


Inside times, some cases involving IPP prisoners.

 

The following case studies highlight examples of these cases.

Case Study A

Mr A, who was 35, received an IPP sentence for robbery with a tariff of two years and nine months. After five years in custody he was released, but three years later he returned to prison when he breached the terms of his licence.

During the three years after his return to prison, he repeatedly told staff he could not cope with his sentence and sought help from healthcare for anxiety. He was often challenging to manage.

Three weeks before he died, Mr A was moved to the segregation unit after he and two other prisoners barricaded themselves in a cell. That evening, Mr A made cuts to his wrist and staff began ACCT procedures. He was assessed by the mental health team, GPs and a psychiatrist. He was offered medication for anxiety and depression but often refused to take it because he said it made him feel worse.

Mr A said his IPP sentence was “killing him” and that he was concerned at plans to recategorise him from category C to B, which he feared would mean a move to a prison further from his family. He repeatedly told staff that he would kill himself after his next visit from his family.

Mr A’s mother visited him a week later. On the same day, he was told he was being recategorised to B. At an ACCT review that afternoon, staff considered that Mr A’s risk of suicide and self-harm had increased but they did not increase the frequency with which he was checked (which remained at once an hour). In the early hours of the next morning, an officer found Mr A hanged in his cell.

Case Study B

Mr B entered custody as a teenager on a short minimum tariff. When he complained to the PPO, he had been in prison for over 10 years. He had recently been recategorised from C to B and transferred to a new prison. He believed these decisions were unfairly impeding his progress.

Mr B believed that returning to his previous prison was important for his release because he had been working well with his therapist and had access to an onsite therapeutic community, a facility his new prison lacked.

Mr B wrote to us about the decision to recategorise and transfer him. Our investigation found that while Mr B had worked hard to reduce his risk of serious harm, we also found evidence of poor behaviour and control issues, and did not uphold this part of his complaint. Further, we agreed that Mr B’s behaviour presented a challenge to the prison and likely had an impact on other prisoners.

We were concerned about the case more broadly, however. While we found that efforts had been made to secure a progressive transfer for Mr B, he was essentially still in prison due to his poor behaviour. We felt that a failure of provision (specifically – the inability to locate Mr B with a therapeutic community and the inability to address his decline in behaviour) were preventing Mr B from making progress. We called for a review of the case and that this review should assess Mr B’s sentence plan and provide further support for progression.

Case Study C

Mr C received an IPP sentence with a tariff of three years. After seven years in custody, the Parole Board recommended a transfer to open conditions to prepare for release. He was recategorized to D and transferred, and was looking forward to proving himself and working towards his release. Later that year, he was approved to begin community work, made eight unescorted visits in the community and completed offending behaviour programmes.

Two days before Mr C’s death, he was accused of assaulting a prisoner and was moved to the segregation unit during the investigation. While there, Mr C was safety screened and assessed, at which point he said he was fine and made no complaints. The following morning, a duty manager visited Mr C and recorded that he seemed in good spirits. That afternoon an officer delivered a letter confirming Mr C was being transferred. It read: ‘It is alleged you assaulted another offender. You are to be moved to closed conditions pending police investigation’. That officer delivering the letter recorded that he took the news well.

Mr C was assessed by staff on arrival in his new prison. They were told he had not self-harmed, did not have a history of depression or thoughts of suicide, and concluded that he was not at risk of suicide. At reception, however, he called his father and said: ‘All right man, it’s coming back here and all that going through the same procedure again, feel like proper locked up again not even getting up’.

That night Mr C was not placed on special monitoring measures as he was found to not be at risk. At morning roll check, he was found hanging with jogging bottoms tied around his neck. Arriving paramedics assessed that he had been dead for some time.

Our investigation found several issues with the management of Mr C’s risk of suicide. During the two days he spent in segregation, he was assessed as not being at risk of suicide. We did not find staff had considered that Mr C’s new circumstances had increased his risk as an IPP prisoner. We also found that on arrival at closed conditions, again staff concluded that Mr C was not at risk of suicide. There was no evidence that staff had considered that Mr C’s transfer might have added considerable time to his sentence.

We recommended that prisons should ensure that all the known risk factors for newly arriving prisoners are fully considered and documented when determining an individual’s risk of suicide and self-harm.


As at September 2019, 2,059 prisoners continue to serve an IPP sentence in custody. We are aware of initiatives in HMPPS to identify, and prioritise, those cases where people are over tariff and not progressing towards release. These include progression units in some prisons and a review of all cases. We will continue to record, and share, the learning from our investigations as it relates to the IPP sentence and its impact on those serving it.

 

Seeking a reprieve possible?

Would it be possible to get a reprieve from Queen’s to temporarily  prevent the IPP setence from continuing for good.

To have a reprieve would give IPP Prisoners relief from further Mental Harm (especially after being relieved of continued distress)

Has been proved that the Administration of the IPP prisoners sentence caused inmates  suicide. The IPP Sentence no longer exists though people still serve the sentence and continue to go round in circles.

IPP sentence has a shocking Death toll. These MOJ numbers are said to be inaccurate. The total deaths are 215, with 72 of those by suicide. 


Moj figures of  IPP Prisoners Deaths

2005:0     2006:2       200:7

2008:9     2009:7       210:12

2011:14   2012:10     2013:12

2014:19   2015:16     2016:11

2017:26   2018:22     2019: 1?

Total Deaths 167

 

FOI IPP suicides from the MoJ

205:0         2006:2       2007:4

2008:4       2009:3       2010:3  

Total Deaths:

56 Total 287

 

 Mental hospitals: data not known. 

A prisoner with severe mental illness has won an appeal against an indefinite jail sentence after a court heard new psychiatric evidence.

Keith Nelson was raped as a child  age 12 and abused in children's' homes.The court heard he tried to kill himself a year later, and spent many years sleeping rough and living in cars.Nelson's mum died in a house fire when he was 15.

However nine years later Nelson remains in Langdon Medium Secure Hospital.

His legal team took his case to the Court of Appeal where they argued far more is known about his mental health than at the time of sentence.



                                                      High Court judge Lord Justice Dingemans


The court heard from Dr David Somekh, a consultant forensic psychiatrist, who said in his opinion Nelson's offending and risk to the public was "entirely attributable" to his mental health disorder.

Dr Somekh, alongside fellow psychiatrists Dr Jonathan Garabette and Dr Mary Linton, agreed that Nelson was best dealt with in the hospital system where he had been a model patient and was responding well to treatment.

However IPP sentences are no longer used by judges over fears that prisoners were left languishing behind bars for years, and sometimes decades, after the minimum recommended term set in court due to  poor administration. 

Lord Dingeman's agreed with the evidence of the experts, concluding in his judgment: "The first concern is that once the appellant gets to a position to be considered for release from hospital he will be sent to prison.

"Such an environment is likely to lead to a relapse of his delusional disorder because he will not take his anti-psychotic medicine, meaning that he will be returned to hospital, before being getting better and being returned again to prison.


"This means that he will "yo-yo" between hospital and prison for the foreseeable for 99 years.

"The second concern is that when finally released from prison the appellant will not be supervised by a team of mental health experts reporting to the hospital and Secretary of State for Justice but instead by a probation officer!!!

Cruel and  unseal  punishment,  life in the  system  playing Russian roulette with a IPP  prisoner life.

"A probation officer will not be trained to spot the subtle signs of mental health deterioration, and if they are identified the probation officer will not have the powers to intervene to arrest any such deterioration.

"This is a matter of particular importance because it is now apparent that the 

appellant will always suffer from some form of mental disorder, but with treatment and effective management and supervision he should progress to live as risk free as is reasonably achievable in society."

The hybrid order was quashed and a new Hospital Order was imposed, meaning that when medical experts deem it safe Nelson can be released under supervision.

 


Nick Hardwick's Tweet 08 01 2021

Epidemic spreading in prisons. Now in total lockdown. Staff shortages reducing regime further. Not sustainable for a protracted period. Can only be managed if population low enough to allow some regime. Urgent need now for EFFECTIVE early release scheme for low

 

 MARK LEECH FRSA - PrisonOracle.com's Tweet

On 1st January remember how senior @HMPPS staff named as liars and forgers in a devastating 2019 court judgment have kept their jobs, been promoted and bestowed with 'Honours' by an #HonoursList unfit for purpose.

 

 Dean kingham's Tweet

This week I spoke at Westminster Legal Policy Forum about reforming the Probation Service. I gave some examples of how poor some Probation Officers can be at Parole, but this takes some beating. Absolutely appalling!

 

Nov 24 to  Dec15

*Does anyone know anyone that has been successful after applying for this 10year or even the 4 year parole suspended! Because I haven’t. My son is an iPP. On his second recall since release in 2016! He know hundreds of ipp and don’t know anyone with success of these?

* It makes me so angry that instead of facing this and changing things they instead choose to leave people to have a life filled with uncertainty and pain. I honestly do not know how these people sleep at night.

*This solicitor has been supposedly representing my partner since August. We’ve had to change solicitors as haven’t been able to get hold of her since 5th December. He received his paper work today and she has done NOTHING! So now my partner is still in prison on recall (12 week custodial sentence) . Could have been out months ago! She hasn’t forwarded any letters we have written to the parole board, she hasn’t put in the appeal that she was meant to do can’t believe someone would do this. My kids are without their Dad for longer than should be and now probably for another few months as he has NO representations

* I pray that my brother is released soon too  its been 13 years for a 4 and a half year tariff

*One of the main recommendations following the publication of the report on the effect of the IPP sentence on families was the need for greater communication between prisons and families.

Given that fact, I would be really interested to find out how many prisons are going in the opposite direction.

In particular, i would be very grateful if you could let me know which prisons prevent you from speaking directly to the chaplaincy unless there is a serious illness or a death in the family. I'm doing some research and may take this further.

Thanks for your help!

 

*I find most category B prisons are really hard to communicate with,and aren’t very helpful.

 

*I just got released from 12 and half years on a 2 and half year IPP I got when I was 19. I should of been out when I was 21 but I’m 32 next month. I want say a big thanks to Dean Kingham and Yasmin Karabasic atbSwain and Co who know the IPP inside and out and you wouldn’t want any others representing you. you can’t beat the man who never gives up, never give up and keep going. Again, thanks to all who got me through!

 


 


 https://insidetime.org/three-officers-convicted-over-assault-on-prisoner/

 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/oct/04/covid-rules-in-prisons-blocking-rehabilitation-say-uk-campaigners

 

 Lawyer in the news: Aston Luff, Hodge Jones & Allen | Profile | Law Gazette

IPP prisoners face cycle of release and recall – insidetime & insideinformation

Investigating cases involving IPP prisoners | Prisons & Probation Ombudsman (ppo.gov.uk)

IPP Prisoners Familys Campaign: Those given IPP setence, the shocking Death toll is a National Scandal. (ippfanilycampaign.blogspot.com)

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/nov/30/uk-government-pays-out-to-family-of-ipp-prisoner-who-killed-himself-tommy-nicol?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR0RbzvBD9OX08fTyFRrEd7dZd5iUhE94EMxz45u4Eae_0tJu55j6d2FuDQ

No comments:

Post a Comment

comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.