Court: Recall on Licence updated 19 October by member Lorna Elliott LLB (hons), Barrister

 

Offenders who have been recalled to prison will receive written reasons as to why they have been recalled. This is in the form of a ‘recall pack’. If the offender disagrees with the reasons for the recall it is possible to make representations against the recall. It is usually possible to get a lawyer to help with this process.

Offenders who are not... considered to pose a high risk of serious harm to the public will be released after 28 days (presuming they have not been sentenced to further terms of imprisonment in the meantime). At the 28 day review stage, the Parole Board can either decide to release the prisoner immediately, release them at a future date, order an oral hearing, or make no recommendation as to release at all. Other offenders will not be released but the Secretary of State is under a duty to review the detention of recalled prisoners on a regular basis (usually every six months.)

If an Offender is Not Released After 28 Days
In these circumstances, it is possible to ask the Parole Board for an oral hearing at which you can call witnesses and challenge the lawfulness of the recall. The Parole Board does not have to grant you an oral hearing, but may do so if in all the circumstances it is fair to hear oral evidence.
In certain circumstances, the decision to recall may be liable to judicial review. It is always wise to seek the specialist advice of a lawyer before embarking on this course of action........................
http://www.courtroomadvice.co.uk/court-recall-licence.html

https://www.facebook.com/groups/katherinegleeson17/

 

 

 

Licence recalls tables

Table of Contents
Table 5.1:  Summary of licence recalls 1 January 1984 to 31 December 2012 and returns to custody by 31 March 2013, England and Wales	Table 5.1
Table 5.2: Summary of licence recalls to 31 December 2012 and returns to custody by 31 March 2013, England and Wales	Table 5.2
Table 5.3:  Summary of number of offenders not returned to custody, as at 31 December 2010 to 31 December 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.3
Table 5.4:  Number of offenders recalled from determinate and indeterminate sentences, by custody status, Oct-Dec 2011 to Oct-Dec 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.4
Table 5.5:  Number of offenders recalled and not returned to custody by quarter, by offence,(1) as at 31 March 2012 to 31 March 2013, England and Wales	Table 5.5
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/offender-management-statistics-quarterly--2
Table 5.6:  Number of offenders recalled by 31 December 2012 and not returned to custody by 31 March 2013,  by Local Criminal Justice Board, England and Wales	Table 5.6
Table 5.7:  Length of time between recall and return to custody for recalled offenders, Oct-Dec 2011 to Oct-Dec 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.7
Table 5.8:  Length of time since recall for those not returned to custody, Oct-Dec 2011 to Oct-Dec 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.8
Table 5.9:  Performance against timescales for licence recalls returned to custody by agency, Oct-Dec 2011 to Oct-Dec 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.9
Table 5.10:  Performance against timescales for licence recalls returned to custody by 31 March 2013 by agency, by  Local Criminal Justice Board, Oct-Dec 2012, England and Wales	Table 5.10
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/offender-management-statistics-quarterly--2

 

Ipp 'Forgotten prisoner' to get a case review Hockley man handed eight-month sentence for assault - but is still in jail nine years later

By Nick McCarthy 29 Sep 2013 08:55 

'Forgotten prisoner' to get a case review

  

 

Paul Rowe with his young daughter

A Birmingham dad who was handed an eight-month jail sentence but is still languishing in prison almost nine years later is to have his case reviewed – after his plight was revealed by the Sunday Mercury .
The Parole Board has vowed to review the case of Paul Rowe, from Hockley , who was given a controversial indeterminate sentence – known as Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) – at Birmingham Crown Court in 2005.
The 45 year-old former panel beater, who admitted assault and making threats to kill, was told he must serve eight months before he could apply for parole.
But although he has repeatedly appeared before the Parole Board in a bid to be released, he has been turned down each time. He is still in prison, even though IPP sentences have now been scrapped.
Paul Rowe’s story was told in the Sunday Mercury last year and since then a long legal battle has been waged.
Now a review of his case is to be carried out after the High Court ruled against the Parole Board for not properly considering his release.
The ruling has had far-reaching implications, forcing the board to change its policy on the way they consider release for prisoners like Paul.

Speaking from prison via his sister Elizabeth Smith, Paul last week told the Sunday Mercury that he feels ‘trapped in the system’ and is distraught at missing out on laying his father to rest, and seeing his daughter grow up.
He last saw his daughter nearly nine years ago, when she was just five years old.
“I have been given no updates regarding possible parole,” he said. “No-one will tell me anything or answer my questions.
“They just keep saying they don’t know yet, so I have to carry on with my life on hold.
“I feel completely trapped and stuck in the system. I last saw my daughter when she was five, and I have missed her growing up.
“I wasn’t even able to go with my brothers and sisters to lay my father to rest in Jamaica after he died suddenly of cancer.
“It annoys and hurts me to see the constant stream of habitual prisoners who come in and serve their sentence and leave and return again and again.
“I know if I was set free, I would not be coming back.”

Peter Rowe

Speaking about her brother’s plight Elizabeth said: “If this was happening anywhere else in the world we would be quick to tell that country about human rights and how primitive they were.
“But it is happening here, under our noses, and it is not talked about. Paul has been let down by the whole system.”
The jailed man’s twin brother Peter, from Edgbaston , said the authorities should take responsibility for mistakes in the case.
“It’s terrible that he has been sat in prison for going on nine years,” he said. “He has completed every single course that has been asked of him and still has no date of when he might be released.
“This has been shabby from beginning until the end. There have been so many flaws in the way they have handled his case. It’s a disgrace. This ruling may have come from a High Court judge, but it does not change his position. He is still in prison with no sign of release.
“Everybody knows that there are serious flaws, but nobody is willing to take any responsibility for what has happened to him.
“He has more than served his time for what he did – but they refuse to let him out.”
Duncan Lewis solicitors, who represented Paul in the hearing, said: “The High Court sitting at Leeds quashed the decision of the Parole Board that the applicant should stay in closed conditions on the basis that they had failed to carry out their separate duty to the applicant of considering release and a transfer to open conditions.
“Unequivocally, the judge ruled that the Parole Board had a statutory duty to consider release, separately to their secondary role to advise the Secretary of State for Justice on the suitability of a transfer to open conditions.”
A spokesman for the Parole Board said: “The Parole Board has not yet received a transcript of the judgment. However, the test required to be applied to cases like Mr Rowe’s has been in force since 2004 and all Parole Board members are trained accordingly.
“This case was decided solely on its merits and in that respect it has not changed the approach the Board should take. The Court appears simply to have decided that the Board had failed to apply the test correctly on this occasion.
“A review of Mr Rowe’s case is currently ongoing (the review period lasts six months, from the compilation of the parole dossier to the issuing of the panel’s decision and reasons) and we have no further comment to make in relation to his case.”
Paul was convicted in 2005, the same year that IPP sentences were introduced.
The Government has since scrapped IPP sentences after the European Court of Human Rights ruled that jailing offenders indefinitely without providing proper access to rehabilitation courses was a breach of human rights.
There are more than 6,000 prisoners in England and Wales serving such sentences. More than 3,500 are over the original tariff specified by the judge, and many of those could now be entitled to compensation.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/forgotten-birmingham-prisoner-case-review-6108792