Total Pageviews

Thursday, 8 December 2016

Michael A O'Brien his new book.The updates on Topical questions.The IPPs sentence given also to the vulnerable with disability’s.



Topical questions in the House of Commons 




Our probation officers do a vital job—it is one that I value highly—in turning offenders’ lives around, and the prisons and probation Minister is conducting a comprehensive review of the probation system that is focused on improving the quality of our probation services. As with our plans for prisons, we want a simpler, clearer system, with specific outcome measures such as getting offenders off drugs, improving educational standards, and getting offenders into apprenticeships and work. We also want closer working with the Prison Service. We will set out our more detailed plans after our review is completed in April.


 What action are the Government taking to address the specific needs of women in the justice system?

We are working to ensure that we take proper account of the specific needs of women at every stage of the criminal justice system so that they receive the support that they need to make positive changes in their lives. We want to see fewer women offending and reoffending, and we will set out our strategy for how we manage female offenders in 2017.


May I give the Secretary of State another opportunity to answer my question? She told the House that she has had meetings to discuss the record levels of suicide in our prisons. Has she actually visited a prison mental health service—and if not, why not?


I have visited a number of prisons where I have discussed mental health services. I have already answered the hon. Lady’s question.


There is obviously a careful risk assessment before people are moved into open prison. I am not aware of the specific facts of the case that the hon. Gentleman has outlined, but I will be happy to meet him to discuss it.

Prisoners serving IPP—imprisonment for public protection—sentences have remained in custody long beyond their tariff and long after the coalition Government abolished such sentences. I understand that a dedicated Ministry of Justice unit is looking into the position of IPP prisoners. Will the Secretary of State tell us exactly what it is doing?

Woodhill prison in my constituency has had more suicides than any other prison this year. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that she is working urgently with the governor to address the situation?


I can assure my hon. Friend that we are working urgently with the governor to address the situation, as well as addressing the overall issue of the number of suicides in our prisons, which is far too high.

Reoffending rates among young offenders remain stubbornly high. Earlier this year, the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers said that there had been a record cut in funding for youth offending teams. What is the Secretary of State doing to address that?

The hon. Lady will not have to wait long before we release the Charlie Taylor report and the Government’s response, which will explain how we will improve outcomes in youth justice.

On her first day in office, the Prime Minister said:
“If you are black you are treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you are white.”
I am pleased to be working with Mr Lammy on a review of the treatment of, and outcomes for, black, Asian and minority ethnic individuals in the criminal justice system. What steps will the Secretary of State take to act on the emerging findings, which show that, in respect of arrests and charging, such people are disproportionately affected?

I am delighted that my hon. Friend has joined that review, to which I am sure that she will make a major contribution. Clearly there are issues throughout the criminal justice system that we need to examine, but I am certainly keen to see more diversity throughout our legal services industry and our judiciary, and we are working very hard on that.


Education budgets are being devolved to prison governors. Will each of those budgets be ring-fenced for education spending purposes?
Yes.
Given the Government’s welcome development of a corruption prevention strategy for our prisons, will the Minister look personally at the allegations of systemic corruption raised by BuzzFeed News today on the basis that this presents a serious risk of undermining our prison system?

I completely agree with my hon. Friend. While the vast majority of prison officers are hard-working and dedicated, there is a small minority that is an issue. We acknowledge that in the White Paper, and we are reporting early next year on our corruption strategy. We are also considering options for a prison-specific offence of corruption to crack down on that scourge.



Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
When the previous Labour Government changed the law so that prisoners had to be released halfway through their sentence irrespective of how badly they behaved or if they were still a risk to the public, the then Conservative Opposition were apoplectic and voted against the change. Do the Government think that the then Conservative party was wrong to oppose that change in the law?


I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier today and last week to the Select Committee.


I think this show will run—probably for some years to come. https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2016-12-06b.110.7



IPP sentence is a life sentence also given to the vulnerable those with disability’s.   


that once in court their lack of understanding grows as their lives are taken over by opaque court procedures and legalistic terminology, and in prison many are left to fend for themselves in a shadowy world of not quite knowing what is going on around them or what is expected of them. 


In the European court is against whole-life sentences.It was argued that his very hopelessness made a person dangerous. "Dr Stephanie Hill, consultant in psychology because having no hope you having little concern for others in light of his whole-life order this manifests itself in an assaults others.It me it is total madness to give young people 99 years sentence for minor crimes in comparison to those who commit much worse crimes. To warrant an IPP you would have to of had to commit 3 similar crimes all though you have punished for those individual crimes .

“One prisoner quoted in the inside time,) The IPP is a life sentence but you might as well be dead because I was given a death sentence. At least if I was dead it would put me out of my misery.”
The whole-life tariff is against all principles of international law as it denies any possibility of reform of rehabilitation. 

Whole-life jail sentences without any prospect of release amount to inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners, the European court of human rights has ruled. In its decision, the Strasbourg court said there had been a violation of article 3 of the European convention on human rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment. The judgment said: "For a life sentence to remain compatible with article 3 there had to be both a possibility of release and a possibility of review."

Thousands  were sentenced to an  IPP most are over tariff  some by 3 times  there original date.
This would effect and take down the best of people  and affect their mental state.


Mental ill-health is one of the most predominant and challenging issues in prisons this is closely associated with the unacceptably high rates of suicide and self-harm in custody. Government have got to its highest ever this year, prisoner had been identified as having mental health needs before their death. A high proportion of the Prison population has mental health needs these needs range from mild high forms of depression this can be treated with medication and support. But only if staff can be more sympathetic to prisoners when prisoners are taking medication that their behaviour could change as a result. 

A report in 2015 by the prison reform trust contained 82 recommendations (Department of Health, 2009), and most of these are being taken forward – including my recommendation for a nationwide liaison and diversion service. 

So why do we have a crises? Should we be asking for a  investigation into the government mishandling ?Who takes that on?
Death have been rising at a alarming rate, who is responsibility for 32 deaths this year 2016)? 

It is essential is for all prison staff to be educated to recognise hidden disabilities those groups more at  risk and to understand the symptoms of mental ill-health subsequently they those care and support. Staff training is, therefore is  crucial but, too often I read , these investigations have found that staff lacked the necessary mental health awareness training, therefore, the mental health needs of prisoners were neglected because signs  were missed.
 Prison staff needs to work together to develop an effective plan of care and to deliver appropriate treatment, and support so that they may be able to overcome their mental health difficulties, at least learn to manage. Unfortunately, mental health conditions cause sufferers to present difficult and challenging behaviour, which staff may deal with as a behavioural rather than a mental health problem.

"Learning disorders are born due to poor functioning of the brain and can influence the individual mental processes such as word recognition, memory, reading comprehension, auditory language processing and mathematical analysis. Learning disorders can also be associated with different types of ADHD, behavioural disorders and sensory disabilities.

Prison and probation staff was failing to identify people with learning disabilities, meaning opportunities to help those offenders were missed, according to independent inspectors. Today they published the second report of a joint inspection into people with learning disabilities within the criminal justice system.

The report, A joint inspection of the treatment of offenders with learning disabilities within the criminal justice system: phase two in custody and the community, reflects the findings of HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Prisons. The first inspection, published in January 2014, looked at what happened when someone is arrested and in police custody through to when someone first appears in court and is sentenced. Inspectors noted the poor quality of services, inefficient processes and confusion among police, court service and probation staff about what constituted a learning disability. This second inspection presents an equally bleak picture about the experience of offenders with learning disabilities in prison and while subject to supervision in the community.

The first inspection found that no clear definition or agreement exists across criminal justice and health organisations about what constitutes learning difficulties or disabilities. Although believed to be a sizeable minority, possibly as high as 30%, there is no way of knowing the number of people with such conditions within the criminal justice system. Adequate provision is, consequently, not always made by the agencies involved to cater for their specific needs. The second inspection found that within probation and particularly in prisons, identification of offenders with learning disabilities remained a problem and as a result, the needs of people with learning disabilities were often missed.

Inspectors were concerned to find: Screening tools were not used routinely by probation officers or in prisons, and there was an over-reliance on disclosure of the existence of learning disabilities by the offender/prisoner or their family;

  •   information about prisoners’ learning disabilities was rarely appropriately shared with relevant staff;

  •    practitioners were frustrated by the lack of support from social and health care agencies;

  •    some prisoners had learning disability nurses but, generally, offender supervisors did not consult them regularly;

  •   although some initiatives and guidance were being developed by national and local leaders, frontline staff and some managers were either unaware or unable to implement it;

  •   and the Equality Act 2010 makes it clear that public authorities have a duty to make reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of service users with a disability (including a learning disability), but in most cases managers and staff in prisons or probation services were not doing this.



However, inspectors also found that:
·         there were pockets of good practice and examples of staff developing supportive relationships and ‘going the extra mile’ but these were the exception, rather than the norm; and
·         Offender managers and supervisors working in the community were keen to receive advice and guidance and those with direct access to community psychiatric nurses felt supported, however, most community psychiatric nurses were not trained or experienced in working with people with learning disabilities.

·         The chief inspectors made recommendations for improvement, which included: ensuring that prison and probation services comply with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 by making necessary adjustments to services delivered to those with learning disabilities, introducing a screening tool across the prison estate for learning disabilities and adapting interventions for people with learning disabilities to help reduce the risk of re offending.

Chief Inspector of Prisons Nick Hardwick said on behalf of both inspectorates:
“In prisons we were alarmed that there were extremely poor systems for identifying prisoners with learning disabilities; in one prison we were even told that they could not identify a single prisoner who had a learning disability. 

This lack of identification is unacceptable. Even where a learning disability was identified, it was not always sufficiently taken into account in prison processes such as behaviour management or anti-bullying measures. Not surprisingly therefore, some prisoners with a learning disability told us about getting into trouble with staff or being bullied because of their learning disability.
We are also concerned that little thought was given to the need to adapt the regimes to meet the needs of prisoners with learning disabilities who may find understanding and following prison routines very difficult. http://www.mac-uk.org/wped/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Dept-of-Health-Bradley-Report-Exec-Summary.pdf

Film



By Danny Mc Dowell & Graham Keeton  http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/dannyandgraham
 https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/media/press-releases/2015/03/learningdisailitiespt2news/ 



Comments 


I would like to thank everyone who helped me with my book Prisoners in Limbo and I do hope those in Authority will take note of what the book contains.
I want to say to each and everyone of you who have loved ones locked up that you will get your loved ones out and you must stay positive. If there is anything I can do to help the cause sign petitions, letter then please let me know.
Although I was not an IPP prisoner I was given a life sentence at the age of 19 and was released when I was 32 so I know the road ahead is not plain sailing however change is going to come and you will be reunited with your loved ones.
My thoughts are with all of you and your families this Christmas and lets see a new beginning in the new year 2017.

Mccour
Just been informed my son is on a suicide watch, apparently he is struggling to cope at the moment. He has had a difficult year to cope with had a court case , which even though he was found not guilty the parole board has requested all the statements from the officers involved to be presented at the parole hearing . his probation officer went to see him for only the 2cd time in two years and accused him of showing signs of a personality disorder ,which he has since been examined and its been proved he hasn’t . I complained about her to her boss and now she has written a negative report about him for parole. He is coming up to 10 years inside in january 7and a half years over tariff and it looks like they want to stitch him up again . ive so had enough of these people , they don’t have a heart any of them . prison officers can beat our loved ones , then charge them with assault and when your family member proves in court the officers were the guilty ones and he was the victim it means nothing , They just turn to the parole board and probation to get their revenge . The bloody system is a joke , and as for them all being independent bodies I find it hard to believe . So worried about my son at the moment, he is a very strong man but they are really pushing him to his limits . sorry for the rant everyone just needed to sound off im feeling a bit stressed myself today

Adams Just to let yous know an ipp has just got release from cat C..looks like things are improving 

Zing Still going to be excessively risk averse no acceptance that is the problem . No surprises here, when u all get happy its lip service like i say they been saying things without any changes.

 does everyone know what administrative detension is? The secretary of state does have the power to release any ipp's and also even overturn a parole board decision
Ramshaw He's had an oral hearing. 5 minutes before evidence was presented. Basically a letter directing release however board was having none of release plans etc. Will hear in 14 days the outcome

Foster   I'm hoping my partner will get released on paper but I haven't heard of anyone yet 

RamshawAnyone heard of ipps getting letter from secretary of state directing release prior to oral hearing???? He got 4 year tarriff and has served nearly 12 years. They had a date in may for paper work to be submitted however hearing just happened

Chaddock Well some one needs over rule it because it was all over the news.


Umm  My oh was beaten by poilce officers and was in hospital for two years he was very sick then they put in jail and he had to go court and police officer had to be present at the hearing he also was found not guilty but he was recalled bk and the police get away with it but our loved ones don't so not fair I really hope he gets better soon and starts to heal hun I know how hard it is xxx much love


 Leigh My partner is an IPP 10 ninth tariff now down nearly 10 years 




 Foster When I rang parole board they said they review everyone's case when it gets to them and they decided on everyone's case weather they can be released on paper or not they said some may need an oral hearing before release. I hope we hear more of ipps being released on paper as it's for all ipps not just recalls


 Cooke I sincerely hope this is the case for your partner. If it is it means that the release of over tariff IPPs is being done. Fingers crossed for you..
  
 Chaddock Parole probation the same  trust me my brother did 11 years IPP 1 year44 day tariff got released June this year and recalled on July passed drug alcohol did not re offend now he's got wait till January for Orel hearing whilst they sit at home with their families MPs lick my Arse and only so much solicitors can do on legal aid some body in power needs to help get them out now they've destroyed many IPPs and their families.

Umm   got recalled and didn't do nothing wrong for him to be put back and he still sitting in jail after 2yrs and a half I really hope this parole board start letting them go on paper and we see results happening it's so hard this government need to really work there ass off to let dem go.

Killeen Difference is though most IPP'S got lifed of on first jail sentences 2 strikers been inside before (even tho a dnt agree with the way the treated) but its total different sentence.


To:  KatherineGleeson Sent: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:12 Subject: Re: IPP article on BuzzFeed Hi Katherine, Sorry for the delay - thanks for getting back to me, I'm covering a trial at the moment so I'm not responding as fast as I'd like. I'm going ahead with this article next week - and I'd be interested in speaking to one more person about this, someone who's the partner of someone serving an IPP sentence. I appreciate your point about there being a range of important stories not involving partners - but I'm always interested in hearing from people in future and perhaps I could revisit this subject in future.In any case I'll be putting pressure on the government to give answers in this.Thanks  Patrick.


 

Wholesale negligence and incompetence of NHS  Police and  Solicitors . I would like to here from you if you've had problems ....?








Monday, 5 December 2016

Treatment of prisoners serving the unjust IPP sentences is in need of urgent action.

screen-shot-2016-11-25-at-11-04-21

 

Completely unjust” that offenders serving Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) terms were languishing in jail.

The implications for many of these prisoners are profound and make for disturbing reading. Recent figures show that for every 1,000 people serving an IPP sentence there were 550 instances of self-harm. This is significantly higher than the 324 cases per 1,000 recorded among the general prison population.

Vice News reported that information from the Ministry of Justice showed 16 IPP prisoners committed suicide since the abolition of the sentence in 2012 and that IPP prisoners overall have a higher risk of suicide than the general prison population.
The high levels of self-harm are perhaps unsurprising. IPP prisoners are often simply unable to jump through the relevant hoops set by the Ministry of Justice to achieve a release date, leaving many feeling that they will be stuck behind bars for years to come, no matter what efforts they make to reform.By Claire Brihgam Hodge Jones & Allen Solicitors London180 N Gower St, Kings Cross, London NW1 2NB

IPP Prisoners no linger need oral hearing.  New strategy to eradicate backlog. Changes and ‘good plan’ to reduce delays in parole process.

As promised, I am writing a regular update on news and developments from the Parole Board. There is so much change going on within the prison and probation service and the impact on you is not lost on everyone working at the Parole Board.
I know from my visits to prisons that one of the single, biggest issues concerning many prisoners is the long delays experienced by those of you who need your parole review considered at an oral hearing. All of us at the Parole Board are determined to sort this. The Parole Board is now holding five times the number of hearings it held a decade ago but for a period of time we could not keep up with demand. We have a new strategy to improve the system however the top priority is to eradicate the backlog.
 
The Board is already over halfway to reducing the backlog, and we are focused on reducing delays even further. I am confident that we are approaching this in the right way. At the end of September 2016, there were 2,093 outstanding oral hearings, and whilst still too high (at its highest point the figure stood at 3,163) it was the lowest level since summer 2014. We continue to list close to 700 cases a month at oral hearing and where hearings have to be cancelled we are attempting to fill those hearing slots with alternative cases.
 
As covered in the last edition of Inside Time, we are running pilots to change how we prioritise cases. We are looking at different ways to manage determinate sentence prisoners, including where more executive re-releases could safely be made by NOMS and how we could increase the release on the papers. These changes are intended to rebalance the system and bring down delays for those serving the longest sentences. This is about striking a reasonable balance, but I acknowledge that these involve hard decisions and there may be an impact on some of you affected by the pilots. We will be reviewing the impact of the pilots early next year.
 
On 22 November 2016, the Parole Board Rules were changed to allow the Board to release IPP prisoners ‘on the papers’ without an oral hearing. This change brings the release provisions for IPPs into line with those for parole-eligible determinate sentences and it applies to both parole reviews and to reviews following recall. We anticipate that the new powers will be used more frequently
for recalled prisoners who have only been back in custody a short time but it can be used for parole prisoners, especially those in open conditions and the progression regime. The Rule change does not apply to life sentence prisoners who can still only be released following an oral hearing.
You may have read about the report produced in November by Peter Clarke, my successor as Chief Inspector of Prisons, about IPP prisoners. I completely agree with what he said and I have given the Justice Secretary options about how we can make further and faster progress in reducing the number of IPP prisoners who remain in prison long after their tariff.
 
Following the appointment of over 100 new Parole Board members by the Lord Chancellor, the first of our training events took place last month. New Parole Board members heard from a variety of speakers including Inside Time editor, Erwin James. Erwin spoke about his journey as a life sentence prisoner, including contact with the criminal justice system in his early life, his experiences in prison, his challenges on release and becoming a writer. He spoke about the importance of professionals and practitioners promoting self-belief and taking control of your life, and providing opportunities for change. The Parole Board also produced an excellent short video of interviews with three prisoners currently serving life sentences at a Cat C prison. The members told us how this gave them an invaluable insight into life in prison, the parole process and oral hearings from a prisoner’s perspective. I want to thank the prisoners who took part in that for their help.
 
Of course it is also important that Parole Board members hear from victims about their experiences and concerns too. We train our new members in handling victims with humanity and respect. We know that most victims are looking for an explanation of what motivated the crime, as this is never really explored at court. I have met with several victims and victims’ groups to help make sure that victims are handled sensitively and properly when they attend hearings and in my experience most prisoners who come before us want to make sure that happens too.
As we come to the end of 2016, I am hopeful that we have a good plan for what we need to do to make the Parole Board work better for prisoners and victims and what we are doing now is getting on with it.
By Nick Harwick


 

The Parole Board Rules are being revised and the changes could have a significant impact on those sentenced to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP)

The proposed changes include the ability for the Parole Board to release IPPs without the need for an Oral Hearing. With Christmas and New Year fast approaching, could this rule change make a difference to you?
 
What is an IPP sentence?
Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences were introduced in April 2005 by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The aim of the sentence was to protect the public from
those offenders who committed crimes which did not merit a life sentence. Prisoners serving this sentence would be set a minimum term (tariff) which they must serve before they could be considered for release. Upon release prisoners will be supervised on licence for at least 10 years.
Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 the Court will impose an IPP sentence when the Offender:
 
1. Is aged 18 or over;
2. Is convicted of a serious specified violent or sexual offence committed on or
after 4 April 2005, for which the maximum penalty is 10 years or more; and who
3. In the courts opinion, poses a significant risk of harm to the public.
When first in force a significant amount of offenders were subject to this new sentence. As a result the prison system was saturated with indeterminate sentence prisoners with relatively short tariffs. Many prisoners past their minimum term without having completed any offence focused work due to the prison system being unable to cater for them.
 
What has changed?
Due to the significant amount of offenders given a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection the Government made changes to the criteria required to impose such a sentence. On 14 July 2008 changes were made virtue of Schedule 8 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. As a result, IPP sentences could only be imposed if one of the following were met:
1. The offender would be required to serve at least 2 years in custody; or
2. The offender has a previous conviction for one of a specified list of very
serious offences.
 
In addition to the above the presumption of risk was removed where there was a previous conviction for a violent or sexual crime. Previously, judges presumed an offender dangerous as a result of their previous convictions. The change made in
2008 allowed for a greater level of discretion as to what sentence should be imposed
when all of the conditions for the imposition of an IPP sentence were met. The aim of this was to reduce the number of IPP sentences being imposed by Courts.
Finally, in 2012 the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act abolished IPP sentences. The IPP sentence has been replaced by Extended Determinate Sentences (EDS). The changes made in 2012 were not retrospective. As a result, whilst no new IPP sentences could be imposed, those who were already subject to the sentence would have to seek progression by the Parole Board. This
has left a significant amount of IPP prisoners within the prison service still seeking
progression.
 
Current procedure for release of IPP
The process as it stands for the progression of IPP prisoners is that the Parole Board will give consideration to their case. For prisoners’ post tariff, the Parole Board will first consider the case on the papers and either find them unsuitable for release or direct the case to an Oral Hearing. Should release not be granted, the Secretary of State will set a period of review before the Parole Board will again consider suitability for progression. This review period will depend on what is outstanding to achieve a progressive move.
Under the current regime the Parole Board have no power to direct a prisoner’s release on the papers. To achieve release, oral evidence must be taken before the decision is made. Currently the Parole Board have a significant backlog of Oral Hearings and as such there are delays in IPP prisoners appearing before the Board.
 
Rule Change
The Parole Board Rules 2016 look to revoke the Parole Board Rules 2011 and the Parole Board (Amendment) Rules 2014. The proposal is for the rules to come into force from 21 November, assuming that neither the House of Lords nor House of Commons object to the proposed changes.
Rule 14 seeks to allow the Parole Board to decide that a prisoner serving a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection is suitable for release on the papers, without the need for oral evidence. This change will not apply to any other indeterminate sentence prisoner – it will only apply to IPPs.
A number of other rules are proposed, including the requirement of a prisoner to
inform the Parole Board that they do not wish for oral consideration of their case or that they do not wish to attend a hearing.
 
What will this mean?
There is now potential for IPP prisoners to have their reviews completed earlier. Currently, release will only be directed upon the taking of oral evidence, even in circumstances where a prisoner has support from professionals involved in their case or in circumstances where a minor and technical breach of their licence has led to their recall into custody. The ability to direct release on the papers will potentially reduce delay caused by the listing of an oral hearing.
Of course there is no guarantee that the Parole Board will release IPP prisoners on the papers. More complex cases will still proceed to an Oral Hearing for the Parole Board to fully enquire into all matters relevant to a prisoner’s release. It is envisaged that the rule change will assist those IPP prisoners who have been subject to a technical breach of their licence following their release into the community and where release is more straightforward.
The 2016 Rules will apply to all cases referred to the Board; including cases referred before the date on which they come into force. As a result, cases referred to the board before the date on which the new Rules come into force will continue under
the 2016 Rules.
 
What can you do to help?
The current test for the Parole Board for the release of an IPP prisoner is as follows: The Parole Board will release an offender only if it is satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for the offender to be confined.
In order to secure release an IPP prisoner will need to demonstrate that their risk is
such that it is manageable in the community. This can be achieved by the completion of offence based courses aimed at addressing risk factors. It is also important to engage with Offender Manager and Offender Supervisor and to demonstrate compliance within the custodial setting. A resettlement plan will also assist to demonstrate how the prisoner seeks to cope upon their release back into the community.
 
What can we do to help?
We would encourage all IPP prisoners to contact us when their Parole Review commences. When the 2016 rules come into force, legal representations will be required to argue for release on the papers in appropriate circumstances. This could save the delays experienced by many prisoners in obtaining release by way of an oral hearing. Subject to your financial circumstances, assistance can be provided by virtue of Legal Aid.
 
 
 
 
 

 

COMMENTS

 
 
 
 



Andrew Sperling @AndrewSperling Politicians won't take responsibility for tackling IPP while in office. When they leave they speak up - Gove, Clarke, Blunkett .
Ben Gun @prisonerben1  Until we decide the purpose of prison, we can't say what we need from prison staff.   The indefinite prison sentence is the most vicious punishment at Governments disposal.
BrackenburyThe more I sit and think it over the more I don't understand how the MOJ and parole board, are not facing charges or being sued , getting away with something that is in every other humane aspect ILLEGAL!! It is unlawful to hold someone in prison for what they MIGHT do it's unlawful to torture a prisoner in Britain, and to their loved ones, let alone just damn right immoral and inhumane! If our loved ones can be imprisoned for their crimes, how on earth is it not applicable for the way the legal bodies behave! Think it's time that us loved ones considered pursuing a way to have them bought before the courts for still implementing and incarcerating people for a sentence that no longer exists and for almost five years now too!! My other partner  put in for compensation after they messed him around for a year with his hearing etc... He got 400 pound!! Legal expenses  joke!! Never mind the mental torture me and our kids have gone through! I wonder if they were pursued for criminal charges for this sentence by enough ppl would it change anything??
Jayne They've got no idea what were all going through never mind our loved ones currently just left to suffer in prison fighting to try get a parole date to try be released the system is disgustingly out of order
Umm The pain every day they don't understand the pain I have each day and it's really does break down my soul and mind but they don't seem to really care we are all going though it and this government really needs to start doing what they said their going to do.

 

Probation

unusual activity at Leicester probation, been trying to contact them so i don't miss my appointments, not been issued a date for next appointment, today i had a different officer check, nothing on the system still, said they will get back to me when my next appointment is, that is what they said last time. not sure what they are up to, i'm hoping they don't just put one on the system and not tell me then recall me for missing it to be honest i wouldn't put that past them.


They lied about my family who are not criminals and an MP signed a complaint with about 10 different points made in it, they responded to 1 point and acted as if that was the only allegation.

plus because the license is cause for fear of further draconian indeterminate imprisonment it counts as a factor to asylum claims which is what i've been threatening to do. now i don't know what's going on so i just want to notify people what's going on to create a fall out, so it's not worth it to put me away. Why keeping people in the dark . for me it only makes me dislike them and everyone has an issue with them thanks for reading.


Ginge Call them every week, worried about the time lapse between appointments make sure they log the calls, been threw this a lot of times.I Had the same issue I was worried about missing a appointment and being recalled and when my officer went sick there was 4-5 months of not noing anything till she was bk I just Keept on there case.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
 

Thursday, 1 December 2016

Prison is a Death Trap for those prisoners with an IPP and learning disblities .

I sometimes feel I am beyond shock at the iniquities that the system delivers. the inquest into his death in custody and listened to evidence that stunned and angered me.  verdict  delivered last Friday.
The jury at Bolton coroner's court had listened to five weeks of evidence about the circumstances of Jake Hardy's death though he is not an IPP there has been 16 IPP deaths . He was 17 years old and life had not dealt him the best hand. He had mental health problems, learning difficulties and suffered from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD
He was charged with common assault. He was then involved in a brawl and charged with affray. Tried separately, he received a total of six months' imprisonment and was sent to Hindley young offenders institution (YOI) near Wigan. It was his first time in prison.

Almost from day one, he became a target of bullying. He was a big lad, 6ft 4in, but his mother says he had the mind of a child. Other inmates told him that he smelt, threatened to "stab him up" and made disparaging remarks about his mother and family. He complained to various members of staff, but no action was taken against his abusers.

Bullying is rife in YOIs and there are supposed to be measures in place to combat it. Jails have safeguarding teams but Hardy received no protection from them.

He was also allocated a "personal officer". This role was created in the 1990s and was seen as raising the status of uniformed staff. Officers are allocated a small number of prisoners to support. They are supposed to know the history of their charges, so as to help them through problem periods.

 Hardy's personal officer gave evidence at the inquest. He told a clearly shocked jury he had not read about Hardy's background, so knew nothing of his learning disabilities, his mental health issues or history of self-harm. He thought Hardy was a big lad who could "look after himself".https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/168137



The jury found that Jake's death was contributed to by failures to give him enough support, record his suicidal thoughts and reports of verbal abuse, and move him to another cell. On the day he died, there were also failures to let him use the phone his mum to protect him from other inmates.


Forty four days into his sentence, Hardy cracked under the abuse. He smashed his television up and cut his arms. But even that did not raise alarms.
Two nights later, staff forgot to allow Hardy to phone his mother. He did not associate with other prisoners because of the bullying. He often cried when on the phone to his mum, resulting in further abuse.
He was told he could use the phone after the association period ended. The jury were shown CCTV footage of the association period, and inmates are clearly seen winding Hardy up through his cell door. The two officers on duty, including his personal officer, do nothing to prevent the abuse. Hardy responds by kicking his door and was told he would not be allowed his phone call. Nor, when association ended, was he given hot water to make a hot drink. All the other inmates, including Hardy's abusers got their hot water as usual.
His personal officer told the jury the phone call and hot water were refused because the staff could not "reward bad behaviour". Hardy killed himself an hour later.
His personal officer told the jury he no longer worked at Hindley. The prison service will not tell me the circumstances of his departure.
Earlier this year, the government announced the setting up of an independent inquiry into the deaths in custody of 18- to 24-year-olds. Some 156 young people in that age group have ended their lives in custody in the past 10 years. Shamefully, the inquiry will not cover the deaths of children under 18 who have died behind bars in YOIs and secure training centres. So the Labour peer, Lord Harris, who will lead the inquiry, will not look at the shocking neglectful treatment handed out to Jake Hardy.
Deborah Coles is co-director of Inquest, which supports the families of those who meet their deaths in custody. She says a full review of all the deaths is needed, looking at not just the fatalities, but at the reasons why young people end up behind bars in the first place.
I said Jake's vulnerabilities dealt him a bad hand in life; a psychiatrist at Hindley told the jury that a "high proportion of inmates at the jail presented with similar problems". We also know that about 60% of young people in custody have been in care at some stage in their lives; was ever a word so misused as care, in that context? It's bad enough that we jail kids who need treatment and not punishment, but to fail them then, in the way that Hindley failed Jake Hardy, is nothing less than a state-committed crime.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/04/prison-officer-failings-death-jake-hardy-hindley-bullying?CMP=twt_gu

DEATH IN PRISON THIS YEAR 2016  IS A RECORD HIGH  OF (32)
http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/bame-deaths-in-prison

A disabled person is defined as having "a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities." Substantial is defined as ‘more than trivial’.

"In some cases, people have coping or avoidance strategies which cease to work in certain circumstances (for example, where someone who has dyslexia is placed under stress). If it is possible that a person’s ability to manage the effects of an impairment will break down so that effects will sometimes still occur, this possibility must be taken into account when assessing the effects of the impairment."
organisations therefore carry a responsibility for identifying those affected and for making suitable provisions for helping to overcome its negative effects (HMG, 1995)
by aiding and accommodating under the disability act. 
 
“Dyslexia is a learning difficulty it  does not just effect  accurate word reading and spelling the characteristic features of dyslexia are difficulties in phonological awareness, verbal memory and verbal processing speed. Co-occurring  difficulties may be seen in aspects of language, motor co-ordination, mental calculations, concentration and personal organisation, but these are not, by themselves, markers of dyslexia. The most significant problem with this and most other definitions of dyslexia, however, is that it loses sight of the fact that dyslexics are people having difficulty in coping this being a snap shot.
 
Dyslexia Co morbid is more than one disability  overlapping  others being Dyspraxia Asperger's and ADHD. Effects you expressing yourself cognitive and sensory abilities phonological awareness.Comorbid subjects show a neuropsychological profile characterized by failure of various cognitive functions with an additive-effect that can determine more severe functional deficits. Comorbid  a marker for ADHD with more severe cognitive deficits, and a worse neuropsychological, academic, and behavioral outcome.


 

Failed Twice

 
 
Failed by the school failed by the prison. Those with dyslexia or other are failed in schools BECAUSE they  given a one way or know way learning system that does not fit all.  Number land up in prison. It is a  well known  that those with disability's stay in  prison  2-3 times longer than other prisoner, often unable to assert themselves and unable to cope with the stressful situation or environment there in that suicide becomes there only answer .His disability was  ignored by unstrained members of staff who  failed in  his act and dismissed his cry's.  Unnoticed  until an inquest?
 
 
 
 
 

Accountable for further failing to prisoners

 
The most common complaint in prison came from those who – like an estimated numbers of prisoners – identified as having learning difficulties and disabilities.

Often, they said, they had gone undiagnosed during their early education (42% of all prisoners have been excluded from school) and there had been no proper screening when they entered the prison system, no tailored provision at the jail, and therefore no means or incentive for them to engage in education.

The hard-pressed head of learning and skills at the prison looked away. Later she spelled out the problem for us. If her prison – and prisons across the system – assessed and then responded as best practice to such large numbers with learning difficulties, it would swallow the whole education budget of around £130m for a prison population of 86,000. And where did that leave the other inmates? It was a stark illustration of the strains on the system.
 
Heads of learning and skills don’t even sit on the senior management team in most jails. When Ofsted turns up at the gates, as part of a wider evaluation carried out by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons, it can rate education provision as inadequate or requiring improvement (as it did in 34 out of 45 inspections in 2014-15) without it having any effect on the establishment being rated good or outstanding. Indeed, in those prisons where education is repeatedly judged inadequate by Ofsted, there is apparently no consequence at all for the governor. In a school, the head would be lucky to keep his or her job, but that is presumably because education matters there. Social development Providers get paid by putting bums on seats in classes for English and maths. But they know – as some of their senior officials told us – that the set-up isn’t working.
 
And what of the impact on reoffending by those serving longer sentences when they are released from internet-free prisons without any of the IT skills that are obligatory to get a job or claim a benefit?
 

Comments

 
Menard My daughter has been diagnosed with Autism and other overlaps  but yet since from the schools stand point her grades are good and she seems OK their not doing anything. They totally disregard what a psychiatrist has diagnosed her with and a doctor. This system is flawed and I feel like I am always fighting for my daughter. I feel for everyone going through this it's so heart-breaking.
 
 
 
Dyslexia increase awareness and understanding