Home » 2013
Yearly Archives: 2013
Corston review revisited
It’s about time the Corston review was revisited.
Baroness Corston was commissioned in 2006 by the then Home Office Minister Patricia Scotland, to examine the issue of vulnerable women within the criminal justice system (Ministry of Justice, 2007 p. 2). This was not the first time that the Government had sought to assess the specific needs of women.
In 2004, the ‘Women’s Offending Reduction programme’ was launched; this project was for three years to deal with women’s offending rates and to help reduce the number of women in prison. Also in 2005 the ‘Together Women Programme’ of many diverse agencies came together to look into the various needs of women offenders. This was launched with a government funding of £9.15 million (Government Equalities Office, 2008 p.44).
The Corston Review was conducted as a result of 6 deaths of women prisoners in HMP Styal between August 2002 and August 2003. The classification for all these deaths was self-inflicted. The cause of death for 4 prisoners was hanging and for the remaining 2 was overdose. The youngest was Sarah Campbell aged 18 who had drug problems and overdosed on prescription tablets the day after she had been sentenced and returned to HMP Styal.
These deaths highlighted the problem of vulnerable women with a history of mental health problems, drug misuse or violent and sexual abuse within the criminal justice system and the risk of self-harm. In the case of Sarah Campbell, the coroner at the inquest Nicholas Rheinberg issued recommendations to ensure that similar situations would not occur again. This included a review of the use of segregation units within prisons and training in suicide and self-harm should be available to all prison staff.
According to INQUEST, a non-governmental organisation in England and Wales working directly with the families of those who die in custody, in 2003 there were 14 self-inflicting deaths of women in prison and 13 in 2004. This showed that the system in some way had failed these offenders (INQUEST, 2005)
Deaths of Women in HMP Styal August 2002-August 2003
| Name | Classification | Establishment | Ethnicity | Age | Status | Cause | Date of Death |
| Julie Walsh | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK white | 39 | Convicted | Overdose | 12/08/2003 |
| Hayley Williams | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK white | 41 | Convicted | Hanging | 04/06/2003
|
| Jolene Willis | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK white | 25 | Convicted | Hanging | 20/04/03 |
| Sarah Campbell | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK white | 18 | Convicted | Overdose | 18/01/03 |
| Anna Baker | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK black | 29 | Remanded | Hanging | 26/11/2002 |
| Nissa Smith | Self-inflicted | HMP Styal | UK white | 20 | Remanded | Hanging | 10/08/2002 |
Source: INQUEST Casework and Monitoring
The report was welcomed by Juliet Lyon, Director of the Prison Reform Trust who saw it as a blueprint for reform and stated “The Corston Review gives government the chance at long last to join up its social policy with its criminal justice policy” (Prison Reform Trust, 2007).
Baroness Corston examined each stage of the criminal justice system from arrest to sentencing to resettlement in order to ‘address the multiple and complex needs of women’ over a time scale of 9 months. The subsequent report was published on 13th March 2007 (Ministry of Justice, 2007 p.4).
The recommendations were divided into 5 areas, Governance, Sentencing, Community provision, Prison and Health which the Government pledged its commitment.
Fast forward now to what has arisen since the May 2010 election. A commitment was made in March 2012 to set out strategic priorities for women in the penal system but as of January 2013 no such document had materialised. In written evidence to the Justice Select Committee in September 2012 the Ministry of Justice pledged this document would be published in the New Year.
In September’s government reshuffle Helen Grant MP was appointed Minister with particular responsibility for women in the justice system. This was short lived after yet another reshuffle in the summer of 2013.
In January 2013 Chris Grayling, Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice said in a written Ministerial statement:
“I am conscious that women offenders have particular needs and that the custodial female estate should be organised as effectively as possible to meet gender specific requirements whilst also delivering best value for the public. I have therefore asked officials to undertake a review of custodial arrangements for women. I expect this review to be completed by the summer.”
An All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on women in the penal system was set up in July 2009 with Baroness Corston as the chair and with administrative support from the Howard League for Penal Reform. Its purpose was to publicise issues around women in the penal system and push for implementation of the Corston Reforms. In March this year there was a meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in the Penal System entitled “Community interventions for women: lessons from the frontline” (All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in the Penal System, 2013).
Let’s go to the present day what do we know about the Government’s attitude to women prisoners, what has Chris Grayling got lined up for them?
It has been announced that Mother and baby units are to close. Separation of infants from their mothers is cruel and is likely to cause bonding problems later. When you have a baby why should a man in Whitehall insist that your baby is taken from you just because you are in prison? I’m sure there are plenty of other ideas we could give Mr Grayling on how to save money!
I recommend you read Frances Crook’s blog; its enlightening nothing seems to be as it first appears.
…“Holloway prison’s mother and baby unit is to close. This means that London women prisoners or those from the South East who have babies will be faced with a choice: go hundreds of miles to Cheshire or the Welsh borders to a mother and baby unit, or, separate from your baby so that you can stay in a London prison so you can be near your other children. Askham Grange was the only open prison that had a mother and baby unit and that is to close down. With the closure of two mother and baby units there are now only five units.” (Frances Crook, 2013)
A child should not have to pay for a woman’s crime; a woman should pay for her crime! Moreover, if you speak to people like Frances Crook, the woman should never have been put in prison in the first place, especially if she is a teenage mother.
But let’s not forget “Gender appears to be the single most crucial variable associated with criminality. Put more bluntly, most crime is committed by men; relatively little crime is committed by women” (Heidensohn, 1987 in Carlen and Worrell, 2004 p. 119).
All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in the Penal System (2013) ‘Community interventions for women: lessons from the frontline’, Minutes of committee meeting 6 March 2013, All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in the Penal System, Committee Room 4, House of Lords.
Carlen, P. and Worrall, A. (2004) Analysing Women’s Imprisonment. Cullompton, Willan Publishing.
Frances Crook (2013) Don’t be fooled by the government’s deceit over women’s prisons, Frances Crook’s blog, 1 November. Available at: <http://www.howardleague.org/francescrookblog/> [accessed 3 November 2013]
Great Britain. Government Equalities Office (2008) Women’s Changing Lives Priorities for the Ministers for Women One Year On Progress Report. London, The Stationery Office [Online]. Available at <http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm74/7455/7455.pdf> [accessed 10 November 2009].
Great Britain. Ministry of Justice (2007) The Government’s Response to the Report by Baroness Corston of a Review of Women with Particular Vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System. London, The Stationery Office [Online]. Available at <http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm72/7261/7261.pdf> [accessed 10 November].
INQUEST (2005) Verdict in Sarah Campbell inquest – 18-year-old woman who died in HMP Styal. [Online] at <http://inquest.gn.apc.org/pdf/2005/Sarah%20Campbell%20Inquest%20verdict%202005.pdf> [accessed 11November 2009].
Prison Reform Trust (2007) Women’s Imprisonment: Corston review provides blueprint for reform. [Online] at <http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/subscription.asp?id=866> [accessed 9 November 2009].
Grayling’s latest crackdown
From 1st November there has been a change in the Incentives, Earnings and Privileges (IEP) system within the prison estate (Ministry of Justice, 2013a; 2013b). How individual prisons will be able to make sure all prisoners comply will be interesting to follow. The 3 categories of basic, standard and enhanced will from now on be stricter and for those not on enhanced ROTL will not be possible. Therefore, for open prisons where rehabilitation through outside work is the norm, if those on enhanced do not fulfil the criteria they will likely be downgraded to standard.
This potentially will leave many prisoners with nothing to do during the day and bored prisoners are not good for any prison. If there are large quantities of prisoners which should under the new rules be moved to standard then how can they be managed? Likewise if prisoners are downgraded to basic, suddenly they will not only have to wear prison clothing which believe me is something to be desired but will have their TV’s taken away.
Grayling has said that under the new policy, the lack of bad behaviour would not be enough to earn privileges; instead inmates would have to work actively towards rehabilitation and help other prisoners (No Offence, 2013)
But then some say why should they have a television? But where do you draw the line on punishment? Each prisoner is still a person and there should be a measure of consideration placed on each one. What has wearing a uniform, well jogging trousers and sweatshirts, got anything to do with punishment for an offence. It’s not like the city where suits are the normal attire. Next prisoners will be wearing striped outfits or ones with arrows on. Time for a change surely! Let’s stop wasting time money and energy in making prisoners look uniform and get down to addressing real issues such as reducing the prison population.
The Maidstone Prison incident this weekend (BBC, 2013; BSkyB 2013) shows that there is unrest within; let’s hope this will be the exception rather than the norm in the future. Can this be linked to the regime changes introduced by Mr Grayling?
No Offence (2013) Male prisoners to wear uniforms and be banned from watching television. [Online]. Available at <http://www.no-offence.org/entry.php/533-Male-prisoners-to-wear-uniforms-and-be-banned-from-watching-television> [accessed 02 November 2013].
Problems at YOI’s? send in the dogs!
After being inundated with tweets concerning Feltham YOI, it’s time to take a step back and consider what really is happening and what could be done about it.
…Our duty is to look after them with humanity and help them lead law-abiding and useful lives in custody and after release http://hmprisonservice.gov.uk/abouttheservice/statementofpurpose/ Believe it or not this is part of the statement of purpose for the prison service! This clearly is not the case.
There are limitations to current penal system with problems of overcrowding and high levels of recidivism. But that is no excuse for locking up children for at least 18 hours per day. How can this treatment help in the rehabilitation of young offenders? And what about them leading “law-abiding and useful lives in custody”?
According to the Independent : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/inside-feltham-why-londons-young-offender-institution-is-one-of-the-scariest-prisons-in-britain-8788635.html Last month, though, the present chief inspector of prisons, Nick Hardwick, wrote what the Howard League for Penal Reform called the worst dispatch from any such institution in more than a decade. “There is no concealing the fact that this report is one of the most concerning we have published recently,” Hardwick wrote. He painted a picture of aimlessness, and hopelessness, and endemic gang violence. If you were a parent with a child locked up there, he told this newspaper, “you would be right to be terrified”.
Later Nick Hardwick stated…“I don’t think this is just a Feltham problem, it’s a wider problem. We need to get our heads around what we are going to do with these very damaged boys, because simply punishing them, well, it doesn’t work. It absolutely doesn’t work.”
According to the Halliday Report (Home Office, 2001)
- Sentences are more severe
- Judges and magistrates award more custody
- Average length of custodial sentences are 50% longer then 10-15 years ago
- Magistrates sentencing significantly higher proportion to custody
So what now?
The Howard League is driving a campaign for justice for children. They want to raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility and ensure that society engages the child behind the crime. They also believe that too many children are in prison. Through their projects such as U R Boss they aim to give children a voice and work to improve the treatment and conditions for children in custody. http://www.howardleague.org/key-issues/
Send in the dogs?
YOI Warren Hill in Suffolk houses young offenders with a variety of problems and backgrounds. It is here that an old dog known as Eddie visits each week to help those inmates that need a bit of therapy. Eddie is part of the “Pets as Therapy Dogs” and gives the lads the unconditional love of an animal that is one of the things that are most missed aspects of their lives when they enter prison.
Home Office (2001) Making Punishments Work. London: Home Office [Online] Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/halliday-report-sppu/
To build or not to build the ongoing titan prison saga
When the crime rate is falling and the prison population is falling month by month, why has the titan prison building programme re-emerged. Yes it will bring much-needed jobs into an area, but are these prisons really necessary or is a punitive game that the Government is playing. Lets knock down an old one and build a bigger better one!
Andrew Neilson, director of campaigns at the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “The idea that big is beautiful with prisons is wrong. Not our words, but those of David Cameron before he became Prime Minister. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/north-wales-new-250m-super-4725395#.Uc1K5cuJ5h4.twitter
If prison is so ineffective when looking at re-offending statistics, then why build more? There are alternatives to prison so why not use this money to invest in methods that give more positive results?
According to Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison Reform Trust ” There is scope to close some outdated prisons and reinvest the money saved into effective community solutions to crime,”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d6e013c8-d65c-11e2-b03f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2Y15sn3Dy
Do prisons help to break the cycle of re-offending?
On Monday, 17 June 2013 a report was published by the Policy Exchange entitled “Future Prisons: A radical plan to reform the prison estate”
The report recommended:
- Closing more than 30 run down and dilapidated prisons and constructing 10-12 state of the art Hub Prisons.
- Locating the prisons on brownfield sites near to main transport routes and to hold more prisoners as close to home as possible.
- Constructing the prisons using cutting-edge architecture, with technologies such as biometric security systems. Halfway houses would be located inside the prison estate and the sites would include courts to cut the cost of transferring prisoners for trial.
- Allowing private providers to compete on a level playing field with the public sector to manage and run the new establishments.
This is reminiscent of Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon, could Foucault’s comment be translated to the idea of a “Hub” prison, would they be seen as a “mechanism of power”. We will have to wait and see!
Fighting crime with algorithms
Algorithms have been used by the police identify crime hot spots in Memphis, Tennessee since 2005. Under the code name of Operation Blue Crush, from 2005 to 2011 crime has dropped by 24%.
Crush represents “Criminal Reduction Utilising Statistical History” or predictive policing as police officers are guided by algorithms. Criminologists and data scientists at the University of Memphis compiled crime statistics from across the city over time and overlaid it with other statistics such as social housing maps, outside temperatures etc. They then instructed algorithms to search for correlations in the data to identify crime “hot spots” which led the police to flood the crime hot spot areas with targeted patrols.
According to the Guardian, Dr Ian Brown, the associate director of Oxford University’s Cyber Security Centre, raises concerns over the use of algorithms to aid policing, as seen in Memphis where Crush’s algorithms have reportedly linked some racial groups to particular crimes: “If you have a group that is disproportionately stopped by the police, such tactics could just magnify the perception they have of being targeted.”
Can this system work here? As the Home Secretary, Theresa May stated yesterday in Parliament:
Out of one million stop and search only 9% resulted in an arrest. So should Police Authorities use this or similar systems to target areas and predict crime or does it have the potential to create so-called crime “hot spots” with possible out of date data? There are then issues to take into account such as fairness and community confidence and the wasting of police time.
Theresa May July, 2nd 2013 http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=13391&player=smooth
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, professor of internet governance and regulation at the Oxford Internet Institute, also warns against humans seeing causation when an algorithm identifies a correlation in vast swaths of data.
“This transformation presents an entirely new menace: penalties based on propensities, that are the possibility of using big-data predictions about people to judge and punish them even before they’ve acted. Doing this negates ideas of fairness, justice and free will.”
“In addition to privacy and propensity, there is a third danger. We risk falling victim to a dictatorship of data, whereby we fetishise the information, the output of our analyses, and end up misusing it. Handled responsibly, big data is a useful tool of rational decision-making. Wielded unwisely, it can become an instrument of the powerful, who may turn it into a source of repression, either by simply frustrating customers and employees or, worse, by harming citizens.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/jul/01/how-algorithms-rule-world-nsa
Let’s talk
New measures are being put in place by the government to support separating couples at the time of year when the number of people considering separation and divorce is at its peak.
The Government plans to spend an additional £10 million this year on legal aid for mediation, taking the total spent to £25 million, and want to ensure that couples who decide to separate give consideration to using the process. In recent years a greater number of people have been successfully using mediation – where they are helped to agree the issues between themselves rather than argue it out through lawyers with a judge taking the final decisions http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/features/extra-10-million-for-mediation
According to the Ministry of Justice the average cost of resolving property and financial disputes as a result of separation is in the region of £500 through mediation for a publicly funded client. This can be compared to £4,000 for issues settled through the court system In addition; the average time for a mediated case is 110 days compared to 435 days for non-mediated cases. What a difference!
Family Justice Minister Lord McNally said:
‘The benefits of mediation are clear – it is quicker, cheaper and leads to better outcomes. That is why we are introducing new laws – which will require couples to attend a mediation information assessment meeting first – to find out more and consider whether it is suitable for them.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-mediation-laws-to-help-separating-couples
Prisoners Huhne and Pryce: does vengeance pay?
We have been bombarded with a daily dose of this pair; I almost feel I know them. The media have whipped up this case to such a crescendo and then finally we got a verdict, a sentence and ultimately a tragedy. To keep a lie for ten years then to have it splattered over the front pages as your ex tries to get revenge, then an attempt to get the case thrown out, but in so doing both parties are convicted of perverting the course of justice.
This is not just about a family torn apart or the demise of an MP, but a battle with the justice system. Do we think justice has been done? I believe justice should restore and not just criminalize, it will be interesting to see what happens here.
According to Prime Minister David Cameron: “It’s a reminder that no-one, however high and mighty, is out of the reach of the justice system.”
The rise and fall of the prison population!
Prison population figures continue to fluctuate. The latest figures show an increase of 80 in the last week, an increase of almost 800 since the beginning of the year yet a decrease of 3,159 in the last 12 months.
I have just read an interesting report recently published in France on ways to fight against prison overcrowding. Two important points mentioned were:
- Consider imprisonment as ultima ratio in criminal matters
- Use, if necessary, a system of numerus clausus to solve prison overcrowding until 2017, then prevent its reappearance
I wonder if Chris Grayling has any thoughts on this?
Raimbourg, D and Huyghe, S (2013) Ways to fight against prison overcrowding. Report of 23 January 2013. [Online]. Available at
http://www.cepprobation.org/uploaded_files/France_Report-on-Prison-Overcrowding-2013.pdf [accessed] 26 February 2013
Prison a holiday camp?
There is a lot of talk about prison being like a holiday camp. Working within a prison for the last year I can honestly say it is certainly not a holiday camp that I would like to stay at. Holiday evokes images of relaxing, happy smiling faces without a care in the world. I certainly do not get that picture when I am talking to any of the prisoners. Many are resigned to their custodial sentence, but others are angry or frustrated. Nonetheless the main concern I hear is what will happen to them after release; a few pounds in their pocket and off they go. So what’s happening with mentoring? Well according to the Guardian:
“The justice secretary said he could not simply continue with the existing pilot schemes at Peterborough and Doncaster prisons, which are testing the private and voluntary sector provision of “through the gate” rehabilitation and mentoring services. He argued that it would take “much of the rest of the decade” before they would provide a definitive conclusion”
Released prisoners to be banned from moving around country (2013) The Guardian 27 February 2013. [Online]. Available at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/feb/27/released-prisoners-banned-moving-country?CMP=twt_gu [accessed 27 February 2013].
Retribution or Restitution
Now that shamed MP Chris Huhne has submitted a guilty plea it is up to the judge to decide on sentencing appropriate to the charge Huhne faces of perverting the course of justice. Speculation is rife that he faces prison for certain, not the first MP to do so; MP’s were handed down prison terms for their part in the expenses scandal. But what do you think the judge should go for? Does Huhne necessarily deserve a custodial sentence or could the judge opt for some form of community sentencing combined perhaps with a restorative justice element?
According to the Telegraph, Mr Justice Sweeney told Huhne he should “have no illusions whatsoever” about the type of sentence he is likely to receive. The maximum penalty for the offence is life imprisonment.
Mr Justice Sweeney faces a perfect illustration of the pressure that many judges come under – a sentence that benefits the crime, in proportion and as short as possible verses all of the above plus an element of deterrent or setting an example for others.
In my opinion Chris Huhe should not be made an example just by virtue of the fact he is an MP and has held a high profile position in the Government. Surely the judge should disregard is job title in the same way that people not in the public eye. Otherwise we are descending into the “court of public opinion”.
This of course begs the question of the role that restorative justice could play if adopted into the mainstream of the criminal justice system of England and Wales. Time will only tell if members of the judiciary will have the courage to use it as part of their toolbox when determining appropriate sentencing.
Retribution or restitution what are we really seeking here?
Chris Huhne quits as he faces jail after pleading guilty to perverting course of justice (2013) The Telegraph 05 February 2013. [Online]. Available at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/9847152/Chris-Huhne-quits-as-he-faces-jail-after-pleading-guilty-to-perverting-course-of-justice.html [accessed] 05 February 2013.
Photo: The Telegraph
The Criminal Justice Blog 