My general view on sentencing is the Sentencing Guidelines are far too lenient, too much concerned with defining mitigating factors, and insufficient consideration of the nature and impact of the crime. So I'm a hard liner. That being said, right from the start I regarded IPP as a constitutional horror, The idea of imprisoning someone on the basis that they'll be kept inside until they can convince some bureaucrat that they'll behave is absurd and unjust. It was shameful it was introduced, and shameful it's still operating. This is in a system that released Colin Pitchfork on parole.
Anything that brings an end to this gross miscarriage of justice is to be welcomed. Surely some sort of triage system could be used so that those sentenced for the least serious offences are released as quickly as possible whilst they work out plans for the more serious offenders. But they will all need support upon release given how long they have served, some for quite minor offences.
Very shrewd in my view to recommend a two year window, since failing that -to employ a far from forensic word- the dithering might never stop, as sometimes to this particular octogenarian, fretful over seeing this and other so long overdue outbreaks of realism and proportionality brought to fruition well within his remaining life span.
Melodramatic? I think NOT.
I (realistically as it seemed to me) on a number of occasions since the early nineties believed that the administration of the day would be “afflicted” by far too long delayed spasms of sanity. I had also dared to hope for a modicum of courage in the face of the reactionary tendency and the media outlets throwing them red meat.
But no; and then back the entire issue would go into the “too difficult box” for -sometimes- thirty years (sic).
To turn from the generalities to IPP sentences, there the anxiety over violent “failures” on release and the opposition’s and media’s -almost gleeful-rage seems to be especially writ large.
There will NEVER be angst free wave of releases, especially given the need to resurrect the Probation and what used to be called the Aftercare entities. Copper bottomed guarantees of absolutely no offending on release require the magic wand which has long been in for repairs.
I add just three things:
1. Where are we now with Lord Woodley’s Bill? I fear I have lost track but my recollection is that, so as NOT to frighten the horses overmuch it has already been tweaked.
2. The Parole Board is -more than ever- an arm of the cjs which instead of being maligned and having its independence threatened NEEDS to receive public acknowledgment from the likes of Shabana Mahmood, Lord Timpson and the sentencing Minister Sir Nick Dakin, from whom we seem to hear less on this topic than we do from the two latter figures. AND: what of another distinguished lawyer, albeit with hands rather full of late, Sir K?
My general view on sentencing is the Sentencing Guidelines are far too lenient, too much concerned with defining mitigating factors, and insufficient consideration of the nature and impact of the crime. So I'm a hard liner. That being said, right from the start I regarded IPP as a constitutional horror, The idea of imprisoning someone on the basis that they'll be kept inside until they can convince some bureaucrat that they'll behave is absurd and unjust. It was shameful it was introduced, and shameful it's still operating. This is in a system that released Colin Pitchfork on parole.
Anything that brings an end to this gross miscarriage of justice is to be welcomed. Surely some sort of triage system could be used so that those sentenced for the least serious offences are released as quickly as possible whilst they work out plans for the more serious offenders. But they will all need support upon release given how long they have served, some for quite minor offences.
Very shrewd in my view to recommend a two year window, since failing that -to employ a far from forensic word- the dithering might never stop, as sometimes to this particular octogenarian, fretful over seeing this and other so long overdue outbreaks of realism and proportionality brought to fruition well within his remaining life span.
Melodramatic? I think NOT.
I (realistically as it seemed to me) on a number of occasions since the early nineties believed that the administration of the day would be “afflicted” by far too long delayed spasms of sanity. I had also dared to hope for a modicum of courage in the face of the reactionary tendency and the media outlets throwing them red meat.
But no; and then back the entire issue would go into the “too difficult box” for -sometimes- thirty years (sic).
To turn from the generalities to IPP sentences, there the anxiety over violent “failures” on release and the opposition’s and media’s -almost gleeful-rage seems to be especially writ large.
There will NEVER be angst free wave of releases, especially given the need to resurrect the Probation and what used to be called the Aftercare entities. Copper bottomed guarantees of absolutely no offending on release require the magic wand which has long been in for repairs.
I add just three things:
1. Where are we now with Lord Woodley’s Bill? I fear I have lost track but my recollection is that, so as NOT to frighten the horses overmuch it has already been tweaked.
2. The Parole Board is -more than ever- an arm of the cjs which instead of being maligned and having its independence threatened NEEDS to receive public acknowledgment from the likes of Shabana Mahmood, Lord Timpson and the sentencing Minister Sir Nick Dakin, from whom we seem to hear less on this topic than we do from the two latter figures. AND: what of another distinguished lawyer, albeit with hands rather full of late, Sir K?