From The Inside

Be Merciful

I’ve been meaning to start blogging again for weeks – but Jon Venables has brought me out of retirement.

It’s been like living in the dark ages these past few days as the baying crowds, led as always by the tabloids, have gathered with their pitchforks and spades, and rounded upon the wounded Venables', seeking for the kill.  In an uncharacteristic demonstration of leadership the Government yesterday decisively and unequivocally announced that ‘no’, Venables' identity would NOT be compromised and ‘no’, details of the reasons for his recall would NOT be released – because at the end of the day not only do they NOT have the right to know – but they also have no need to know.  The snarling press have given a whimper, and for now at least, have skunked away with their tails between their legs.  No doubt they will return.

I can barely remember when I was 10.  I was in primary 6 and Mrs Poole was my teacher.  There are other small fragments in there – but it was a lifetime ago; a different life.  I was a child.  I cannot begin to imagine what it would have been like to have to go through life constantly bearing the public shaming of what I had done way back then.

I can barely imagine what it must be like to go through life under a lie, with a false name and a false history, because if people knew who I really was (and what I had done when I was 10!) they would not only hate me, but some would want to kill me.  Knowing that even those who have come to like and love me the most only do so because they too believe the lie.  Living in daily fear of being exposed – or lynched.

So what have we learned this week about Jon Venables?  He’s been living in the North of England in a bed-sit by himself.  He’s been unable to form any meaningful relationships since his release.  Struggling to cope it has been alleged he can’t get through a day without drink and drugs.  All because of something he did when he was 10. 

Of course there are many who argue that what he did was so serious that he doesn’t deserve to ever move on.  That he should spend the rest of his life in custody.  But that is not justice – that is vengeance. 

The Goal Of Gaols? Part 3

Another rationale for prisons is that they give the prisoner time to "address his offending bahaviour".  This sounds good, and it is certainly true that for many prison is a hard wake-up call to take stock of their life and make necessary changes.  Despite what the papers claim few prisoners actually like prison, and 95% of them will be leaving with promises and assurances that they will never be back.  Yet statistics tells us that for 60% of them this will be a dream rather than reality.  So why haven't these prisoners 'addressed their offending behaviour' and changed their ways?

There are no simple answers to that - and if I had them I would be a richer man.  In reality there are some factors in people's lives that make change hard.  A high proportion of prisoners will have mental health problems or addiction issues which have contributed to their offending behaviour.  It is not easy to deal with these factors.  Many prisoners want a clean break and to get out and move away from their circumstances and peers, yet the "system" doesn't really allow this to happen.  So most return to the drug-infested, deprived areas from which they came, making it difficult for them not to fall into old patterns of behaviour, especially when you may now have a reputation and there are expectations of how you will behave.

The reality is also that with increasing over-crowding, and constant financial cut-backs (can I say that as a Civil Servant?) the prison service does not have the resources to give the help and support to prisoners that they need.  Short-termers in particular (who make up the majority of the prison population and provide the biggest recurrence of re-offending) are often locked up for 23 hours of the day with minimal support or intervention into their lives.  One long-termer who is now receiving and responding well to the help being given to him, complained to me that for many years he was serving short-term sentences.  "You came in, were locked up, and then at the end you were thrown out without any help back to where you came from - only now more bitter and hardened" he told me.  "No-one came to help me change."

Even for long-termers, my experience is that out of an umpteen year sentence, most prisoners will simply do a 5 week cognitive skills course, and maybe a half-day alcohol awareness class.  And that is it.  There is little intensive one-to-one work done, which from my experience is what many of these guys need. 

Addressing offending behaviour is crucial if we are to break the cycle of re-offending.  Yet it is a complex area needing as much, if not more, work done in the community as well as in prison.  Resources are scare, for promising to spend more money on prisons and prisoners does not win votes in an election.  It costs nearly £40,000 a year to keep a prisoner in prison.  Could this money not be better spent on better rehabilitative programmes in the community, alongside meaningful community service and even tagging?  Just a thought.

The Goal of the Gaols? Part 2

The second purpose given for prisons is of course punishment.  Punishment of course is an indefinable thing, and unquantifiable.  Is it punishment if the offender doesn't see it as such?  Should personality be taken into account?  For example, take 2 identical prisoners commiting the exact same offence and sentence them both to the same imprisonment.  For a whole range of reasons one may react very differently to the sentence than the other and finding it far more difficult - therefore the same punishment may be experienced far more severely by one more than the other. 

But what is the purpose of punishment itself?   It must surely have a positive aspect as well as a negative one. When we punish our children we don't just want to inflict pain (of whatever sort) for the sake of it, or because they have annoyed us, or because they deserve it.  We want them to learn from it, to respond to it, to develop positively from the experience.  We will very often speak to the child later explaining why they were punished and what we expect from them in the future.  But how does locking someone up have a positive aspect for that prisoner?  We may just be hoping that the very experience is so negative that it acts in itself as a deterrent for future behaviour.  But no work is done sitting with the offender, explaining why what they did was wrong, nor helping them see how they should respond differently next time.  And many prisoners, those who have maybe never been given good parental guidance, advice and boundaries in the past, genuinely struggle to know how they should change, even if they want to.

And this type of punishment benefits no-one else either.  In fact others become losers too - the prisoners loved ones; society itself for losing someone who could potentially make a positive contribution to its life; the tax-payer who pays for their board - tin fact there are no winners.  Imprisonment is an uninspiring mode of punishment - surely there must be more positive ways to punish that actually help and assist the offender at the same time, and which make a positive contribution back into society?  Or am I being too much of a dreamer again??

The Goal of the Gaols? Part 1

Prisons have always been with us - and so have prisoners.  I wonder how many news stories we have read or heard telling us that someone else has been sentenced during our lives - we must have heard of the sentencing of thousands.  But how often do we stop and ask ourselves why we do it.  What's it's purpose? Is there maybe a better way?

Of course the prime reason should always be public safety.  That is all well and good - until we remember that the majority of prisoners in any one year will have been imprisoned for fine defaultment.  And if you take public safety to the extreme, then such dangerous prisoners should be locked up for life - and not for a few years.  How can a judge say to a prisoner - "You are a danger to the public.  I sentence you to 6 years imprisonment (which means you will definitely be out in 4 years and if you get parole then just 3!) after which you'll no longer be a danger to the public!"?  If public safety were a major concern, then we should be returning to the days that prisoners are held indefinitely until they have demonstrated that they are no longer a danger - not something that I would advocate!!

And if public safety was such a major consideration, then what work is being done with prisoners to make sure that they are no longer a danger to public safety when they are released?  In my experience the answer to that is "precious little".  Lack of funds, too many short sentences, and way far too many prisoners - all mean that everyone loses out and little meaningful work can be done.

And while the public protection argument holds for our most serious criminals (of which there are few!) it doesn't cover the majority who may be a nuisance, but who are definitely not a danger.  We need to be locking up prisoners we are afraid of - and not just those that we're mad at!

So my quest can continue.  Why imprison?

Sick of Violence??

I've been off sick all week.  Hoped to get back today, but it hasn't happened, so hopefully will be next Monday now.  My boss has been really good, telling me not to hurry back and already cancelling meetings I have next week so that I don't feel pressurised to return before I'm ready (I'm putting that down to being caring rather than enjoying the peace and quiet of me not being there!).

Just got a virus which is proving difficult to shift.  Mid-way through my second course of antibiotics.  Think I'm getting there!?

The thing is, the thought of being off unwell always seems better than the reality.  The image is being tucked up in bed all snug and warm, reading all those books I never seem to have the time to do.  The reality is feeling too yucky to care, and too tired to concentrate longer than a few pages at a time.

Another thing I am realising however, is that since working in a prison I find crime, violence and murder less and less appealing as subjects of entertainment and relaxation.  I used to like nothing more than a mindless and harmless who-dunnit as light reading - such as a good Peter Robinson, P.J. Tracy or Ian Rankin.  I now find them too close to comfort to be all that enjoyable - I hear too many tales of real violence and horror on a day to day basis to be detached enough to read it as "light" reading.  (It's amazing however how popular real crime stories are in the prison libraries!).

The same is true for films and TV - even the programmes I used to enjoy such as "Street Wars" or "Police, Camera, Action" I sometimes feel uncomfortable to watch, because I know it has been the real past of many of those I work with. 

Maybe I'll get used to this - after all it's harmless isn't it?  Or is it indeed weird that in this violent and sometimes lawless culture that we are living in, that we still enjoy crime as a form of entertainment?