Chair Criminal Cases Review Commission. Member Women’s Justice Bd.
Ex Victims’ Commissioner, Solicitor Gen & PCC. Fellow St Hilda’s Oxford. Writer. Labour Party

Category: Uncategorized

  • Women in Prison

    Women in Prison

    Our criminal justice system imprisons twice as many women now, as it did in the nineties. No increase in the quantity or gravity of female crime has happened, to justify this. Harsh penal policy, directed at tougher sentencing for men – who are 96% of the prison population – seems simply to have carried women along with it. Yet, it is almost two decades since Baroness Corston recommended, in her seminal Report, that there should be:

     “a distinct radically different, visibly led, strategic, proportionate, holistic, woman-centred, integrated approach” towards women in prison.”

    That need for a targeted approach to women is even stronger now. Imprisonment grows while research shows, what a huge role domestic and sexual abuse play, as drivers of women’s offending. The Prison Reform Trust’s Report: ‘There’s a Reason We’re in Trouble’ (2017) found that 67% of women in prison had suffered abuse, with most in the grip of a male perpetrator, at the time of their offence. Some women were coerced into delivering drugs or shoplifting to order. Many were convicted of stealing food, to survive when being starved of cash, or of stealing alcohol to self-medicate. Other women strike back, after years of abuse, and are convicted of violence themselves. Some are arrested, when they have called the police, and manipulative perpetrators make cross-allegations.

    One prisoner, Mary told PRT that she was in an abusive relationship for 3 years. He had, repeatedly, assaulted her and, though she was a disqualified driver, threatened her family unless she drove him to deliver drugs. The police stopped them and found his cannabis, but Mary took the blame, together with admitting that she was driving whilst disqualified.

    Belinda also spoke to PRT. She has scars, from her ex-partner throwing boiling water over her and slashing her with broken glass. She suffers from ADHD and depression. He took her to a party, got drunk and tried to force himself on her, so she punched him, to get away. He got his friends to make statements and the police prosecuted her for assault.

     A variant is that, frustrated by police incomprehension, a victim, who has called them, shouts at them or pushes them away. If a male officer takes hold of a female victim, it can cause a struggle, through a ‘fight or flight’ response, as she relives earlier trauma. Offences such as these, committed against police officers, usually result in imprisonment.

    Typically, women get short sentences. But if this sounds merciful, that is the wrong conclusion. 53% are sentenced to less than 6 months and another 17% to less than12 months, and all are released halfway through. Few courses/treatments, to tackle complex needs, are available on that brief time scale. Many programmes have been defunded and the remainder have entry queues far longer than the sentences themselves. That means that 70% of, often needy, women, who go to prison, are just warehoused, without getting any benefit, nor any new learning, to set them up for a future.

    For male prisoners, relationships can be a protective factor; wives hold the family together. But abusive fathers rarely keep the home fires burning. Women can lose their children, their home, their job, and their friends, through one short prison sentence. 17,000 children a year are separated from their mothers, by custody.

    Jane told PRT that the Magistrates’ Court imprisoned her when she had not expected it. Her little boy went into care. When she ended her sentence, all she had was a prison-issue thermos and a tent. 3 years later, she still hasn’t seen her son.

    Not surprisingly, 55% of women, who get short prison sentences, reoffend. Suspending a sentence can mean that home, job, children, family, and local connections are preserved, and fewer than 30% of women, on those sentences, re-offend.

    The Tory Government, perforce, was legislating to suspend all prison sentences of less than 12 months. Prison capacity is around 89000 and, without that change, they estimated a need for 94000 places, before the end of this year.

    Albeit as an incidental, that legislation would have taken a very welcome scythe, to the damaging, short sentences currently imposed upon women.

    The new government should do the same, but this time, intentionally. It should also look closely at the Greater Manchester and West Midlands Women’s Problem-Solving Courts. In both regions, probation staff harness local services such as mental health and housing, to tailor community-based sentencing packages for women who offend. Depleted services can make this hard, but there is huge commitment, and early data is looking good.

    An impressive innovation is that the sentencing judge reviews the defendant’s progress, every few months, at court. The judges are outstanding and see the opportunity to improve these women’s lives. They both discipline and encourage. Women emerge wide-eyed, with the belief that the justice system requires them to try hard so that they can do well.

    Of course, it is insufficient to improve the process that picks up the pieces. We must, quickly, hugely re-invigorate the fight against male abuse of women, and I have no doubt our new Labour Government is committed to that mission.

    However, it is darkly ironic, that overcrowding in male prisons, some of it caused by the  sentencing of violent men,  may ultimately trigger the tailored, rehabilitative approach to women in trouble, that Jean Corston’s Review recommended many years ago.

  • VERA BAIRD WELCOMES SUPPORT FOR THOSE AFFECTED BY ASB IN SOUTH TYNESIDE

    A support team to help those affected by anti-social behaviour has been established in South Tyneside.

    South Tyneside Council in partnership with South Tyneside Homes have recruited a group of five volunteers to provide support to victims across the Borough.

    The Mayor of South Tyneside, Councillor Richard Porthouse, presented the volunteers with certificates to celebrate the completion of their initial training. The training equipped the volunteers with the essential skills needed to support victims affected by anti-social behaviour.

    South Tyneside’s ASB victim support volunteering project is being supported by funding from Northumbria’s Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Vera Baird. The project is part of her regional initiative which aims to offer advice and guidance to those affected by this type of offence.

    Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner, Vera Baird, said: \”Anti-social behaviour can affect anyone at any time and I am very grateful to all the volunteers and everyone involved in helping me tackle this issue head on and making a difference to the lives of victims. Protecting people from harm and helping victims are top priorities for me so I wish this project in South Tyneside every success.\”

    The Mayor said: “It was a pleasure to meet the Borough’s new volunteers and to help celebrate their first steps to becoming fully trained.

    “The volunteers who have joined the project will provide a vital service to people affected by anti-social behaviour. They will provide ongoing emotional support and practical help and will be a point of contact for victims.

    “On behalf of the Borough I would like to thank all of the volunteers for agreeing to give up their time to support those affected by anti-social behaviour in South Tyneside.”

    The volunteers will help victims to cope and recover following an incident or sustained attacks as well as improve community confidence.

    Councillor Tracey Dixon, Lead Member for Area Management and Community Safety said: “Anti-social behaviour not only has a detrimental impact on communities, it can be extremely distressing for the individuals affected, impacting on their health and wellbeing. It is something we are determined to tackle.

    “We hope the emotional and practical support that our volunteers will provide to victims and witnesses of anti-social behaviour will empower residents to report this type of activity so action can be taken to prevent further incidents in their area.

    “We are committed to working with our partners including Victim Support and South Tyneside Homes to make sure this scheme has a positive impact across the Borough.”

  • Progress Online Article (13th June 2014) – Policing through rights and respect – not kilos of water.

    Police forces across the country work hard, delivering community safety and working with residents to problem solve and cut crime

    Policing can only be based on partnership. ‘The police are the public and the public are the police’ is the most quoted of the Peelian principles, set out by the founder of the Metropolitan police. Few people, police, members of the public or politician would ever dispute it – except, perhaps, London mayor, Boris Johnson.

    Despite the opposition of 20 of the 25 London assembly, and without the approval of the Home Office, Johnson has decided to spend up to £400,000 of public money on heavy weaponry, which cannot be targeted but only used against people at large, namely water cannon.

    This is not just a decision for London – it is the first time that water cannon will feature in policing in all of England and Wales. There is no consensus for this step. Johnson shows little respect for his public in following the example of police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who has said that ‘his’ officers are there to wage ‘total war on crime’. Londoners may be unhappy with the notion that cops are their leaders’ storm troopers rather than servants of the public. Made sceptical, through scandals such as the Lawrence case,‘plebgate’ and the deaths of Ian Tomlinson, Mark Duggan and John Charles de Menezes, Londoners may worry too about further arming the police and might ask exactly who will be defining the enemy.

    Labour assembly member Joanne McCartney objects that ‘there is confusion behind exactly how the process of their deployment will work’. Police and crime commissioners across both the country and the political spectrum are against their introduction. The Association of Chief Police Officers’ briefing says that ‘water cannon are capable of causing serious injury or even death’.  The home secretary is right when she states that we need to consider the health and safety aspects before going any further. There are examples from across Europe of severe injuries caused by police using water cannon. The riots in London in 2010 could not have been stopped with these devices which only work in spaces the size of Parliament Square.

    We are a country of free speech. We do not police protests through water cannon but through respect for that right and the rights of others who disagree. There were no riots where I live in Northumbria. If police there make a mistake, even a grave one, they do not retreat into defensive obfuscation but trust their public with the truth. Lost confidence which gives rise to protest and then, as respect for the rule of law evaporates, to lawlessness, is better not triggered in the first place. It will not be recovered by indiscriminate blasting of protesters, bystanders and criminals alike with thousands of kilos of water.

    Since 2010, through massive spending cuts imposed by the mayor’s Conservative party, the people of London have lost 3,111 police officers. Water cannon are not a substitute for uniformed officers on the street. Nor are they a substitute for the trust of the community in their police, so lamentably weakened under Johnson’s bravado but feeble stewardship.

  • Tackling Knife Crime (Northumberland Gazette article)

    Knife crime can have a harsh effect on communities. Across Northumbria, we have seen the devastating effect that knives have caused to families.

    I am a firm believer that there should be tougher sentences for those who carry knives and I am pleased that the Home Secretary, Theresa May, has given her backing to tougher sentences for knife crime.

    An amendment to the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill has been put forward which proposes a six-month jail term for anyone convicted of carrying a knife for the second time.

    This amendment makes sound sense.

    Tougher sentences would send a clear message to those who carry knives repeatedly that it is not acceptable.

    The family of 16-year-old Glen Corner in South Shields have campaigned for changes in the law.

    In the past, they have lobbied their MP and taken their campaign to the heart of government to demand change.

    Glen was tragically taken from them in August 2006 when he died from a stab wound.

    Their belief is quite simple – that no one should be carrying knives as they can devastate lives.

    I agree totally with this sentiment.

    Tackling knife crime has received the support of the two major parties in the House of Commons.

    Labour leader Ed Miliband is clear in his determination that legislation should be used to strengthen the law and he is sympathetic to the issue of mandatory sentences after a second offence.

    Of course, we need to make sure this is done in the right way.

    I believe that in Northumbria, people want to send a strong message to people who carry knives repeatedly.

    A similar measure was put in place to tackle gun offences and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, said that a simple message is needed.

    It was heard about guns and it needs to be heard about knives.

    We need to ensure that we educate and rehabilitate those caught up in the knife culture, but just as importantly it is imperative that the police and courts are given support to tackle knife crime.

    While we are fortunate in Northumbria that we do not have the same problem with knife crime as in some other areas of the country, we have had tragic deaths in this force area and Northumbria Police will continue to take a proactive stance in tackling knife crime.

    Politicians across the political spectrum continue to want this issue addressed.

    There is a drive and commitment from the Home Secretary, Leader of the Opposition and Police and Crime Commissioners to see change.

    It is now our job to make it happen.

  • Huffington Post Article (9th June). Responding to the Director of Public Prosecutions Rape Action Plan.

    Today’s Rape Action Plan from Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, is yet another valiant attempt to improve the conviction rate for sexual offences which is, in reality, still held back by out of date rape myths which prevail at court and which remain influential in the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

    There was an upward trend in the rate of conviction for cases that got to court for about seven years as police and CPS made progress in training their staff and improving witness care. However, the increase was never huge and it fell sharply from 63%-60% during the past year.

    There must be a fear that similarly, the recent increase in the number of complainants who have the confidence to report rape will go into reverse if the conviction rate continues to go down, making the point that they are unlikely to get justice.

    The police and CPS training which brought those original improvements was substantial. However it seems only to have got them over some of the rape myths that used to block prosecutions, leaving them locked into others. A letter read this morning on the Today programme made that point. It showed CPS explaining to a complainant that the underwear she was wearing was one of the reasons why they wouldn’t prosecute her allegation of rape. Particularly shocking is that the letter must have been written by a dedicated rape prosecutor since it is a decade since CPS allowed a non-specialist to manage a rape case.

    Alison Saunders is therefore right to focus in her Action Plan on yet more guidance for prosecutors, research into why victims withdraw, ensuring legal advocates have the right skills, regional workshops for CPS/police to strengthen learning around investigations and prosecutions and improving oversight and accountability for police decisions to take no further action. It is rightly too all directed towards acquiring and using a better understanding of what consent means and on shifting the focus from the credibility of the victim to the overall allegation and the conduct of the accused.

    The continuing impact of these out of date myths even on trained police and prosecutors leaves little hope that untrained jurors will do better. And if myths and prejudices influence outcomes at court, that will cause injustice and will re-inforce their use in police and CPS decisions about which future cases to take forward. So while the DPP re-trains her staff in the significance of factors such as underwear, it is equally important that every rape jury has explained to them the prejudicial effect of similar myths.

    Happily, the Crown Court judges have long had a folio of directions in place to neutralise most of the well-known myths and prejudices in trials. It was the former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, who first appreciated that the training that the judges themselves get about myths and stereotypes had to be passed on to juries if rape trials were going to be fair.

    A good example is when a rape complaint is made sometime after the event. The defence will say that the sex was consensual, that rape is so nasty that anyone would complain of it immediately and that the delay in complaint shows that she is lying about lack of consent. In the absence of any different understanding jurors might accept that argument. Yet judges know from experience, including around guilty pleas, that sexual assault victims frequently do not complain at once. So they can direct a jury that while some people may speak to the first person they see, others will, through shame and shock take far longer to tell anyone what has happened. Judges will, in that way, bust the myth that a late complaint is necessarily a false one and leave the facts in each case, fairly set out for the jury to decide.

    There are directions similarly to deal with notions such as because the complainant wore provocative clothing, he/she must have wanted sex; since the complainant got drunk in male company, he/she must have been prepared for sex; that an attractive male does not need to rape; a complainant in a relationship with the alleged attacker is likely to have consented; that rape does not take place without physical resistance from the victim and usually causes injury and that rape by a stranger is necessarily more traumatic than rape by someone the victim trusted.

    However, many victims and rape support groups would say that despite these directions there is often aggressive cross examination in rape trials, which relies on these very myths. That can undermine the quality of a complainant\’s evidence and prejudice the jury long before the summing up when the directions are given. Clearly the point of Judges knowing that rape myths can prejudice trials should be so they banish them from the process all together, not allow their use by lawyers and then try to explain them away.

    There is no DPP figure who can oversee and direct the Courts as Alison Saunders can give leadership to her prosecutors. There is no Court Inspectorate who can monitor performance as HMIC does for the police. In Northumbria, we will fill this gap by establishing a panel of volunteer Court Observers, probably with a complement of former victims, who will follow every sexual assault case at Newcastle Crown Court to see whether the courts are doing their share of ridding rape trials of pernicious myths as the CPS and the police are encouraged and exhorted once again, to do theirs.

    They will look at other aspects of the trial too, such as whether Independent Sexual Violence Advisers (ISVAs) who support complainants throughout sexual abuse cases are allowed to accompany them in court; how Crown Prosecutors relate to complainants who, since police are trained to give evidence and defendants prepare their case with their barristers, are the only ones unprepared for what is to come and whether questioning about previous sexual history still haunts these trials. We will also look to establish our very own Police Rape Scrutiny Panel to scrutinise case files which have failed to attain the requisite evidential level of prosecution or where a prosecution has failed and look for lessons to learn.

    If we are to continue to increase the proper conviction rate in rape and to prevent a consequent decline in complainant’s confidence to report, all the criminal justice agencies must play a role in ridding these trials, once and for all of the prejudice and myth which today’s announcement shows are alive and well in the police and CPS. What happens in trials can either reinforce these myths or render them redundant