How
very Soviet
Well,
I’ve finally been provoked into blogging for the first time in
several years. Apologies. I am unable to balance openness with
privacy, a problem that has plagued me since my release. But here we
are.
The
junction between politics and criminal justice is usually a messy
one.
Some nations have
resolved this by making them the same. The Soviet Union, North Korea,
China…all the nice places just subsumed criminal justice into their
ideological fortress and the political becomes the judicial. Whatever
became politically necessary became judicially correct.
Then you were shot in a basement.
The
cynical amongst you, and long time readers, will appreciate that
there were corners of British justice which were always afflicted by
the same disease - politically motivated sentencing.
Life
sentences were a particularly fraught, politically charged,
judicially warped arena. The setting of minimum terms for lifers was
set by bureaucrats. The prerequisite to release of moving to Open
prison was decided by Ministers (or the paper-monkeys acting under
his/her name). Release was decided by Ministers.
During
all of this, the Parole Board was a factor, but in reality and law
couldn't make decisions, merely recommendations. Hence the situation
where the Board assessed me as fit for Open for ten years on the
trot, with Ministers refusing to let me move. That cost me ten years
and the taxpayer the best part of 300,000 quid.
The
cost in time and money was the smallest cost of political control
over sentences. The largest cost was that it distorted Justice
itself.
Which
brings me to recent events. A Bill is currently passing through the
legislature that removes the legal processes put in place over the
past 25 years to ensure release decisions are fair and rational, not
centred on reflex responses to the Daily Mail front page. The party
of law and order is abandoning law and order in favour of
vote-grabbing. I will return to maul this travesty soon enough.
Meanwhile,
a more febrile series of events occurred that illustrates the
politically porous nature of the management of Life sentences and the
moral vacuum that can corrode people's views.
A
transgender prisoner, lets call him SAB, made a speech at a recent
rally which included the phrase “punch TERFs in the face”. The
crowd cheered - a disturbing development where violence against
political opponents seems to becoming acceptable.
So
far, so normal, in these intense culture wars. But SAB isn't your
usual speaker. He is a Lifer on license in the community. He was
originally given a discretionary Life sentence for kidnapping and
torture, then attempted to murder a fellow prisoner. The result was
that SAB served some 30 years before the Board judged him safe enough
to release.
Lifers
calling for violence are, to be crystal clear, absolute fucking
idiots. I really can't emphasise enough how insanely stupid it is.
Whether you mean it or not. And you can expect a robust response from
the probation service and/or the Parole Board.
But,
if you have the barest of interest in criminal justice, you expect
this response to be proportional and necessary for public protection.
Not driven by political motives. I cannot stress enough how corrosive
it is to any system of justice to be driven by political decisions.
Information
is incomplete and sporadic, but we do know that the Met police
initially said there was no crime, no arrest necessary. It is
reported that the Probation Service hauled SAB in and gave him a
warning, but decided that his risk to the public has not reached the
level of requiring a recall to prison - the ultimate sanction for a
Lifer on license.
Enter
the mob. Of course, in this age, it was a Twitter mob. Led by a
lawyer (not criminal law) who would describe herself as decidedly
TERF-ish, who felt personally at risk from SAB because SAB had
suggested he would be attending a speaking event organised by said
lawyer. We can call her TL, TERF lawyer.
This
is not unreasonable. A man with a history of violence, who had just
called for violence against TERFs, was attempting to attend TL’s
event. TL was extremely unhappy at the lack of action by the police,
and quickly began to threaten legal action. Many other women also
made complaints to the police.
Enter
the politicians. The Home Secretary, in charge of the police forces,
tweeted that she hoped the Met would revisit the case. Which is, to
all but the disingenuous, an instruction to the police. Oddly enough,
SAB was then arrested. Then released, investigations ongoing.
In
the face of no information from the Probation Service as to what was
going on, TL began threatening legal action unless her needs were met
- recall SAB to prison.
SAB
was then recalled to prison. Despite Probation previously determining
this wasn't necessary on grounds of risk, it is believed that the
Minster of Justice ordered the recall. The second political
interference in the situation, for solely political benefit.
I
began to feel very uncomfortable at this point. The sheer ignorance
of the system of those campaigning for this was as deep as it was
expected. What shocked me most was the sheer visceral glee of these
people at the recall of a man to prison for possibly many years, on
political instructions. I stupidly expected better from someone
working in the justice system.
TL
went so far as to say that she would not be happy unless SAB stayed
in prison for the rest of his life. Likely to be decades. At this
point we parted ways…
Scratch
a liberal and underneath you’ll find a Daily Mail editorial. I was
still shocked at the blatant glee. Not that a possible danger was
averted, but that a person from the opposing tribe was going to
suffer. The joy at that was vomitus.
I
begged that they at least appreciate what they had done. And the
denials came thick and fact - “We did nothing, he did it to
himself”. As if a Hand of God mysteriously came down and
transported SAB to the Scrubs. As if their screaming at the Ministry
had nothing to do with Ministers reversing two previously made
decisions by Probation. This was disingenuous hypocrisy from those
simultaneously cheering their success.
It
is the excuse used to justify anything done to prisoners. “Well, if
you hadn’t committed the crime and gone to prison, the screws
wouldn't be giving you a beating. Your fault.” It's a refrain I’ve
heard for decades. And its still as pathetic and immoral.
The
final step from me was to point out that getting a man imprisoned was
a big deal, and may not have been necessary. But no, they wanted him
in prison. Period. TL especially, who was still threatening to sue
Probation for not dancing to her satisfaction.
I
deleted my Twitter account. I was not going to be anywhere near a mob
who could turn on me in an instant and try to use political pressure
to get me imprisoned. I’ve been through that already, thanks.
The
final straw was the response from TL when I asked if she knew what
she had inflicted, what prison is like? The response was so steeped
in ignorance I may frame it for posterity:
“I
can’t turn on Netflix without tripping over yet another ‘behind
bars’ documentary or dramatised film about men getting attacked by
the Big Dog who's in with the Warden. We’ve all seen Shawshank
Redemption. My dad did three days in Shrewsbury prison. Don’t come
this ‘you don't know prison’ nonsense.”
Truly
mind-boggling. Hatred addles the mind. Ideology can allow you to
justify doing horrible things. And political interference in the
justice system invariably leads to injustice.
Me?
I’d have hauled him in for a chat. An official warning. And
recalled him to a Probation hostel with a strict curfew and limited
geographical movement. That would have negated any risk. But in their
ignorance and sheer spite, safety wasn’t what they actually wanted.
They wanted to see him suffer.
And
if you hear my voice from the cockpit of a plane, don’t worry, I
know all about flying. After all, my Grandad was in the RFC and I’ve
watched Top Gun five times.
Ben
Gunn