cassiarowland.bsky.social
Senior researcher in public services @Instituteforgov, passionate about crime. Formerly @CrestAdvisory. Also trustee @EndometriosisUK
522 posts
3,283 followers
1,245 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
You're right though the law is pretty clear! The court has to have good reason to impose a more severe sentence than they would have if the defendant had been sentenced at the time of offence. So that could be something like signs of increased risk in the interim, breach of bail conditions etc.
comment in response to
post
Possible, but it seems like court delay was the problem here. Issuing an out-of-court disposal is typically pretty quick. This is from the mags chair & criticises CPS delay, which to me implies the court decision, or at least sentence impact, might have been different?
comment in response to
post
Really interesting thread, thanks Gavin - and shows the importance of accurate data!
comment in response to
post
Exact application depends on circumstances, but if that's not generally happening, bc courts are unaware/not applying the law properly/appropriate provision doesn't exist, that's v concerning. Would love any thoughts/experiences from criminal lawyers/probation officers/youth workers etc on this!
comment in response to
post
This bit is particularly alarming to me. It's not 100% clear what 'a very different outcome' suggests, but courts *should* be sentencing adults for offences committed as children similarly to how they would have been sentenced when the offence was committed.
yjlc.uk/resources/le...
comment in response to
post
Crucially, even if people get an equivalent sentence, eg the same length community order, that will be supervised by the *adult* probation service - which is v different, generally less supportive & more punitive than youth supervision, and often lacks the peer/group elements of youth provision.
comment in response to
post
This is just beautiful. Thank you for writing it!
bsky.app/profile/cass...
comment in response to
post
One of the reasons I (like many disabled people!) get so cross w/ ‘person-first language’, ie ‘person with a disability’ not ‘disabled person’ & the ‘your disability doesn’t define you’ stuff. Of course it does — not in whole but in part! Just like being a lesbian, a Londoner, a policy wonk etc.
comment in response to
post
In practice, I suspect they will introduce a presumption to release at halfway/two-thirds point bsky.app/profile/cass...
comment in response to
post
Yes this is a real challenge. We talk a lot about the lack of ‘purposeful activity’ (education, rehabilitation etc) here. In the current context it could be v difficult for prisoners to prove good behaviour.
www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/...
comment in response to
post
Yes, one of the issues at the moment (as Gauke mentions) is that parole board delays mean people on short sentences who are recalled to prison (non-fixed-term recall) can’t get a release hearing before their sentence ends & they get released anyway. So last thing they need is more cases!
comment in response to
post
Otherwise - major shortage of prison lawyers will make it hard for people to bring challenges in practice? Not the mechanism you'd like to think of the government relying on...
comment in response to
post
Hmm I'm not sure. I suspect (though don't know) that practically, there will need to be a presumption to release most prisoners at the halfway point, and prisons/probation will have to demonstrate particularly poor behaviour or high risk to overcome that. Same at 2/3 for more serious offenders.
comment in response to
post
If you found this interesting, check out our Week in Public Services blog! @stuarthoddinott.bsky.social @amberdellar.bsky.social and I cover the most interesting stories [that we've read about] on health & care, children & young people, local gov and crime & justice. medium.com/week-in-publ...
comment in response to
post
Evidence suggests both of these would reduce reoffending, improve outcomes for people and save public money, while also easing pressure on prisons. It seems likely they've been victims of politics trumping policy, but the gov's emphasis on looking 'tough' could undermine its ultimate goals.
comment in response to
post
Finally, there are also loads of good suggestions in the review that the goverment has *not* (so far) picked up, particularly allowing more suspended sentences (which we've previously recommended & argued for by @barristersecret.bsky.social) and more problem-solving courts.
comment in response to
post
Crucially, the government's proposals on these two points are different to what Gauke proposed in his review. This means that they are v unlikely to free up the c.10,000 prison spaces he projected. Will be more like 5-6,000: not enough to avoid further reforms or emergency measures before 2028.
comment in response to
post
Tightening or adding conditions to people's sentences just for the sake of it will harm these relationships and make supervision feel unfair and unnecessarily punitive, while also risking driving record levels of people recalled to prison for breaches even higher.
comment in response to
post
Change 3), 'harsher' community sentences, is all about the politics rather than the evidence. The key success factor for community sentences & probation supervision is positive, fair relationships between probation staff and offenders, & offenders feeling staff really believe they can change.
comment in response to
post
Picture is more nuanced for the other two though. Earned early release has strong pros & will substantially ease pressure on prisons...but ending automatic early release could reverse that. Assessing good behaviour/rehabilitation also v difficult given chaotic state of prisons currently.
comment in response to
post
Worth noting too this is a game-changer for women in prison, the large majority of whom are serving sentences under a year for non-violent offences, often having been victims themselves of more serious offences and with dependent children.
comment in response to
post
2) is a good idea, pure and simple. Short prison sentences are less effective & much more expensive than community sentences - yes, even for repeat offenders - and put a lot of pressure on prisons, especially 'reception' prisons which are the most overcrowded.
comment in response to
post
Gov is making 3 big changes to sentencing: 1) earned early release for most prisoners (after 33-50% of sentence) & abolishing automatic early release, 2) shift to community sentences over prison sentences, esp for <1 year & 3) harsher, more restrictive community sentences/probation supervision.
comment in response to
post
I’d be wary of the psychological impacts of spending so much time in one room — but if that’s already happening, better with access to learning/purposeful activity than without.
comment in response to
post
Yes potentially! I’d like to see prisoners have more access to technology: if you have no/v limited access to a computer or tablet for years on end, that doesn’t do your employment prospects on release any good. That could also provide more opportunities for in-cell courses/learning/work.
comment in response to
post
Not at all, it's just a pet peeve of mine! And I think the media reporting of this stuff doesn't help. I'd love to see sentences reframed in legislation & courts as '2 years' imprisonment followed by 2 years' community supervision' or something like that - would be so much clearer!
comment in response to
post
People *do* serve the sentence they're given - it's just some of it is served in the community! There are good reasons not to spend the whole sentence in custody. bsky.app/profile/cass...
comment in response to
post
Great advantage of people serving part of their sentence in prison & part in the community is you can provide oversight, supervision & support post-release. If you're sentenced to 2 years and you spend it all in prison, there's no mechanism to help you adjust or keep an eye on you once you're out.
comment in response to
post
I'm not opposed to that per se, but if you're doing that you've got to shorten the sentences you impose or double your prison capacity. Also, time served on licence in the community, subject to restrictions & supervision, is still part of the sentence.
comment in response to
post
Today was a great day to read this, as I struggle to explain the opaque and ludicrous approach to sentences and release dates in England and Wales in a way that makes sense to someone who doesn't spend their life reading about this stuff!
comment in response to
post
It's also worth highlighting a downside of earned early release approach. While there are a lot of benefits, it introduces new opportunities for bias in the system. Racial bias is one risk, but also people who are more literate or just good at navigating the complex prison system etc will do better.
comment in response to
post
Absolutely. Gauke does explicitly say in his report that requirements for early release should be lower when it's first introduced, to account for the difficulties of getting onto rehabilitative courses etc in the current situation. But not yet clear how any of this will be implemented in practice.
comment in response to
post
This raises the possibility capacity challenge could get *worse* rather than better! People currently released after 40% of their sentences could be spending 50-100% in custody instead. This is the highest impact change proposed in the review, so gov very reliant on it to free up necessary spaces.
comment in response to
post
They say expectation is most people will be released 33-50% of the way through their sentence, but they could serve their whole sentence in custody. Given current state of prisons & how difficult it is to get onto rehabilitative courses, might be v difficult for offenders to prove good behaviour.
comment in response to
post
Gauke's proposal in the review was that most offenders (who currently serve 40%) should be able to earn early release after a third of their sentence, but otherwise be automatically released after half - the status quo before emergency releases. Instead, gov is ending automatic release altogether.
comment in response to
post
Currently, most offenders get released after 40% of their sentence (cut from 50% last autumn). Some serve 50% & most serious serve 66%. Release at these various points is automatic for most offenders, but the most serious 66%ers need parole board approval. Yes, this is unnecessarily convoluted!
comment in response to
post
Prison is extremely expensive, especially compared to some of the community alternatives discussed in the sentencing review, so this approach could work here. It's not clear if the government will have the appetite for it - but they may have little choice.
comment in response to
post
How is this going to be reconciled with expected cuts to MoJ budgets at the spending review? We've called for 'double-running', temporarily increasing spending on preventative services, so cost of acute services (ie prison) should fall longer term www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/...
comment in response to
post
Finally: implementation of a lot of this is likely to be really hard. Prison and probation systems are massively overstretched. A lot of community provision of eg drug and alcohol services, psychotherapy etc has been decimated. There has *got* to be money for some of this or it just won't work.
comment in response to
post
If it's mandatory, there's no informed consent. There are real medical risks. Also introduces major problems with treatment compliance, which is hard to monitor. And how long does it last? Voluntarily, many people are on it permanently. If mandatory, what happens at the end of the sentence?
comment in response to
post
Suggestions about chemical castration are v mild in the report, just continuing funding for voluntary pilot. I've got no issue with that, but suggestion the justice secretary might make it mandatory is v concerning. When voluntary, this is a therapeutic treatment some people find really helpful.