There will be a TV programme tonight (9 pm ITV1, thereafter on ITV Player) about the recent rise in the number of elderly prisoners, a rise that I imagine is driven by a number of factors, but chiefly the number of indefinite IPPs passed in recent years and the authorities' failure to provide these prisoners with the opportunity to undertake the courses that might permit the Parole Board to allow their eventual release. The current efforts being made to identify and bring to trial many hundreds of historic sex offences are bound to lead to the incarceration of (mostly) men in their sixties seventies and beyond. In addition there are a fair number of whole life tariffs that have been passed in the last few years.
I first became aware of this situation when I visited Wandsworth Prison a few years ago. One wing was kept for elderly and disabled inmates, and I was taken aback to see wheelchairs and mobility aids parked outside cell doors. The prison has to provide proper medical and other care for these people, and because they are, for obvious reasons unsuitable for regular prison work some raised flowerbeds have been established th the yard outside to allow prisoners to tend them.
One of the most famous, or should I say infamous, old prisoners is Harry Roberts . who was involved in the murders of three police officers in 1966. The cold blooded nature of the crime, his notoriety, and the fact that he has by no means been a model prisoner means that he may stay inside for some time yet.
The idea of what amounts to an old people's home with bars on the windows is a strange one, but it is a fact and the Prison Service will just have to get on with managing the issues that arise.
I plan to watch the programme so perhaps I am jumping the gun in offering my view.
ReplyDeleteHarry Roberts is clearly a very nasty person indeed and I can imagine that the Parole Board were correct in their risk assessment, judging that he is still too dangerous to be released despite the length of time he has been imprisoned.
However, I have doubts about the value of detaining elderly men in need of wheelchairs and other paraphernalia associated with the elderly and infirm. Would they really be a threat to public safety if released?
Mike
The only accurate way to answer the question is to release and see what happens, but that is a risk I would not be willing to take. I have no doubt that even some very old men, in wheelchairs, could definitely pose a risk if they were to be released.
Delete"However, I have doubts about the value of detaining elderly men in need of wheelchairs and other paraphernalia associated with the elderly and infirm. Would they really be a threat to public safety if released? "
DeleteI think the issue here is which organisation is best equipped to look after them in old age, assuming they need near-constant care. It's an unfortunate fact that some elderly people can be difficult to care for under the best of circumstances, and it isn't at all uncommon for carers to be abused and even assaulted by those they are looking after. I would strongly suspect that if some of these old lags were handed over to their local authority care homes we might see a significantly increase in the incidence and degree of abuse carers sometimes receive.
Well I did watch the programme and was disappointed. It failed to answer the qustion, "....which organisation is best equipped to look after them in old age?"
DeleteThe first half dealt with those who might deserve our sympathy but do not earn mine. I do not identify with those who run a brothel, suppy drugs or engage in money laundering, regardless of their medical needs (and none of those interviewed had any signoficant need.)
The second half was staged in a pub and wallowed on the nostalgia of tales from the "diamond geezers" of sarf London, who according to Barbara Windsor are worthy people (no questions asked.) None of them was in the least repentant, they were hardened, violent criminals who should be locked away for public protection.
Mike
I remember Roberts as the man who escaped likely execution by hanging under the ancient "year and a day rule" (enacted in 1274, it was only finally repealed in England and Wales in 1996. It still survives in some common law jurisdictions). He had been involved a few years before these shootings in a brutal attack in which the very elderly victim was beaten around the head with a decanter. The sentencing judge told him he had only just escaped "the rope" because the victim had lived. He was sent down for seven years. A year and three days after the attack, the victim died. Had he died two days earlier, Roberts could have been tried for murder and faced a possible death penalty. At the time of the 1966 murders, the death penalty had been abolished for a mere eight months.
ReplyDeleteDusty Old Tome
Fascinating. One had recently married a heroin addict, and become a drug dealer while trying to wean he off it. Another had started a chain of "massage" parlours. It makes my retirement look very tame.
ReplyDeleteA lot better than the average care home. What do I have to do to get in? Does my house get sold to pay the fees.....
ReplyDeleteBS and his/her/their readers might find On Probation Blog relevant and, as it always is, interesting.
ReplyDeleteInfirm? Perhaps. Merely elderly? Not so fast (say I, being merely elderly).
ReplyDeleteMy only personal brush with murder at close hand came years back when a co-worker in her 60's was strangled by her husband (70's) after a night of drinking and venting of pent up animosity (between them, not I). Google "Albert Fish" for another classic old fogey monster. Or Ed Gein.
Case-by-case basis still applies, I fear.
sounds safe and comfy
ReplyDelete