Details of young offender deaths revealed

By Neil Puffett Thursday, 06 October 2011

Details of how 23 children under the supervision of youth offending teams died in the community last year have emerged after the Youth Justice Board released fresh information on the incidents.

Figures provided to CYP Now reveal that seven children died as a result of suicide, seven as a result of road traffic accidents and four were murdered.

A further two died from "potential suicide", while one death was classed as "suspicious". There was also one accidental fall and one accidental drowning.

Of the deaths, six occurred in the West Midlands, five in London, five in the North West, three in Yorkshire and the Humber, two in the East Midlands, one in Wales and one in the East of England.

Di Hart, principal officer of youth justice and welfare at the National Children's Bureau (NCB), said the statistics highlight the need for more analysis of the risk factors surrounding young offenders.

"They are all violent deaths of one kind or another, which would suggest something about the needs of young people," she said.

"There are risk factors in these children’s lives and there are parallels with the child protection system, but [in the youth justice system] we don’t approach these deaths in respect of risk factors that were missed."

Earlier this year it emerged that a total 132 young offenders died while under supervision in the community since 2006.

A consultation launched by the board on how information can be better reported on serious incidents has now closed, but no detail of the future structure of the system has emerged.

Appeal court criticises judge's approach to riot sentencing

Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 27 September 2011

Lord chief justice says if other crown courts had circulated alternative tariffs it would have been a 'recipe for chaos'

 

Lord Justice Leveson, one of three appeal judges, criticised the sentencing initiative in Manchester of Judge Andrew Gilbart. Photograph: Wpa Pool/Getty Images

A Manchester judge who made influential comments on sentencing offenders in the immediate aftermath of the August riots has been criticised by the appeal court.

If other crown courts had circulated alternative tariffs for various crimes it would have been a "recipe for chaos" in the judicial system, the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, warned.

Disapproval of the comments by Judge Andrew Gilbart QC, the recorder of Manchester, came from all three judges sitting in the appeal court on Tuesday as they began considering the first cases to come before them from the summer disturbances.

The hearing follows concerns expressed last month by senior legal figures that some prison terms imposed on rioters were unduly harsh.

The former director of public prosecutions, Lord Macdonald, cautioned that the courts risked being swept up in a "collective loss of proportion".

Opening the appeal caes, the judges - Lord Judge, Lord Justice Thomas and Lord Justice Leveson – said they would view BBC television news coverage of the riots before they decided whether any of the sentences handed down were disproportionate. They would only watch material already broadcast.

Nine men and one woman are appealing against what their lawyers allege was the "manifestly excessive" length of their custodial sentences. None are challenging their convictions.

Three of the appellants appeared in court: Lorriane McGrane, a 19-year-old Territorial Army soldier from Peckham, south-east London; Enrico Vanasco, a 25-year-old chef from Manchester; and Hassan Koyuncu, an 18-year-old from north London.

Two of the appellants, Jordan Blackshaw, 20, from Northwich, Cheshire, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, from Warrington, Cheshire, had posted notices on Facebook inviting people to participate in riots in their home towns. Both received four years in prison. Their lawyers told the court that what their clients had done was "monumentally foolish", "hugely stupid" and "hugely shortsighted".

Gareth Roberts, representing Blackshaw, said the judge imposing the sentence "had failed to consider the leading authorities in relation to riot sentences [set] following the Bradford riots [in 2001] where sentences of four years were given to those carrying crossbows and wielding scaffolding poles".

But the lord chief justice implied that the appeal court viewed this summer's disturbances as more serious because they were far more widespread.

"[The Bradford cases] are not guideline cases," he said. "The Bradford riots were confined to Bradford. One of our concerns is that these were nationwide.

"At the moment we are inclined to consider that we should take that into consideration."
Addressing the "guidelines" formulated by Gilbart in Manchester as the courts began to process offenders, the appeal court justices were equally dismissive.

Leveson, who is also chairman of the Sentencing Council, said: "What concerns me is that the judge ... started to give sentence ranges ... for offences with which he was not concerned. That's not even something this court does."
To read the full article follow the link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/27/riot-judge-sentencing-guidelines-criticised?CMP=twt_guhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/27/riot-judge-sentencing-guidelines-criticised?CMP=twt_gu

Policing is too important for politicians to play with

Posted by Paul McKeever - 22 September

We face grave circumstances, says the chairman of the Police Federation.

With the Labour party conference fast approaching, there is the inevitable flurry of backroom activity that comes hand in hand with such events. Interest groups from all spectrums will be clamouring to meet and petition MPs, exchange business cards and solidify alliances. It is also an opportunity for political parties to build bridges and take up causes. Ed Miliband took up the cause of policing at the close of August with the launch of a national campaign against police cuts.

We obviously welcome his announcement. We are gratified to see politicians realising the gravity of the situation and the dangerous path that the government has embarked upon. However, reading the latest opposition press releases and hearing the Labour leader speak would perhaps lead the less informed to believe that Labour had no intention of cutting the police budget. Reading some of their press materials one would be forgiven for thinking that if Labour were in power they would in fact be increasing the police budget. This is obviously untrue.

Let us be under no illusion, we face grave circumstances. This is no time to be playing political games. Labour in power would be cutting the policing budget too; twelve per cent in fact. This figure, reached by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, is one that we also recognise as achievable. But let's not dress this up as something it is not; it is still a cut none the less. Tough decisions are having to be made and would have to be made regardless of who was in power. The cause of policing is not a band wagon to be jumped upon; it is a foundation of stable, British society. What we need is the mature consideration of facts, rather than the knee jerk consideration of political opportunity. It is too important an issue to be treated as such.

The Police Federation is often portrayed as intransigent, the police service often described as an unreformed monolith. This is both unfair and untrue. We have gone to considerable lengths to facilitate this government in its efforts to bring the budget deficit down. We were one of the few public services who actually tabled a comprehensive and far reaching efficiency programme. We tabled a fiscally prudent agenda at this year's Police Negotiating Board. We even proposed cash savings from police pay that equated to those proposed by the official side, identified by the Winsor recommendations. It was rejected and it was made clear to us that this was about more than just money.

The Police Federation has increasing felt like a political party amidst an ideological battleground. Policing seems to have become an intellectual playground for those to tinker with as they see fit. It is too important an issue to be treated as such. The Labour party are now calling for an independent review of British policing. It is not the Royal Commission we asked for, but we welcome it all the same. After all ,we have been calling for a Royal Commission for over a decade now.

I cannot emphasise enough that we recognise that this country is in dire financial straits and that a Royal Commission will take time and cost money. We are often told that the problems of policing are in the here and now and that they need to be dealt with head on, that a Royal Commission "is for situations when a problem is a long way off and its answer unclear". We agree. That is why we tabled efficiency savings that would deal with the budget problems of here and now, to buy time for us to have a full and frank discussion about the future of our police service.

The government's proposals for this country's police service, whether you agree with them or not, present a fundamental philosophical shift. The results of the last election meant that no single party's manifesto was endorsed but that a compromise was reached. All three parties had very different visions for policing. That's why we need our government to go to the public up and down this country and ask them what they want from us, be this through their elected representatives in parliament or through a Royal Commission/independent review. It's the democratic thing to do; it's the right thing to do.

Behind the riots: what young people think about the 2011 summer unrest

Malcolm James
guardian.co.uk, Monday 5 September 2011

Following David Cameron's call for a sociological analysis of the riots "when the dust settles", sociologists from universities around the UK have come together to provide an initial analysis of the riots.

The articles contained in this series cover nine affected areas: Birmingham, Manchester, Salford, Brixton, Clapham, Hackney, Lewisham, Wood Green and Walworth. The last six areas are in London. Three weeks after the action, the articles provide important insights into the causes, motivations, actions and consequences of the disturbances. Through interviews with young people, they start to illustrate much-needed local pictures of what happened in different places and why.

Following the riots, the vast majority of defendants that came before magistrates' courts were young people under 25. The articles show that, if we are to understand the riots, it is young people not politicians we should be listening to. Some those interviewed were involved in the action, some were on the fringe, some knew people who took part, and some decided not to be involved. The authors of the articles are all sociologists who live or work in the areas covered. Together, they are writing in association with the British Sociological Association, Race and Ethnicity Study Group.

Each article functions as a window into the local contexts in which the riots unfolded. And while there is not, nor should there be, a single catch-all analysis summing up the riots nationwide, common themes and interconnections do emerge.

From the death of Mark Duggan in Tottenham, the riots fanned out into 46 local authorities. Whereas Cameron quashed the disturbances as "pure criminality", devoid of any political meaning, there was evidently some shared motivation, cause or desire for the actions that followed. Young people we interviewed thought the motivation political, even if they also recognised that some actions were opportunistic. They acknowledged that while the riots were about "getting paid", they were also (particularly in London) caused by Duggan's death, and the subsequent disrespectful treatment of his family by the authorities.

The looting, discussed by some as an ironic critique of consumerism – "shopping riots" – was often more directly explained as a response to repeated stop-and-search, racist policing, deprivation, poverty, unemployment, cuts to the educational maintenance allowance (EMA), anger, and inequalities between the haves and the have-nots.

Many interviewees identified deprivation and inequality as root issues. Some spoke about the lack of work opportunities and access to education, as well as the EMA cuts. Some believed that getting an education was the key to the golden gate, but a year after graduation they were still struggling to find work. For others, also out of work, a university degree had never been on the cards.

But much of the anger was directed at the police. Young people spoke of incessant stop-and-search accompanied by rudeness, arrogance and racism. Some young people talked of Duggan's death not as a unique injustice, but as yet another example of police murder. Young people spoke of the riots as a means of "sticking two fingers up" at the authorities, and for a couple of nights relishing having the upper-hand.

They spoke of the multicultural make-up of the riots. They were clear – these were not race riots. This is not to say, however, that in some places race was not an issue. Following the deaths of three Asian young men on Dudley Road, the longstanding tensions between Birmingham's black and Asian communities resurfaced, and abated, as people turned away from race relations and towards problems with community representation and leadership.

Finally, many young people talked about the riots as a consequence of the anger and frustration felt at not seeing a future. Unable to see education, jobs and pensions on their horizon, some explained how they sought pleasure in consumerism. But while those they looked up to accessed and displayed these objects freely, for young people they were often out of reach. As consumers first and foremost, the inability to shop made them feel unfulfilled and lacking in self respect. In some places the signs of these divides were part of the architecture around them – the upward mobility of the cityscapes of global capitalism looked increasingly remote.

To read more, follow the link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/05/young-people-2011-summer-unrest?CMP=twt_gu

The 15,000 police who never make arrests - because they are too busy doing paperwork

5th September 2011

By Jack Doyle

Nearly 15,000 police officers did not arrest a single criminal last year, a report reveals today.

The figures will reinforce concerns that too many officers are stuck in ‘back office’ jobs, doing paperwork and not carrying out front-line police tasks.

Research by the Policy Exchange think-tank found 14,500 officers had no arrests against their names in 2010.

The findings are from 18 out of the 43 forces in England and Wales, and if repeated across the remainder it could mean tens of thousands more are not making arrests.

The report found one in 20 officers – a total of 7,280 – are doing roles which could be carried out by cheaper civilian staff, including work in control rooms, forensics, and administration. Replacing warranted officers with civilians would save around £20,000 a year for every job, the think-tank found.

The study, The Cost of the Cops, found that in one force barely half of all officers made any arrests last year.

More than 1,000 of the 2,076 officers In Derbyshire made no arrests, and in the West Midlands, the country’s second largest force, nearly 2,000 of 8,485 officers – nearly one in four – made no arrests.

The report accepts that many officers not making arrests do important work such as management, running police cells and undercover investigation. But it says the findings suggest ‘there remain too many officers not in front-line roles where their warranted powers are being exercised’.

Blair Gibbs of Policy Exchange said: ‘Too many sworn officers are hidden away in back offices.

‘Some forces like Surrey and Suffolk became more efficient by hiring cheaper civilian staff but many did not.
‘As a result taxpayers have spent at least £500million since 2006 in extra employment costs for more than 7,000 police officers who have a uniform, but who aren’t policing.’

The report will be welcomed by ministers, who have argued that police chiefs can maintain front-line services despite budget cuts of a fifth by 2015.

Peter Fahy of the Association of Chief Police Officers said: ‘In the past police forces would be financially penalised if they went below a target number of police officers, and this has acted as a barrier to further civilianisation.

‘That reflects historical political obsession with the number of police officers rather than the effectiveness of the overall workforce and service to the public.’

Mr Fahy defended the use of police officers in ‘office-based’ jobs such as handling intelligence, training and processing offenders.

The Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers in England and Wales and is campaigning against cuts to funding, said the report’s claims ‘simply do not translate into reality’.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2033755/The-15-000-police-make-arrests-busy-doing-paperwork.html#ixzz1X4tYtfHV

Restorative justice hailed 'success' in Cambridgeshire

The use of restorative justice for minor offenders has been hailed "a success" by Cambridgeshire Police.

About 800 officers have been trained to hand out on-the-spot punishments to keep first-time offenders out of the criminal justice system.

Restorative justice has been used in the county since the beginning of 2011 and to date 190 offenders have been dealt with through the system.

The system is only employed if the victim of the crime agrees to its use.

The alternative to traditional processes of arrest and punishment is based on three principles.

Insp Dominic Human said: "You have to acknowledge that what you've done is wrong, you do some reparation to put it right, and you reintegrate into society.

"So you move on very quickly, accepting that you've been given a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity not to become a criminal.

"On many occasions it's simply that a victim just wants an apology, and restorative justice allows that to happen."
'Same outcome'

Trained officers ask victims of minor crimes to suggest appropriate punishments, and then determine whether that particular solution is fair.

"We're not judge and jury at all," said Insp Human. "We are simply facilitating an opportunity for someone to immediately say: 'I've done something wrong and I want to put it right'."

As part of the restorative project, youth offenders who caused criminal damage to a window agreed to clean all the windows on the house.

A 16-year-old shoplifter who stole goods to the value of £3 had to clean 100 shopping baskets and a 12-year-old who caused £75 worth of damage to a car had to send a written apology, and the parents paid for damage.

Insp Human said that the system saved "a massive amount of time" when compared to arrest and punishment through the courts.

"We can get the same outcome, in a very short time, at the scene.

"The motive for introducing restorative justice is because it's about doing the right thing for the victim.

"In the cases so far, we've saved over 1,000 operational policing hours which we can then use to concentrate on other important issues within the community."

Cambridgeshire Constabulary intends to train all officers in the use of restorative justice methods in the future.