Offender restricted zones
Discussion
Is this actually legal? If someone has served their sentence how can this be legal?
I understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
I understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
Edited by Inbox on Friday 8th August 15:14
Inbox said:
Is this actually legal? If someone has served their sentence how can this be legal?
I understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
bI understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
Edited by Inbox on Friday 8th August 15:14
ks to them, maybe they'll think again next time. 
Maybe we should invent a special place that caterers for their needs, but not their wants, that securely keeps them contained and everyone outside of this place safe from them. This place would need to be secure though, so maybe have walls or other barriers instead of geo fencing.
Can't think what such a place could be called though, but a bit like a zoo for human animals, but without paying visitors.
Can't think what such a place could be called though, but a bit like a zoo for human animals, but without paying visitors.
I understand but this is turning it around and saying you must stay in a specific area i.e. you can't travel anywhere.
I thought once the sentence given was served, you are rehabilitated in the eyes of the law and free to live your life until you do something that lands you back in the system.
This seems like a second punishment, it is certainly a restriction on someone's movements.
I thought once the sentence given was served, you are rehabilitated in the eyes of the law and free to live your life until you do something that lands you back in the system.
This seems like a second punishment, it is certainly a restriction on someone's movements.
My understanding from reading the article is that they are talking about people who are on Licence, so they've been released halfway through their sentence (possibly reducing to a third!) but with conditions.
One common condition is tagging, but the current setup is a bad joke really so if this works well then it's a good thing.
I've got zero issues with restrictions on anyone currently serving a custodial sentence, but released on licence.
One common condition is tagging, but the current setup is a bad joke really so if this works well then it's a good thing.
I've got zero issues with restrictions on anyone currently serving a custodial sentence, but released on licence.
Inbox said:
If they are on probation/out on licence I can understand this but when their sentence/probation ends the issue this change tries to resolve is still there.
I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
I doubt we are getting the full details of the proposal. In any case, crime and punishment, particularly of sex offenders, and domestic abusers, is a vote catcher if it gets the correct launch. It needs a catchy title, some support from victims, and it'll be great. Well, at least as far as gaining some votes. Whether it will do the job is another matter entirely.I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
Inbox said:
If they are on probation/out on licence I can understand this but when their sentence/probation ends the issue this change tries to resolve is still there.
I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
It doesn’t say that it’s permanent, you are making that up. I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
Dingu said:
Inbox said:
If they are on probation/out on licence I can understand this but when their sentence/probation ends the issue this change tries to resolve is still there.
I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
It doesn’t say that it’s permanent, you are making that up. I think this is a permanent post-release geo-location restriction enforced by the probation service, a never ending sentence.
Inbox said:
Is this actually legal? If someone has served their sentence how can this be legal?
I understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
Because they haven't served their sentence, very few do; they're released on licence because paroling people is an incentive to not behave like an animal in gaol and these days the prisons are full. The article specifically mentions sex cases which generally end up on the sex offenders list, which is effectively a greatly extended period of probationary supervision, it's just a variation of existing rules.I understand the concern and they can restricted from entering a certain area already but turning it on it head seems to be further punishment.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce832zyg1vlo
Edited by Inbox on Friday 8th August 15:14
Article also says:
“ Sources say the plans will be attached to the sentencing bill likely to be introduced to Parliament next month.
This bill will probably also seek to reduce the minimum amount of time less serious offenders have to serve to a third of their sentence, as part of efforts to ease prison overcrowding. “
And there’s your answer - actual prisons are expensive, so the future is virtual containment through tagging.
“ Sources say the plans will be attached to the sentencing bill likely to be introduced to Parliament next month.
This bill will probably also seek to reduce the minimum amount of time less serious offenders have to serve to a third of their sentence, as part of efforts to ease prison overcrowding. “
And there’s your answer - actual prisons are expensive, so the future is virtual containment through tagging.
Inbox said:
I understand but this is turning it around and saying you must stay in a specific area i.e. you can't travel anywhere.
I thought once the sentence given was served, you are rehabilitated in the eyes of the law and free to live your life until you do something that lands you back in the system.
This seems like a second punishment, it is certainly a restriction on someone's movements.
Second punishment, similar to motor insurance increasing after a couple of speeding tickttsI thought once the sentence given was served, you are rehabilitated in the eyes of the law and free to live your life until you do something that lands you back in the system.
This seems like a second punishment, it is certainly a restriction on someone's movements.
pheasant said:
Second punishment, similar to motor insurance increasing after a couple of speeding ticktts
No. It has flipped the previous system around so that the victim of, for example a violent assault, doesn’t feel trapped inside their little bubble that the lowlife nasty piece of subhuman detritus isn’t allowed into.
Do NOT treat violent perpetrators as victims.
I had assumed that the swap form may not go to X to must stay in Y was to push the restriction on to the perpetrator rather that a specific victim or society in general.
If the restriction protects a victim and the victim moves /gets another job then there is no longer a need to go back to the court for a change to the terms with all the costs and delayed involved.
If the restriction protects a victim and the victim moves /gets another job then there is no longer a need to go back to the court for a change to the terms with all the costs and delayed involved.
Tony1963 said:
No.
It has flipped the previous system around so that the victim of, for example a violent assault, doesn’t feel trapped inside their little bubble that the lowlife nasty piece of subhuman detritus isn’t allowed into.
Do NOT treat violent perpetrators as victims.
Exactly.It has flipped the previous system around so that the victim of, for example a violent assault, doesn’t feel trapped inside their little bubble that the lowlife nasty piece of subhuman detritus isn’t allowed into.
Do NOT treat violent perpetrators as victims.
Mind you, I was listening to the news tis morning with Labour's idea to re-patriate foreign offenders at the point of sentencing.
'It will save £54k/year and free up prison places'. Any offender, other than murder and terrorism, will be deported immediately and it will be up to the home country to decide what to do with them!
Do they seriously think another country is going to spend money locking up somebody who is convicted here? A convicted rapist, or similar, would be deported and would likely then go free rather than serve years in prison.
Absolute jokers!
MustangGT said:
Exactly.
Mind you, I was listening to the news tis morning with Labour's idea to re-patriate foreign offenders at the point of sentencing.
'It will save £54k/year and free up prison places'. Any offender, other than murder and terrorism, will be deported immediately and it will be up to the home country to decide what to do with them!
Do they seriously think another country is going to spend money locking up somebody who is convicted here? A convicted rapist, or similar, would be deported and would likely then go free rather than serve years in prison.
Absolute jokers!
I do wonder though if a significant proportion of rape survivors wouldn’t prefer that their attacker was immediately removed and permanently banned (presumably?) from the country, rather than being sat in a UK prison trying every possible avenue to get out, remain in the country, etc etc?Mind you, I was listening to the news tis morning with Labour's idea to re-patriate foreign offenders at the point of sentencing.
'It will save £54k/year and free up prison places'. Any offender, other than murder and terrorism, will be deported immediately and it will be up to the home country to decide what to do with them!
Do they seriously think another country is going to spend money locking up somebody who is convicted here? A convicted rapist, or similar, would be deported and would likely then go free rather than serve years in prison.
Absolute jokers!
Southerner said:
I do wonder though if a significant proportion of rape survivors wouldn’t prefer that their attacker was immediately removed and permanently banned (presumably?) from the country, rather than being sat in a UK prison trying every possible avenue to get out, remain in the country, etc etc?
Then they can be deported on release. Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff