Jonty Bravery Sentenced

[Fundoreen]

Jonty Bravery: Autistic teenager who threw six-year-old boy from Tate Modern jailed for at least 15 years

[worsy]

Should have been double.

[anonymous-user]

No where near long enough, the child has to live with their injuries for life.

More worrying is this most likely could have been prevented as he told his carers what he wanted to do but they didn't say anything.

Doesn't the Joint Enterprise law have any impact in this case?

[Cold]

I might have read it wrong, but I thought he was jailed for life with a minimum term of 15 years?

[vikingaero]

Discretionary Life 15 Years.

[anonymous-user]

It seems quite rare in this country that a life sentence actually means life. The child and his family have a life sentence.

[Fundoreen]

Bravery has a disability but its seems to have manifested itself as a desire to harm a random stranger.
You get these people that try to push someone under a train as well.
Is this common?
Should have been sent to work on an isolated sheep station 300 miles from any other town in Aus.
I wonder how this urge would have manifested itself then?
At least your realise the authorities are actually idiots looking at some of the terrorist incidents
and the mental cases involved being allowed to roam freely amongst us.

[bristolbaron]

gottans said:

It seems quite rare in this country that a life sentence actually means life imprisonment. The child and his family have a life sentence.

FTFY. A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not necessarily a custodial life sentence.
Prisoners who receive a life sentence will have a minimum custodial term before being eligible for parole, after which they will serve the rest of their term on parole - they’re not released and forgotten about.

It is rare to receive a ‘whole life order’ rather than a life sentence, which would then mean serving the whole sentence in custody.

[anonymous-user]

bristolbaron said:

gottans said:

It seems quite rare in this country that a life sentence actually means life imprisonment. The child and his family have a life sentence.

FTFY. A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not necessarily a custodial life sentence.
Prisoners who receive a life sentence will have a minimum custodial term before being eligible for parole, after which they will serve the rest of their term on parole - they’re not released and forgotten about.

It is rare to receive a ‘whole life order’ rather than a life sentence, which would then mean serving the whole sentence in custody.

A valid distinction but at the end of the minimum term, the safety of the public will be down to the parole board if he is in prison or a medical assessment to judge if he continues to present a risk. I would rather the judge nailed it properly right at beginning, the parole board doesn't have the best of records in these matters.

He will be out in 7.5 years, back in supervised care which worked so well the first time around.

[21TonyK]

The fact that Bravery is autistic and diagnosed with a personality disorder does not in any way diminish his responsibility or the severity and impact of his actions but it highlights the poor quality of care he was under.

He described exactly what he planned to to in advance saying he would go to prison which is what he wanted but no-one did anything about it.

He was still 17 but one of the biggest issues young people with special needs face is what happens when they hit 18? All the support from schools, social workers and most of funding for care and support disappears. If they don't have strong family support it can go very wrong, very quickly.

The agencies that were supposed to be supporting and helping him have to carry some of the blame in this case.

[waynedear]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not to worry, SS will learn lessons from it.

[21TonyK]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

There we go then, good old "joined up multi-agency care"...

Oh well, "lessons will be learned".

Unfortunately its too late for the poor kid Bravery tried to murder and for his family.

[Pit Pony]

I'm sorry but this looks like criminal negligence on the part of the carers. Are they likely to be subject to any action?

[Craigyp79]

And this is what happens when you strip social services to the bone, alienate and chase away most of the decent social workers then blame the poor sods who are left struggling with huge caseloads and impossible decisions for the fallout...

[21TonyK]

Pit Pony said:

I'm sorry but this looks like criminal negligence on the part of the carers. Are they likely to be subject to any action?

I'm sure a thorough investigation will show that it was due to a procedural error cause by a lack of staff or it was a training issue. A full report will absolve everyone from responsibility.

I sound so cynical but I have seen first hand the effort it can take to get concerns addressed with action rather than "another review".

[anonymous-user]

21TonyK said:

Pit Pony said:

I'm sorry but this looks like criminal negligence on the part of the carers. Are they likely to be subject to any action?

I'm sure a thorough investigation will show that it was due to a procedural error cause by a lack of staff or it was a training issue. A full report will absolve everyone from responsibility.

I sound so cynical but I have seen first hand the effort it can take to get concerns addressed with action rather than "another review".

It happens so often, they probably have a procedure for arse covering, give it a couple of years and something equally awful will happen....again!

[MikeyC]

Craigyp79 said:

And this is what happens when you strip social services to the bone, alienate and chase away most of the decent social workers then blame the poor sods who are left struggling with huge caseloads and impossible decisions for the fallout...

Incompetence in Social Services has been going on a long while, I seem to recall a certain Sharon Shoesmith being sacked in 2008 - Labour gov so surely plenty of cash ?

[Big-Bo-Beep]

I'm interested how should the agencies have dealt with him knowing his mounting desire to kill someone ?

Apart from a locked room in a secure hospital, therapy, pharmaceuticals, what the hell does one do with broken people ?

[Winterway]

Craigyp79 said:

And this is what happens when you strip social services to the bone, alienate and chase away most of the decent social workers then blame the poor sods who are left struggling with huge caseloads and impossible decisions for the fallout...

This. I'm not aware of anything quite like this resulting in my area, but as I work for the local authority I can tell you a lot of good experienced people have been lost in recent restructures with reduced team numbers and a 'competitive' interview process, to be replaced with inexperienced former apprentices etc on lower grades.

Sorry for off topic, but as it is obvious I'm refering to my own experience! I'm in IT, but heard the same story throughout the organisation. I probably shoulder some blame myself. Team reduced by one and I lost out in phase 1, however after spending a week making sure my EOI was solid (will never make that mistake again, they don't read 'em) and awaiting an interview date, they pushed back 2 months and moved the goal posts to allow our apprentices to apply (two more roles back in the team)... I don't know for sure but I'm certain there were no more than a few points in it.

[bitchstewie]

Big-Bo-Beep said:

I'm interested how should the agencies have dealt with him knowing his mounting desire to kill someone ?

Apart from a locked room in a secure hospital, therapy, pharmaceuticals, what the hell does one do with broken people ?

I think that's the question that nobody has an answer too.

The attack is appalling and it seems very easy to point out "he said he was going to do something like that".

The difficulty is that I suspect if you act on every warning signal someone might give you're not just talking a small change in the system or the resources available you're talking giant leap.

Billions probably.

I don't know how you prevent it.