Another victim of releasing prisoners on parole

[Jaglover]

Hanson was released on parole three months before the murder
Of banker John Monckton.

This was 7 years into a 12 year sentence for attempted murder.

He was released despite an official assessment calculating that his chances of committing another violent offence were 91%!!!

The madness of automatically releasing prisoners on parole, whatever their like hood of re-offending, has claimed another victim.

BBC said:

Questions over early prison release Hanson was released from prison three months before the murder Following his conviction for stabbing banker John Monckton to death, questions have been asked about the early release from prison and subsequent supervision of Damien Hanson. A public inquiry is expected to be ordered next week. Hanson, 24, of no fixed address, was released three months before he murdered Mr Monckton. He was seven years into a 12-year jail sentence for shooting a youth three times after he had stolen a Rolex watch from his victim. Hanson - as someone sentenced to four or more years in jail - was entitled to apply for release on parole - or licence - once half of his sentence had been served. The Parole Board is required to balance the risk of further offences being committed... against any benefits to the public and the offender of a longer period of resettlement in the community Parole Board The Parole Board for England and Wales said the safety of the public was "the overriding issue" in deciding whether prisoners could be released on parole at this stage. "When handling applications for parole release, the Parole Board is required to balance the risk of further offences being committed during the parole period, against any benefits to the public and the offender of a longer period of resettlement in the community," it said in a statement. Decisions are based on the offender's background and their crimes, what led them to commit their crimes, their progress in prison and reports from agencies that had regular contact with them during their sentence. In the case of Hanson, his first application to be released on parole - six years into his 12 year sentence - was refused. Under parole rules, Hanson was entitled to a review after a year. Parole conditions At the second attempt, he was granted parole and was released on 27 August 2004 - three months before he murdered Mr Monckton. It emerged on Friday that Hanson had been let out of jail on licence despite an official assessment calculating that his chances of committing another violent offence were 91%. Anything above 75% is considered high risk. It has also emerged that, on his release, he was dealt with solely by the Probation Service rather than with the multi-agency approach usually used to monitor the most dangerous offenders. This was despite the fact that he has spent most of his life since the age of 14 in prison for a string of convictions including burglary, unlawful wounding, attempted burglary and attempted murder. Hanson was late for a curfew on the day of Mr Monckton's murder The Parole Board said on Friday it had already reviewed the case of Hanson. It would work closely with the police and probation service "to ensure that processes are strengthened", it said in the statement. "We wish to hold an inter-agency case review here to ascertain what further lessons can be learned and whether there should be more research into the causes of re-offending on licence," the statement added. On the day of his release Hanson moved into a bail hostel in Streatham, south London, as one of the conditions of his parole - or licence. Those conditions vary from case to case. They can include receiving psychiatric or medical treatment, not to undertake particular kinds of work and not to communicate with named people. Prosecutors in the Monckton murder case revealed in court that Hanson's conditions included that he must be at his bail hostel between 11pm and 6am. The court heard that, on the day of Mr Monckton's murder and after he had changed his clothes and gone for a meal, Hanson had arrived at his hostel a few minutes late for his 11pm curfew. Another condition was that he must not enter the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham - the scene of a number of crimes he had committed in the past. Breaking a condition would have meant his parole would have been revoked and he would have been returned to jail. Inquiry call Martin Wargent, of the Probation Boards Association said there should have been "very tight checks" on Hanson by the Probation Service. "He would be supervised by a probation officer, he would be seen very regularly, there would be visits at home, and in some cases where the risk is assessed as very high, there would be police surveillance as well," he told BBC News. If things work well then there are very tight checks on how people are behaving and what people are doing but no system is foolproof Probation Boards Association But he called for an "immediate inquiry" into how Hanson had been allowed to commit such a brutal crime while under supervision. "If things work well then there are very tight checks on how people are behaving and what people are doing but no system is foolproof. "This is a very sad reflection of that." The Home Office said it could not comment until the case of Hanson's co-defendant Elliot White is concluded. It is expected to order a public inquiry after Hanson and White are sentenced.

[sadoksevoli]

And this is enough of a shock to get angry about? This isn't really news any more - victims of crime are perpetually let down, often for this very rerason - the punishment and deterrent effects of the criminal justice system are virtually non-existent and the emphasis on rehabilitation means a system played by the offenders to secure better treatment and early release. Meanwhile the Police, the parasitic legal establishment and politicians refuse to allow the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens to defend themselves adequately, while failing to fulfil their side of the contract in protecting them. And in this siutation we don't get a refund for poor services, we can't sue for breach of contract and we certainly can't eradicate the criminal cancer from our society (the socialists having hijacked this aim with their "social justice" and "they're victims of an inequal society" rubbish), the answer is to pray the criminals don't come to you or emigrate.

[Jaglover]

sadoksevoli said:

And this is enough of a shock to get angry about? This isn't really news any more - victims of crime are perpetually let down, often for this very rerason - the punishment and deterrent effects of the criminal justice system are virtually non-existent and the emphasis on rehabilitation means a system played by the offenders to secure better treatment and early release. .

I would consider this more shocking than the norm, because a report prepared by themselves before he was released said it was a virtual certainty he would commit more violent crime once released, but is was done anyway.

It was not the case that those assessing him were hoodwinked in any way, simply that he was released on parole despite this.

[polus]

It does have that element of "Oh its happened again, how awful"

I dont really understand whats so hard, surely they look at the prisoners case before release, how could this have been missed?

I know the UK prison resources arnt endless but the attitude seems to be that if offenders have served 60% of the sentence its enough. Obviously this is speculation but I shall ask a guy I know on monday who worked in prisons for 15 years.

[sadoksevoli]

The whole system is riddled with problems, false theories and people who are either incompoetent or who try their best and are beaten down by the system. But to me it's clear - elements of society have gone beyond any reasonable, affordable or realistic hope of being rehabilitated into decent members of society at large. The naive theories of academics, politicians, parole officers and others involved in determining policy should be discarded, the true cost to society gauged and determined physical and legal measures carried out to restrict these elements in their ability to wage their evil little campaigns of crime against the rest of society. The contract is this - if society perceives you to be repeatedly at odds with it, then you permanently lose your right to be a part of that society and enjoy the benefits of its prosperity.

[ZR1cliff]

Ive been following this story and have found the whole thing sickening,ime trying to look at it from another angle,why would a crim thats not long been out of prison after a longish sentence want to commit such a serious crime to put himself back behind bars for life?
What makes a person tick to not only destroy other peoples lives but also virtualy end their own......
Are some of us including myself so far out of touch with another sector of the community in this country that we dont know there are beings in this country so low down about life that they are so easily willing to swap it for a life time of incarceration?.
It would be interesting to know how many "lifers" for serious crimes are behind bars compared with the 50's,60',70's & 80's.

[granville]

Hats of to young James, above, for some excellent quasi ranting which concisely defines my own feelings.

Good to know there will be at least one member of the resistance with me at the barricade come the meltdown, military beret suitably donned and sten gun primed, ready to cough death.

[Jaglover]

sadoksevoli said:

The whole system is riddled with problems, false theories and people who are either incompoetent or who try their best and are beaten down by the system. But to me it's clear - elements of society have gone beyond any reasonable, affordable or realistic hope of being rehabilitated into decent members of society at large. The naive theories of academics, politicians, parole officers and others involved in determining policy should be discarded, the true cost to society gauged and determined physical and legal measures carried out to restrict these elements in their ability to wage their evil little campaigns of crime against the rest of society. The contract is this - if society perceives you to be repeatedly at odds with it, then you permanently lose your right to be a part of that society and enjoy the benefits of its prosperity.

My thoughts exactly.

There are some criminals who deserve a second chance and should be released after rehabilitation. Others have degenerated into a feral state and should be locked up until death or physical infirmity means they no-longer pose a threat to the public.

[ZR1cliff]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Looks like he's been run over by a Massey Ferguson.