75ZT Community

She has done the whole DRR thing Mick. Costs an absolute fortune and she was breached for non compliance, sentence revoked and sent to custody.

See, you now know that I don't just go to Court for a laugh

But you also see that, of the options open to us, there is very little room to manoeuvre.

Oh, just to add colour to the picture, if she goes to custody, all her fines and costs etc are remitted.

Any new ideas would be welcome.

raistlin wrote:She has done the whole DRR thing Mick. Costs an absolute fortune and she was breached for non compliance, sentence revoked and sent to custody.

Not surprised by this. There are precious few who make it, most will die way before their time. Some will say that's the best option, doesn't help the grieving parents. spouses and children. Here, I know what what I am talking about, not personally but by close association with those that have been devastated. The consequences of drug addiction are not confined to the user
Sadly I have no other advice or ideas. Other than to take the supply of drugs out of the hands of criminals and put it in the hands of government agencies. 80% of all crime would cease but, that is another conversation entirely.

Mick wrote:take the supply of drugs out of the hands of criminals and put it in the hands of government agencies.

Oh, amen to that Mick.

raistlin wrote:

MrDoodles wrote:How about 48 hours in the stocks?

Failing that, how about the birch?

Not sure too many would want a repeat of either!

I thought you were going to be serious Mark

But to what extent do we only have ourselves to blame for situations like this?

We have a system that allows 16 year old girls to get pregnant, for which we award them either a Council house or Housing Benefit!

We then pay them more and more money for lying on their backs and knocking kids out to whatever feckless idiot is passing and when they then don't have enough money to support their drink/tobacco/weed habits, (delete as applicable) they then go out shop lifting, for which the "punishment" for this is either a fine that the Tax payer pays for them or a stay in one of Her Majesty's 5 star hotels, with 3 hot meals a day, computer games, widescreen TV, gym etc etc...

IF jail was a deterrent (which in my opinion, it isn't) then I don't think so many would be so keen to have more than one visit!

Hang on though Mark, aren't you getting a little off track here?

I accept (without necessarily agreeing with) the points you raise above but I thought we were discussing viable, doable alternatives to a financial penalty?

raistlin wrote:Hang on though Mark, aren't you getting a little off track here?

I accept (without necessarily agreeing with) the points you raise above but I thought we were discussing viable, doable alternatives to a financial penalty?

But if you can't put her on Community Service because she's a drug user, Jail isn't an option because of the child care issues and if you fine her, she only then goes out and shop lifts more, I can't think of any other options open to you!

The problem you have, is like most things in the current Society, there are no longer any consequences for anyone's actions!

And until you address that issue, the feckless will continue to appear before you, with exactly the same issues!

Personally, I would make prisons more austere and make criminals serve their full sentences. Offenders should be made to understand that they are being punished and not rewarded with a state-subsidised holiday for their crimes!

I would use electronically tagged “chain gangs” to provide labour for projects such as coastal defences and I would introduce automatic prison sentences for all repeat offenders!

But then, what do I know!

Perhaps it is time for you to start lobbying then Mark

BTW, have you ever been inside a prison?

raistlin wrote:Perhaps it is time for you to start lobbying then Mark

BTW, have you ever been inside a prison?

I stood in the Local Election last year and will be standing in the County Council Elections next year!

And so far, I've managed to stay on the right side of a Prison Wall!

If it was so bad in there, no one would go in more than once!

MrDoodles wrote:I stood in the Local Election last year and will be standing in the County Council Elections next year! Good for you mate.

But you don't have to hold office you know.

MrDoodles wrote:If it was so bad in there, no one would go in more than once!

Sorry Mark, but in my experience, that is a view based on myth. Not trying to be insulting but what I mean is, you really need to see the people for whom the prospect of a custodial sentence is to be desired.

raistlin wrote:

MrDoodles wrote:I stood in the Local Election last year and will be standing in the County Council Elections next year! Good for you mate.

But you don't have to hold office you know.

MrDoodles wrote:If it was so bad in there, no one would go in more than once!

Sorry Mark, but in my experience, that is a view based on myth. Not trying to be insulting but what I mean is, you really need to see the people for whom the prospect of a custodial sentence is to be desired.

No desire to insult you either, but if it was so bad, no one would want to go back!

MrDoodles wrote:No desire to insult you either, but if it was so bad, no one would want to go back!

In point of fact, prisons are pretty inhumane places. Please take my word for that rather than the sensational media clap-trap which is trotted out so frequently, or better still, come with me on a visit to Winson Green, see / feel for yourself the total desperation and degradation of the inmates and make an informed decision Mark. If that sounds a bit snotty, it isn't meant to but you said yourself, you've never been in a prison so you'd agree, I hope, that you can't really make that informed decision without experience

Then you could sit in the public gallery of my Court or any Court and imagine the lifestyle of those who would wish for the stability of a custodial sentence and for whom the prospect of the fabled playstation is a long way down the list of priorities that make the custodial environment the preferred option.

Unfortunately, it would, I suspect, also demonstrate to you the utter futility of prison sentences for most people, and I say that as a hard liner Magistrate who is no stranger to sending people to prison.

I've seen some right villains in my time and I've heard and seen evidence that would curdle the milk on your breakfast cornflakes but I have to say that by far the majority of those sent to prison are inadequate rather than evil.

Anyway, BNP membership aside what would be an adequate, effective sentence for the subject of this thread Mark? Radical or not, it would have to be doable. Would it be something already within our remit or would it require legislation?

For the subject of this topic I would advocate a drug free environment for 3 months as a guaranteed punishment for any misdemeanour, that excludes all drugs, even an aspirin. Obviously that would require a different type of incarceration to that currently available. As we know there is no shortage of drugs in any and all prisons/ secure facilities. Just the threat of cold turkey? Might be worth a try.

(Edit) Oh bugger, I forgot about the poor darlings human rights.

(edit, edit) Double bugger, forgot about the kids for a moment. Ah well, back to the drawing board.

raistlin wrote:

MrDoodles wrote:No desire to insult you either, but if it was so bad, no one would want to go back!

would be an adequate, effective sentence for the subject of this thread Mark? Radical or not, it would have to be doable. Would it be something already within our remit or would it require legislation?

To be fair, under the current system, we are pretty screwed when dealing with the like of the people you have mentioned!

So much needs changing in our current society, that I look forward to meeting you at a meet and discussing it with you face to face, as I fear my solutions would be too many and varied to post on a Forum about cars!

As no one was hurt in the theft for a measly £10 you could decide not to send the lady to jail. And if you did the probability of her reoffending would be down to her own choices when she is released. What ever you decide to do Paul you are stuffed. Some crims never return to prison and in those cases a custodial sentence works. Given the history for this mum Heroin has marked her card. I for one thinks that a custodial sentence is a useful deterrent if other professional supports and monitoring services are brought into play on release. The stakes are high as she is a mum and will continue to offend and one hopes she does not add robbery with violence to her tariff.

A recurring theme in these things is cost to the public purse. In straightened times it is gradually becoming an imperative that a resolution must be seen through an economic prism that focuses on the isolated costs of the individual’s penalty/rehabilitation and therefore seen as a singular, multiplied by the total number of offenders. That, increasingly, does not seem to be working. I suggest that it is misleading and can only lead to cost-based remedies doomed to failure, as the budgets are reduced and become even more politicised.

The primary objective, the interests of the offender put to one side for a moment, might be the alternative of cutting the link between the offending parent/guardian and the minors involved. It is well known that bad, as well as good, behaviour is learned and that problem children more often than not, but by no means in every case, come from homes with problem parents.

In the case of the OP it seems reasonable to assume that the children might well follow the mother’s example and continue the tragic cycle. If we are determined to attack this destructive pantomime, and not just in the interests of so-called ’society’ but mainly the interests of the neglected and abused children, perhaps we should tackle it with resolve rather than the wringing of hands and the platitudes of ’rights’ activists.

The prize is the gradual reduction in offending and offenders; the integration of non-maladjusted offspring making a contribution rather than an eternal cost. I could go further with precise alternatives, but brevity may be a better choice.

Perhaps we need to go back to first principles here? What makes people like the woman in question tick? What is it that she needs, wants must have? Prison and fines patently do not work; pointless trying them again and besides only a lunatic would continue trying something that consistently failed in the hope that it would somehow eventually work!

Public acts of punishment probably would not work either, would more than likely result in “badges” of honour anyway.
Let’s turn this on its head. What is it that keeps us (mostly) on the straight and narrow? Well in mine and my wife’s case it was a strict upbringing. Parents who set strict boundaries on what we could and could not do. Peers bringing us in to line when we strayed from the right track? It would appear that the person in question did not benefit from such.

So, what about a 24hr, seven days a week, 365 days a year minder/mentor/disciplinarian? Armed with the abilities and power to keep them where they should be. A former Sgt Major type of character would appear to fit the bill. As Jumper puts it very well there is a pattern here and it needs t be broken. Perhaps this may help to break the cycle of child see parent do, child do; child becomes parent and so forth. The women’s children will see that their mother lives her life the way she does and will more than likely mimic her.

But in reality I don’t think there is an answer. Society from the dawn of time has had to cope and deal with such characters and sadly will have to continue to do so.

Best of luck Paul. Really don't envy your task at times. Respect.

Well worth thinking about Gary. Clearly not immediately available though.

As an interesting and not unrelated aside:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9690784/Prisoners-could-be-banned-from-watching-Sky-TV-in-jail.html

Hmm very difficult. Really not good for those kids. I wonder what is done in other countries in this situation?

Interesting to read that the prisoner's work to pay for Sky, still not convinced it's really appropriate though. At least it's not coming from the taxpayer, the majority of whom cannot afford Sky (like myself).

I can now offer the following (drafted at the same time as my earlier post but parked in the interests of not wishing to bore!)
Please forgive the length of my replies, I like to show my ‘work in the margins’ as it where so that it helps to justify my view!

Hmmmm…given the repeatedly acknowledged limited range of options, and the unsuitability or lack of efficacy of each of them, surely that makes the choice relatively easy. From a menu of bad choices, you choose the least bad!

My first post on this may have appeared off the cuff and not aroused comment, but in fact was based on a belief that what counts is what works, and it’s clear that nothing has ever worked yet!

Our apparent obsession, although well-meaning, with the continuity of family life, meaning those families where ‘dysfunctional’ doesn’t come anywhere near an accurate description, seems to be counter-productive. Countless generations of criminality have succeeded each other with seemingly no indication that government has a real grasp of the serious social and economic stranglehold adolescent crime has on millions of people.

Difficult decisions have to be made before major upheaval takes over, the proliferation of drugs being a glaring example. Calls for ’drugs’ to be legalised are ridiculous and address a different problem. As are suggestions that somehow government, with its disgraceful record of lack of efficiency and control in virtually everything it touches. Because murder and rape are still frequently committed should we ban life sentences for those who offend? It’s the same argument.

My previous post concerning nature v. nurture might, given the courage and determination to actually face the real problem, produce an effect that benefits all - particularly the lost children of so many offenders.

My motivation in this is entirely the well-being and continued progress through adolescence into adulthood of children, sidestepping the malign influence of peers and disruptive family members that have such a destructive effect on those bright, fresh, potentially brilliant and successful minds. A child, born in the grinding immorality and deprivation of a mother or violent father who are dependent on drugs and criminality will have no chance whatsoever to realise that potential.

If we are genuinely concerned about equality, and I don’t mean those chattering class impostors race or sexuality, then make a start with humanity at a totally instinctive and unadulterated level, the clean mind of the child - completely without the learned prejudices and influences which so often pollute.

A £10 theft is paltry. Do we not attribute value to a child’s immature mind? That is the real crime committed by the mother here, and the one should be taken with other.