Life sentences in all but name

See below for an interesting article by David Rose, about sentences of imprisonment for public protection, which are effectively life sentences.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200703190027

Such sentences are imposed if the judge sentencing is satisfied that the defendant poses a significant risk of serious harm. The sting is that the judge must proceed upon the assumption that the defendant does pose a significant risk of serious harm if they have previous convictions for a specified offence, of which there are over 150. This gets to the point of David Rose's article that such sentences are being used too frequently. Over 1000 such sentences are imposed a year incomparison to 200 discretionary life sentences, the nearest equivalent sentence prior to April 2005.

The real difficulty is that the current offence, the record of previous convictions and the Probation Service Pre Sentence Report will provide the information upon which the decision is made. Pre Sentence Reports are now completed according to a computer matrix which will determine the risk of reoffending and risk of harm in the future. Such determinations are inevitably subjective.

The Court of Appeal will only interfere in situations where the judge has clearly made a mistake.

Offenders imprisoned for public protection will not be release unless they can satisfy the Parole Board that they are safe to be released. Given the current climate something the Parole Board will be increasingly reluctant to do.

As a consequence the government have unwittingly caused a large and long term increase in the prison population. The Home Office estimated that only 250 or so such sentences would be imposed a year.

The only case I have dealt with where such a sentence was imposed was in my opinion quite correct. The defendant had a recent previous conviction for a knife point robbery of a shop. He was to be sentenced for 2 knife point robberies of shops the last one committed whilst on bail for the 1st. The complainant in the last offence was a heamophiliac, so the potential consequences of the offence were extremely serious.