Crime

Tuesday

Joanna Hughes

What were the CPS and the courts thinking? 

A mother jailed for retracting allegations of rape by her husband, (allegations she now says were truthful) has been freed. A few days ago, appeal judges overturned the eight-month sentence of which she had served seventeen days, ordering her immediate release.  A triumph for common sense and compassion, but why was she jailed in the first place? Yes, the CPS thought she’d lied under oath and invented a rape claim – and that’s serious – but, as it turns out, her husband intimidated her into retracting the claim. In any event, an eight-month sentence is excessive. It is precisely the sort of sentence that the government should be reviewing in

Saturday

Andrew Taylor

Mean streets | 27 November 2010

Christmas is coming, which generally leads to a surge in sales of crime fiction. Fortunately for readers, some delectable crime novels have appeared in the past few months. Among them is Val McDermid’s Trick of the Dark (Little, Brown, £18.99). This is not one of her series novels but a standalone thriller whose plot revolves around St Scholastika’s College, Oxford, a women’s college with a certain resemblance to St Hilda’s. One of its alumnae is Charlie Flint, a clinical psychologist whose professional reputation is hanging in the balance. She receives an anonymous bundle of press cuttings relating to a recent murder at the college, now the subject of a high-profile

Tuesday

David Blackburn

Another coalition compromise, this time on immigration

Agreement has been reached on the troublesome immigration cap. The BBC reports that skilled non-EU migration will be limited to 43,000. This is just a 13 percent reduction from this year’s cap and there are numerous exemptions to be made; notably, inter-company transfers will not be included when workers earn more than £40,000 per annum. This is a considerable moment for the coalition because the cap was thought unworkable. The Conservatives have their cap, a pep pill for the embattled Home Secretary.  But this is also a victory for Vince, who is being feted by businessmen across the airwaves this morning. Cable and May have also been praised by Migration

Sunday

David Blackburn

Labour’s terror u-turn doesn’t lessen its authoritarianism

It is a day for about turns. First, the Pope has taken a historic decision to approve the use of condoms to fight AIDS; second, Labour has vowed to change its position on terror legislation and law and order. The party feels its record in government has damaged its reputation as a guarantor of liberty. Generation Ed wants to make another break from the past. Ed Balls has masterminded a cunning sleight of hand. The proposal is nowhere near as dramatic as headlines suggest. Labour will support the government’s proposed reduction of detention periods from 28 days to 14, provided the police and security services are not impeded by the change. Balls

Thursday

Alex Massie

Trickle-Down Torture

Yes, it’s from the Daily Record but if there’s one thing the Record does well it’s cover gangland Glasgow: Scots gangsters are using “waterboarding” terror tactics to torture rivals. Hardened crooks have copied the CIA-style interrogation technique where water is poured on to a cloth covering the victim’s mouth and nose to simulate drowning. We can reveal that a leading member of one of Scotland’s most notorious crime clans was tortured by a rival gang using the shock tactics last week. Drug dealer John Fox was terrorised after being snatched off the street by four thugs during a row over stolen drugs. Associates of Fox said he was taken to

Wednesday

Ed Howker

Phil Woolas, four investigations and a funeral wreath

It may take another week to discover if Phil Woolas has the right to challenge the election court ruling that destroyed his career. To the delight of his cadre of supporters in the House, judges have said there are “difficult questions to resolve” – not about the evidence of Woolas’ campaign making “false statements”, but about the specific application of the Representation of the People Act (RPA). Before the last die is cast, here are two quick contextual points. First, it is not just Harriet Harman who is keen to shut down this episode – many folks on all sides of the House of Commons would like to pretend skulduggery

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

The curious case of the Guantanamo Bay pay-outs

What to make of the out-of-court settlement that has been paid to around a dozen former detainees of Guantanamo Bay? According to unofficial reports, taxpayers might have to shoulder £10 million as a result. One of the men is thought to be receiving £1 million. The explanations seeping out of Westminster are understandable enough. Security chiefs, we’re told, were keen to avoid a lengthy process – not just because it could mean more cost for the taxpayer, but because it would drag the practices of our intelligence services out into the public realm. David Cameron, speaking on the matter in July, highlighted that Mi5 and Mi6’s time could be spent

Friday

David Blackburn

Toughening up on Home Affairs

An intriguing argument from the Economist’s Bagehot this week: the government’s liberal prisons policy will force Coalition 2.0 to tack to the right on Home Affairs. ‘If the Lib Dems’ sway on these issues was foreseeable, so are its political dangers. One is Tory anger. Even some of the Conservative MPs who agree with the Lib Dems on control orders worry about their liberal line on crime. Behind the scenes, figures from both parties are coming together to plan “coalition 2.0”—a policy programme for the second half of the parliament. Among the rumoured Tory representatives are confirmed hawks such as Michael Gove, the education secretary, Owen Paterson, the Northern Ireland

Tuesday

Blair Gibbs

Prisoner voting rights are undemocratic

It was unlikely that the Coalition could have played for any more time before lifting the ban on prisoner voting.  That was the tactic played by the previous Government, but now it seems the will of Strasbourg will prevail.  But the policy is wildly out of step with public opinion, hard to justify and difficult to administer – it is also another example of how our own Parliament and domestic courts have been undermined.     The public are opposed – usually on principle – to granting additional privileges to serving prisoners, especially when they have done little or nothing to earn it.  They are against voting rights in particular

David Blackburn

The inviolable right of prisoners

After 6 years of resistance, the British government has submitted to the European Court of Human Right’s judgement that prisoners have the right to vote. It will use a case in the Court of Appeal to make the announcement and then prepare itself for compensation suits. Understandably, the government is furious that it has been forced to make a concession on law and order, an area where they are weak enough already. Even Dominic Grieve, a firm supporter of the ECHR, is understood to be exasperated. Straining to limit the political damage, Ken Clark hopes to limit the franchise to those prisoners sentenced to less than four years; judges may also

Monday

Max Chambers

A harmful double standard

Professor David Nutt, the former Chief Drugs Adviser to the Government, has sparked controversy again today by pronouncing that alcohol is more harmful than heroin, crack, powder cocaine and methamphetamine. His findings are based on a paper published today, which builds on a 2007 journal that explored the same issues. So, is Professor Nutt right? If he is, what should the consequences be for public policy and, in particular, our systems of drug classification and alcohol taxation?   To find out, it is worth returning to Professor Nutt’s 2007 academic paper.  The relative harm of drugs is measured according to nine meters, taking into account the various aspects of physical

David Blackburn

Out of Control Orders

The government’s developing a tension headache over Control Orders, and there have been two noteworthy interventions. First, Theresa May lambasted Ken Macdonald. The former Director of Public Prosecutions, who is a now a Lib Dem peer overseeing an independent inquiry into counter-terror legislation, has made clear that he ‘will go ballistic’ if the Home Office retains Control Orders, which it is expected to recommend, in line with the advice of another Lib Dem peer, Lord Carlile. Second, David Davis has described Control Orders as ‘Kafka-esque’, the term used by Chris Huhne on the Politics Show yesterday, and has also said that he will vote against the government if Control Orders

David Blackburn

Confronting terror at home

As Julian Glover notes, Jack Straw let the cat out of the bag. ‘Never, ever, downplay the possible consequences,’ he says. The coverage of the recent bomb plot has largely ignored that it was foiled. That, by any definition, is a success, a vindication of our security services. Independent inspector Lord Carlile is right that improvements can be made to the bomb detection apparatus in airports and targeting security at the source of a threat – i.e. packages from the Yemen rather than package holidays. The previous government would have used this plot to introduce another wave of invasive legislation – never, ever, downplay the possible consequences to justify I.D.

Tuesday

David Blackburn

The growing need for elected police commissioners

The police are more Thin Blue Line than The Sweeney. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary has found that 15 of 22 police authorities perform ‘adequately’, which is defined as meeting ‘most of the minimum requirements of the specified role…they were most effective at dealing with local short-term policing priorities’. More worrying, with forces facing 20 percent cuts: only 4 authorities were judged to have set clear strategic direction and ensured value of money. Worse still, the report found that: ‘In just over half of the police authorities inspected, there is little or no account made of the delivery of efficiencies or workforce modernisation’. These administrative shortcomings are adversely affecting operations,

Thursday

David Blackburn

Balls fires a warning shot at May

It has taken Ed Balls 24 hours to steam into action. He says: “The government’s deep cuts of twenty per cent to policing could mean up to 20,000 fewer police officers, according to the Police Federation. And I’m particularly worried that specialist policing units, such as those to tackle organised crime, domestic violence or child abuse which the government no longer considers to be part of the frontline, could be the first to be cut.” This comes as the latest crime figures suggest that crime has fallen, thanks in part to the last government’s massive recruitment drive in policing and its increase of the prison population. Deep budget cuts to

Wednesday

James Forsyth

Osborne vows to play straight

George Osborne’s statement is, I hear, about 40 minutes long. I also hear that there is no obfuscation in it about what is being cut. The coalition is determined that no one can accuse them of trying to disguise what they are up to. Given what we have learned from pre-briefing, the cuts must be just massive in the departments we haven’t heard anything about yet. There is word this morning that the legal aid budget is going to be being reduced by far more than was expected even at the weekend. It appears that legal aid is one of the things that took the hit as the Treasury tried

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Generous settlements mean gigantic cuts elsewhere

I hear that the Department of Transport’s settlement is another one that is not as bad as expected. The capital statement is, apparently, positively reasonable. George Osborne’s commitment to infrastructure spending has meant that a good number of transport projects have been saved. On rail fares, I hear they will indeed go up significantly. But not by as much as the doomsday 30 to 40 percent scenario reported in the Sunday papers. Nearly all the settlements we have heard about so far have been less bad than expected. There must be, given that Osborne is sticking to the cuts schedule set out in the budget, some departments that are going

Sunday

Fraser Nelson

What about the Home Office?

The less we hear from Theresa May, the more I worry about the Home Office budget. I’m hearing rumours of her taking a 30 percent cut, which I first dismissed as a piece of expectations management. But now I’m beginning to wonder. We know that defence is settled – about an 8 percent real-terms cut. The NHS, which absorbs a quarter of government spending, will have real-terms increases (something even the left-leaning IPPR doesn’t back). The schools budget has escaped relatively unscathed, we read. So what’s left? Again, there’s so much deliberate misinformation out there that I hesitate to give a rumour round-up. But here goes.   One major victim

Saturday

Will Tanner

What you need to know ahead of the Spending Review: Crime

This is the latest in our series of posts on the Spending Review with Reform. A list of previous posts can be found here. What is the budget? The UK has one of the most expensive criminal justice systems in the world, spending a higher proportion of GDP than any other country in the OECD. Total spending on crime amounted to £23 billion for 2009-10. However, recent research suggests that total government spending on public order and safety amounts to more than £31 billion overall. Aside from central government funding, police authorities receive funding from the police, raised locally through council tax. In 2009-10 this amounted to just under a

Friday

James Forsyth

The coalition’s liberal approach to sentencing could be the final straw for the middle class

Today brings another couple of reminders of the coalition’s potential political problem with the middle class. In the Telegraph, Peter Oborne attacks Cameron and Osborne for a “morally disgusting” policy of targeting the middle class for an outsize share of the fiscal pain. While the Mail’s front page screams ‘What does get you locked up?’ as it details how 2,700 criminals who have more than fifty convictions were not sent to prison. Now, this is, obviously, the result of the last government’s sentencing policies. But, as the Mail points out repreatedly, this is a regime that Ken Clarke wants to make more liberal. In other words, even fewer people would