To think that it’s ridiculous to offer prisoners ‘incentives’ for attending verdict/sentencing hearings - it’s connected to Lucy Letby.

[pam290358]

Just heard on the news that Lucy Letby has again refused to attend court - this time for sentencing today. There are now calls for tougher sentences for those who won’t attend court, but an ‘expert’ on the BBC is of the opinion that that won’t work for people already facing long sentences/whole life terms. The alternative view is that they should be offered ‘incentives’ to do so, such as privileges in prison or live streaming the proceedings from their cell.

I’m not an advocate of dragging them kicking and screaming into the dock because I don’t think it benefits anyone - least of all the victims’ families who are already traumatised enough, but I must admit to being strongly against offering incentives for something I feel should be mandatory anyway. What do others think ?

And at no point did I say that was what I ‘wanted’. I clarified the point I was making in my reply.

Like it or not she will have the same rights in prison as anyone else

The point I was making was that victim impact statements are not intended to be about the perpetrator facing up to the crime - no matter what the remarks here. It’s about the families’ of the victims having their say to the court and to have their vies considered - and whatever closure they can get from that.

So if your child were the victim of a paedophile you would still feel the same ?

These murderers have no regrets or empathy and I don't think any words will make them reconsider their thoughts on it all. I would personally rather NOT see them as I would not want to see their miserable faces.

Cell with a screen. Prison officer either side of her so she can’t damage it. Job done.
Or leave her in a cell alone with the audio piped in. With Bluetooth and all the IT tech it can’t be difficult.

Why? The impact statements are for the judge not her.... the families didn't write them to her

There was a case in the US where a prisoner was laughing and jeering during the impact statement. The judge warned him once and when he continued the judge had him bound to the chair and gagged. Not ideal, but it’s a simple solution.

The one that caused a national outcry where the judge then recused himself and apologised do you mean?

There is no Bluetooth or Wi-Fi in prisons. It’s not a difficult concept. There aren’t even open phone lines.

This is on sentencing council website.

What point are you trying to prove @caringcarer

@IfICantHaveYou, that prisoners often get released early, for so called good behaviour, so don't in fact pay the full price for their crime. If a judge having heard all the evidence sentences a person to say 6 years in prison then they should be made to serve those 6 years. Image if a crime was committed against you and you were in court for sentencing and heard a judge order a sentence of 6 years in prison and 3 or 4 years later you were out in a town and came face to face with the person who was supposed to still be locked up.

Yes, you do know about the massive overcrowding problem in prisons? There is not enough room. There are not enough prisons. There's no money!

@caringcarer yoh have totally misunderstood that chart you posted. Nowhere does it mention release for “good behavior”. People’s release date is for the most part guided by sentence type and length. For the umpteenth time, “good behavior” is not grounds for release.

I think they should at least be made to listen from a cell, and not allowed to turn the telly/radio off.

It's robbing the families of a chance to read victim statements directly to the person who has wronged them, which could be an important part of healing and moving forwards. (Not that you ever would in this case, but still.)

How do you suggest they get the statements read out on live TV or radio?

Prisons don't have the facilities!!'

And it would NOT be allowed anyway

Prisoners "appear" in court all the time by video link, I have facilitated myself when I worked in mental health.

Do you think they appear by video link from their cell?

To move an unwilling prisoner to video link, they would have to shut down the prison. No visits, no medical, no work, no education, no fresh air, no other court appearances. All other prisoners locked down for how long..? A day?

The video link rooms are not secure in the same way cells are so would need at least 4 officers in the room (plus six in full riot gear to move prisoner).

It’s not Orange is the new Black, it is real life.

I know they don't appear from their cell, like I said, I have facilitated it.

Don't know where you get the idea they would have to close everything down from.

Take her out first thing then let the prison go about the day.

Most prisons themselves have numerous self contained areas that can operate independently.

Yes it would tie up offIcers, but no more than a hospital visit.

I have moved patients/ prisoners ( forensic mental health) many times, including in restraint, including when other patients/ prisoners were about, in emergencies.

I have moved people in restraint to vehicles where they were then locked in a metal room then sent elsewhere.

Fucking awful.

Not nice, but doable.

It wouldn't be hard to set up a portable one using mobile internet. Do that and it's almost cost free.

FWIW I don't think they should force her to attend in anyway, but it's entirely possible.

How do I know? I was released from Bronzefield earlier this year. HTH.

Never been in there, but I have been in Castington young offenders, Durham, Frankland, Everthorpe,Hull, Rampton probably others I have forgotten about, numerous NHS mental health forensic settings.

Never know anything like and entire prison / hospital shutdown for the forcible movement of a prisoner. Why would they?

Like you say, life is not like Orange is the new black.

It’s what happens. They are short staffed, moving a disruptive prisoner from the spur to medical? Lockdown. Moving a disruptive prisoner from “fresh air”? lockdown. Staff meeting? Lockdown. Getting someone back in their cell after they kicked off? Lockdown. Someone shits in the corridor? Lockdown.

My lived experience is just as valid as yours.

"lived experience"?

One prison.

Apparently she murdered some of the babies so that she could talk about it or be near the doctor with whom she was infatuated.

And she looked utterly mortified when he gave testimony.

She was obsessed with him and willing to literally kill to facilitate interaction with her.

So I suspect that is what is most important and meaningful to her: that HE sees her in this position. It is humiliating for her. And for this reason, I think she should have been forced to attend, even if she had to be sedated to make that happen. Then she could think about how she appeared to HIM then, how HE hated her and saw her for who she really was in the moment of testimony. I want her to have that thought to ponder for the rest of her life.