MOJ Prison Policy JR TODAY

[ChazsBrilliantAttitude]

Just seen on Twitter.

Will post links

3. Before the new policy rolled out there was a 'consultation' with stakeholders including Fair Play and the Centre for Crime and Justice Studied. But evidence presented in court shows Minister had already agreed the new policy predicated on the opinion that single-sex exceptions do not apply to prisons. Therefore this was not in fact a consultation, and none took place. The interests of women in prison were not represented. The evidence presented at that time by FPFW & CCJS was not considered: the decision had been made.

Just wasting everyone's time asking people when the result is already a fair accompli does not meet the criteria for a consultation (see Gunning principles)

😡😡😡

fait accompli obviously. Bastard autocorrect!

Do we know whether the sex that Paris Greene had with fellow inmates in Cornton Vale in Scotland was consensual? Paris was moved several times to the male estate because of this, but I don't think there was ever a charge of sexual assault.

Of course, the fact that Paris was convicted for a particularly gruesome murder may have something to do with a woman's reticence to complain.

Paris is now in the female wing of a jail in Edinburgh. Presumably is no longer using body size, penis and violent history to encourage sexual activity with the female inmates...

I have a vague recollection from reading about this issue here & elsewhere, that the legislation which governs prisons in this country says that they need to be single sex. Do you know if this is right KPSS?

That makes me think the prison service doesn't rely on the exemptions within the EA to provide separate male & female estates, because legislation says that they have to separate men & women. Presumably when they decided to put some trans women without a grc in the female estate they were relying on that prisoner having the p/c of gender reassignment (otherwise they would be legally identical to male prisoners) and were therefore using the EA.

Thank you for your tweeting KPSS! Did you get the impression that the MoJ now thinks the EA exemptions do apply to prisons? Or have they officially not changed their tune. I suppose we will find out tomorrow.

@ArabellaScott

I can't work out from that article whether Jones had a GRC at the time of the attack but already had apparently had a diagnosis of - Gender Identity Disorder - is this still a term used?

'The attempted rape had come just as she had been released on licence from prison in 2002, having served less than half of a five year sentence for manslaughter.

'She had killed Mr Cutler while living as an 18 year old man claiming she had been provoked during a heated row.

A psychiatrist's report later diagnosing Gender Identity Disorder as a significant factor in Jones' claimed loss of control before the killing.'

If my memory is correct Mark Jones / Karen Louise Lawson/ Karen Louise Jones didn't have a GRC at the time of the sex attack in 2002 as GRA was 2004 but I have seen reports with different dates. Worth double checking.

Was living in a women's bail hostel though, a young man with a manslaughter conviction! If you know women's bail hostels the women there are even more vulnerable than when in prison as they are in contact with their violent partners, pimps and drug dealers. More vulnerable than most people can even imagine.

Within only 5 days he had taken a woman hostage in Transformations and attempted to rape her. Without going into detail this wasn't some unconsenting misguided sexual pass, he terrorised her. The papers said he only stopped the attack because he failed to become aroused. Nonsense he was very very very aroused, that's what drove him to enact that brutal terror on his victim. What they mean is that he couldn't maintain an erection. This is a very important point and clear language is vital. A penis nor erection is not necessary for a sexually violent killer to behave in the way Jones did.

That the experienced James Barrett was so sympathetic to Jones makes me think getting him into the female estate was some sort of pet project. Barrett knows better and has made very astute observations on why male prisoners would fake GID.

Karen Jones case is key and James Barrett was a huge player and this should be to his professional shame.

If MN delete this and give me a strike for referring to a killer who sexually terrorised a woman as "he" , I won't be back. It was good knowing you fine intelligent women but I cannot refer to Jones as she and ever look myself in the mirror again.

Just in case , Au revoir , Godspeed X X X X

KPSS thank you for covering this, if trans women are allowed in womens prisons then why aren’t ALL men allowed in the female estate? What’s the difference? (To the women incarcerated?) the female prisoners don’t know how the men identify, only that they are men, with a penis, capable of impregnating them....

Gin gratefully received!!

I like the idea of a prisons Staniland question. Although given that rapists and child sex offenders are housed in the female estate.....

Paris Green had both 'consensual' sexual relations and sexually assaulted women. One female prisoner had a pregnancy scare. Green was moved to a different female prison, and then finally to the male estate. I don't believe there was ever a charge - certainly I haven't seen one reported in the press.

I didn;t get the impression that the MoJ now believe that the EA single-sex exceptions apply to prison, although Fair Play tweeted along these lines tonight. Nic also attended remotely and may well have spotted something that I didn't (it's hard to both listen and tweet!). I think that will come out tomorrow in the defence. What is key though is that in November the correctness of the policy was restated by Frazer. Given that this policy was at least in part predicated on the assumption that the exceptions do not apply to prisons, I argue that this rubber stamps this interpretation of EA.

@happydappy2

KPSS thank you for covering this, if trans women are allowed in womens prisons then why aren’t ALL men allowed in the female estate? What’s the difference? (To the women incarcerated?) the female prisoners don’t know how the men identify, only that they are men, with a penis, capable of impregnating them....

Exactly. If the single-sex exceptions do not apply, then all males should be equally free to request transfer to female estate and it is then discriminatory to refuse them.

Thank you KPSS

WanderinWomb

I'm sure a few of us will copy what you've posted so it is never lost

Great Post wanderinwomb

@RozWatching

The women's estate isn't as overcrowded as men's. Could the reason be that callous? Just thinking how women's refuges are being wound down to save money. The more males that want to identify out of overcrowded men's prisons, the better?

There was announcement today of intention to expand the female estate by 500. Considering only around 3200 women inside at the moment and plenty of spare capacity , that's huge plan.

Is that for all us hate speechy T**FS and all the self-iders from male estate? Maybe they want to put us uppity women in with the TW to teach us a lesson. Have to laugh or I'll cry with anger.

Fpfw tweets summarising today's hearing.
mobile.twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1366835904350990337

...

"Since that meeting the MOJ now accepts that the single sex exceptions DO apply in prisons. And that they CAN exclude transwomen from women's prisons when objectively justified according to EA2010 /5

However the issue presented to the court today was whether the policy - signed of by the minister for justice in March - had been formulated without consideration of the option to use the single-sex exceptions /6

Since the Minister approved the policy in March - before the change of heart after the May meeting when we raised legal objections - it seems likely that it was not part of the decision making /7

Indeed the final policy makes no reference to any assessments regarding where a prisoner is located being based on "proportionate means of a legitimate aim". /8"

Did a post on Jones here.

www.keep-prisons-single-sex.org.uk/karen-jones

Jones brought a case which established legal sex (i.e. GRC) as criterion for being housed in female estate. Prior to this criterion was that prisoner had already had reassignment surgery. Jones changed this meaning that intact prisoners could be housed in women's prisons.

These "experts" just seem so... naïve. And, I mean, I'm sure they've seen a lot in their time. And yet.

"Ah, this person's problems (the small matter of committing violent sexual crime) are all caused by their great distress at having their delicate lady brain housed in a burly male body. We can fix all this by putting them in the women's prison. There, finally at peace, they will sit calmly with their sister prisoners, braiding each other's hair while awaiting a new life on the outside as a gentle librarian".

Literally anyone's grandma is a better criminal psychologist than that (and I say that out of respect for the grandmas, though it's not saying much).

How have they persuaded themselves of this? Do they think they're being clever? Kudos?

Thanks, KPSS

I have often wondered about Paris Green. The sexual relations happened long before Karen White's.

It's state sanctioned rape.

They’re anything but naive.

I hope someone mentioned/mentions in court that some males without a GRC have ended up in women's prisons.

@Ninkanink

They’re anything but naive.

Willfully blind, then? What do you think is going on in their heads? To persuade themselves that this is all fine and safe, they must have some incentive, psychological or other? I'm the naïve one for not getting it, probably...

Oh I think there’s a definite agenda. And I certainly don’t think it’s benign.

I think if you can show that the single sex exemption in the EA allows for the exclusion of TW even if they hold a GRC it would be very difficult to justify accommodating a TW without one.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

I think if you can show that the single sex exemption in the EA allows for the exclusion of TW even if they hold a GRC it would be very difficult to justify accommodating a TW without one.

More than that. You can only legally exclude males from spaces females because of the single-sex exceptions. If you determine that the single-sex exceptions do not apply to a space or service, then to exclude males is discriminatory and illegal. Thus, if the single-sex exceptions do not apply to the female prison estate, surely it is discriminatory and illegal not to open this up at the very least to applications for allocation from all males?

MoJ did not say that single-sex exceptions do not apply in the case TW who want to be housed there. MoJ said exceptions do not apply to prisons.

Hopefully we will find out the thinking tomorrow...

• spaces for females sorry - tired. Brain not sending all words to fingers....

KPSS I can’t see how any judge would be comfortable with those consequences. Clearly Parliament intended for there to be exceptions for situation of safety etc. To try to argue that it does not apply to arm of the state that involves housing people long term in confined spaces seems illogical.