Action being taken to ensure domestic abuse prisoners not among those released early tomorrow, minister says
Prisoners set to be released early tomorrow have been trawled through in an attempt to not let domestic abusers go, the policing minister has said.
Tuesday will see about 1,700 prisoners released early to alleviate overcrowding in prisons in England and Wales.
The government said serious violent criminals, terrorists and domestic abuse perpetrators will not be released as part of the scheme.
However, the domestic abuse commissioner Nicole Jacobs told The Times victims of domestic abuse are having “sleepless nights” over the release as they fear those who have been convicted of crimes such as common assault towards a partner will not be flagged as domestic abusers.
Policing minister Dame Diana Johnson said the government has been trying to ensure that does not happen.
She told Sky News: “There’s been a real trawl through to try and identify where their primary offence isn’t domestic abuse, we know there’s a history, and that’s where the steps have been put in to protect as best we can.
“Because we know, unfortunately, domestic abuse is so prevalent amongst the offending community.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Why ex-judges want shorter sentences
Sir Keir Starmer has blamed the previous Conservative government for not building enough prisons, saying he has been “forced into” releasing prisoners early.
Dame Diana said about 1,700 prisoners will be released tomorrow. A total of about 5,500 prisoners in England and Wales are expected to be released earlier than planned in September and October as part of the temporary scheme.
The prisoners will serve the rest of their sentences under the “strictest licensing conditions” and will be tagged, the government has said.
Read more:
Starmer facing pressure over winter fuel payments and early prisoner release
Idris Elba joins PM for first knife crime summit
But Martin Jones, Chief Inspector of Probation, said there are “no risk-free options available”.
He said the eight weeks the government has given the probation service to plan for the scheme has given it “at least a fighting chance of getting this right”.
However, he warned the number of offenders being released means some could reoffend when they should have been in jail.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Starmer blames Tories over prisons
He told The Times in August: “I think it’s inevitable, being realistic about it, that things will go wrong. I wish we could live in a perfect world where that doesn’t happen.
“What I think you should start to see, at least, is that if people have to focus on those, that they start to identify where things go wrong, and they draw lessons from that quite quickly.
“I also think there’s a little bit of a numbers game to some extent, you’re rolling the dice all the time in relation to serious further offences.
“You know, ultimately, if you release thousands of people, a number of those cases will ultimately, sadly, there will be things that will go wrong.”
👉 Tap here to follow Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts 👈
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: “The new government inherited a justice system in crisis and has been forced into taking difficult but necessary action to ensure we can keep locking up dangerous criminals and protect the public.
“Anyone released into Home Detention Curfew is risk-assessed, faces the strictest licensing conditions and must be tagged.”
Strategy’s Michael Saylor and BitMine’s Tom Lee are among 18 industry leaders who will look at ways to pass the BITCOIN Act and enable budget-neutral ways to buy Bitcoin.
The Fellowship PAC, launched in August, said it had “over $100 million” from unnamed sources to support the White House’s digital asset strategy.
Politics
Starmer was aware of the risks of appointing the ‘Prince of Darkness’ as his man in Washington – to an extent
It was a prescient and – as it turned out – incredibly optimistic sign off from Peter Mandelson after eight years as Chancellor of Manchester Metropolitan University.
“I hope I survive in my next job for at least half that period”, the Financial Times reported him as saying – with a smile.
As something of a serial sackee from government posts, we know Sir Keir Starmer was, to an extent, aware of the risks of appointing the ‘Prince of Darkness’ as his man in Washington.
But in his first interview since he gave the ambassador his marching orders, the prime minister said if he had “known then what I know now” then he would not have given him the job.
For many Labour MPs, this will do little to answer questions about the slips in political judgement that led Downing Street down this disastrous alleyway.
Like the rest of the world, Sir Keir Starmer did know of Lord Mandelson’s friendship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein when he sent him to Washington.
The business secretary spelt out the reasoning for that over the weekend saying that the government judged it “worth the risk”.
Keir Starmer welcomes Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte to Downing Street.
Pic: PA
This is somewhat problematic.
As you now have a government which – after being elected on the promise to restore high standards – appears to be admitting that previous indiscretions can be overlooked if the cause is important enough.
Package that up with other scandals that have resulted in departures – Louise Haigh, Tulip Siddiq, Angela Rayner – and you start to get a stink that becomes hard to shift.
But more than that, the events of the last week again demonstrate an apparent lack of ability in government to see round corners and deal with crises before they start knocking lumps out of the Prime Minister.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Had I known then, what I know now, I’d have never appointed him’ Starmer said.
Remember, for many the cardinal sin here was not necessarily the original appointment of Mandelson (while eyebrows were raised at the time, there was nowhere near the scale of outrage we’ve had in the last week with many career diplomats even agreeing the with logic of the choice) but the fact that Sir Keir walked into PMQs and gave the ambassador his full throated backing when it was becoming clear to many around Westminster that he simply wouldn’t be able to stay in post.
The explanation from Downing Street is essentially that a process was playing out, and you shouldn’t sack an ambassador based on a media enquiry alone.
But good process doesn’t always align with good politics.
Something this barrister-turned-politician may now be finding out the hard way.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024