This week government figures are likely to show the prison population back to where it was before the last early release scheme.
But even though hundreds of prisoners have served only 40% of their sentences, there is a cohort of the prison population who have served extended sentences, years beyond their minimum term.
IPP sentences (imprisonment for public protection) were introduced in 2005 and abolished in 2012. But the law wasn’t backdated, so the legacy of prisoners serving indefinite sentences continues.
Image: Andy Logan, 45, from Kent, has had two IPPs
“It’s broken me as a man,” says Andy Logan. The burly 45-year-old from Kent has spent most of the last 20 years in jail on an IPP sentence, now he won’t leave home without his mother.
“I don’t go out, I’ve got no social circle,” he says. “I’m not in no family photographs, it’s like Back To The Future when he gets erased from the photos, I’m not there. I’m a ghost – I’ve been a ghost for 20 years.”
He was given IPP sentences twice, for two cashpoint robberies where he showed his victims a knife but didn’t use it. The minimum terms for each crime were two-and-a-half years and three years, but each time he spent far longer behind bars, the first time four years, then seven years. But that wasn’t the end of it.
After his release, Andy’s IPP hung over him. He could be recalled for any misdemeanour, including drinking too much alcohol, taking drugs, or missing probation appointments.
Over the next eight years he was recalled six times and would spend months behind bars waiting for a decision. His recall prison time alone has amounted to nearly four years. Twice the recalls were later deemed “unjustified”.
Image: Andy is so fearful of recall, he doesn’t go out without his mother
“I started my sentence with people who murdered people – and some of them got out before me,” says Andy.
“I lost all hope. I thought I’d never get out. I took drugs for four years. I exploded in weight. Self-harm started happening and I’d never self-harmed in my life.”
Andy lifts up his sleeve to reveal a red scar. “That one, I nearly did the artery on my last recall. I was just so frustrated I wanted to die.”
His lawyer Catherine Bond says he was often recalled for minor breaches.
She said: “One was in 2020 – Andy does struggle with alcohol addiction. He had started drinking more at that point.
“He kept his probation officer informed, but his probation officer recalled him anyway, and the parole board found the recall was unjustified because although there was alcohol use, that doesn’t necessarily equate to any increased risk.”
Image: Andy’s mother holds a picture of him as a child
Each IPP recall is ‘re-traumatising’
Ms Bond says the recalls have damaged Andy’s mental health.
“Each time you go back in there you don’t know when you are going to get back out so the whole process is re-traumatising, and I think it can make it more difficult for people to resettle when they get back out so each recall can increase the risk of further recalls,” she said.
But she also has IPP clients who’ve never been released – one jailed in 2005.
“It was a robbery – threat of violence. I’m not minimising that in any way but 20 years on it’s totally disproportionate and these are people’s lives,” she said.
“Of course, they’ve done something wrong but effectively it is the misfortune of having committed an offence at a particular time… meant they are in prison for this excessive amount of time.”
The number of unreleased prisoners on IPP has fallen from 5,000 in 2015 to 1,180 in early 2024. Around 700 of those have served 10 years longer than their minimum term.
Image: Source: His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service
The number recalled is rising with over 1,600 currently back in jail, mostly for licence breaches. The average time spent imprisoned on recall has risen dramatically from 11 months to around 26 months.
Andy is so fearful of recall, he doesn’t go out without his mother Betty. As Betty drives him to meet his probation officer, he says: “What if someone takes a dislike to me and says ‘who are you looking at?’ and makes an allegation against me – I’m in prison. So, I’m just terrified.”
Image: Andy’s mother Betty
But Andy hopes this could be one of his last visits to probation. Until recently, any IPP prisoner would have to wait at least 10 years after their release from prison before their licence could even be considered for removal by a parole board – but in February this year that time period was reduced to three years. For Andy that means in the next few months he could finally get off it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:24
February: Prison recall population at record level
A Ministry of Justice (MoJ) spokesperson said: “It is right that IPP sentences were abolished. With public protection as the number one priority, the lord chancellor is working with organisations and campaign groups to ensure appropriate action is taken to support those still serving these sentences, such as improved access to mental health support and rehabilitation programmes.
“An independent report from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons found the majority of recall decisions were necessary to keep our streets safe. However, to avoid waiting unnecessarily for parole board hearings, eligible IPP prisoners can now be considered for release earlier after a thorough risk assessment.”
The prison population is bursting and is set to run out of space within a year according to internal forecasts from the MoJ. But some of those taking up space – probably shouldn’t still be there.
Around 200 homes have been evacuated and a major incident declared after police arrested two men on suspicion of explosives offences.
Police carried out a warrant in Vulcan Street, Derby, and arrested two Polish nationals – one in his 40s and another in his 50s. They remain in custody.
Officers said locals might have heard a controlled explosion earlier as the Army’s explosive ordinance division deals with the situation.
The incident is not being treated as a terrorism-related, and there is said to be no wider risk to the community.
Police, the fire service and the ambulance service were still at the scene early this evening.
The evacuation area covers:
Shaftsbury Crescent – in its entirety Vulcan Street – in its entirety Reeves Road – in its entirety Shaftesbury Crescent – in its entirety Harrington Street – from Holcombe Street to Vulcan Street Baseball Drive – to Colombo Street Cambridge Street – at Reeves Road and Shaftesbury Crescent
Eight people have been arrested on Merseyside by police investigating the discovery of alleged drugs laboratories “on an industrial scale”.
Officers from the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit (NWROCU) executed 10 arrest warrants in dawn raids on Wednesday at residential properties across the region.
Suspects were held on suspicion of the production of, and conspiracy to supply, class A and B drugs, as part of what is believed to be one of the biggest operations of its kind ever seen in the UK.
Image: Pic: NWROCU/PA
Image: A suspect is led away after being detained in Prescot. Pic: NWROCU/PA
At one address in Prescot, police used a saw to cut through the front door before arresting a 68-year-old man, who was escorted to a police van wearing shorts and with a jacket over his head, covering his face.
The NWROCU began investigating two and a half years ago when police in South Wales detained a Liverpool-based suspect with an estimated £1m worth of amphetamines.
Warrants were carried out in April 2024 at industrial sites in Bootle and Huyton, with officers finding a tonne of suspected heroin adulterant at one and 550kg of what was believed to be cocaine adulterant at the other, Inspector Danny Murphy of Merseyside Police said.
Detectives also found 80kg of amphetamine in a simultaneous raid on a suspected laboratory at a residential premises in St Helens.
Inspector Murphy said: “We think the laboratory set-ups and the industrial scale of it at the time, in 2023, was the biggest we’ve seen in the UK, so it’s a big investigation, a very detailed one.”
Mr Murphy said the organised crime group was suspected of transporting the drugs across the country in a multimillion-pound conspiracy.
Those arrested are alleged to have been “significant players” and to have carried out a number of roles within the suspected criminal enterprise, including “cooking” the drugs and couriering across the country, as well as organising.
Mr Murphy said they believed drugs were imported to the country before being bulked out with adulterants in the labs, potentially making millions of pounds of profit for the gang.
The assassination attempt on a former Russian spy was authorised by Vladimir Putin, who is “morally responsible” for the death of a woman poisoned by the nerve agent used in the attack, a public inquiry has found.
The chairman, Lord Hughes, found there were “failings” in the management of Sergei Skripal, 74, who was a member of Russian military intelligence, the GRU, before coming to the UK in 2010 on a prisoner exchange after being convicted of spying for Britain.
But he found the assessment that he wasn’t at “significant risk” of assassination was not “unreasonable” at the time of the attack in Salisbury on 4 March 2018, which could only have been avoided by hiding him with a completely new identity.
Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia, 41, who was also poisoned, were left seriously ill, along with then police officer Nick Bailey, who was sent to search their home, but they all survived.
Image: Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal.
Pic: Shutterstock
Dawn Sturgess, 44, died on 8 July, just over a week after unwittingly spraying herself with novichok given to her by her partner, Charlie Rowley, 52, in a perfume bottle in nearby Amesbury on 30 June 2018. Mr Rowley was left seriously ill but survived.
In his 174-page report, following last year’s seven-week inquiry, costing more than £8m, former Supreme Court judge Lord Hughes said she received “entirely appropriate” medical care but her condition was “unsurvivable” from a very early stage.
The inquiry found GRU officers using the aliases Alexander Petrov, 46, and Ruslan Boshirov, 47, had brought the Nina Ricci bottle containing the novichok to Salisbury after arriving in London from Moscow with a third agent known as Sergey Fedotov to kill Mr Skripal on 2 March.
More on Salisbury Spy
Related Topics:
Image: L-R Suspects who used the names of Sergey Fedotov, Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov. Pics: UK Counter Terrorism Policing
The report said it was likely the same bottle Petrov and Boshirov used to apply the military-grade nerve agent to the handle of Mr Skripal’s front door before it was “recklessly discarded”.
“They can have had no regard to the hazard thus created, of the death of, or serious injury to, an uncountable number of innocent people,” it said.
It is “impossible to say” where Mr Rowley found the bottle, but was likely within a few days of it being abandoned on 4 March, meaning there is “clear causative link” with the death of mother-of-three Ms Sturgess.
Image: Novichok was in perfume bottle. Pic: Reuters
Lord Hughes said he was sure the three GRU agents “were acting on instructions”, adding: “I have concluded that the operation to assassinate Sergei Skripal must have been authorised at the highest level, by President Putin.
“I therefore conclude that those involved in the assassination attempt (not only Petrov, Boshirov and Fedotov, but also those who sent them, and anyone else giving authorisation or knowing assistance in Russia or elsewhere) were morally responsible for Dawn Sturgess’s death,” he said.
Russian ambassador summonsed
After the publication of the report, the government announced the GRU has been sanctioned in its entirety, and the Russian Ambassador has been summonsed to the Foreign Office to answer for Russia’s ongoing campaign of alleged hostile activity against the UK.
Sir Keir Starmer said the findings “are a grave reminder of the Kremlin’s disregard for innocent lives” and that Ms Sturgess’s “needless” death was a tragedy that “will forever be a reminder of Russia’s reckless aggression”.
“The UK will always stand up to Putin’s brutal regime and call out his murderous machine for what it is,” the prime minister said.
He said deploying the “highly toxic nerve agent in a busy city centre was an astonishingly reckless act” with an “entirely foreseeable” risk that others beyond the intended target would be killed or injured.
The inquiry heard a total of 87 people presented at A&E.
Image: Pic AP
Lord Hughes said there was a decision taken not to issue advice to the public not to pick anything up which they hadn’t dropped, which was a “reasonable conclusion” at the time, so as not to cause “widespread panic”.
He also said there had been no need for training beyond specialist medics before the “completely unexpected use of a nerve agent in an English city”.
After the initial attack, wider training was “appropriate” and was given but should have been more widely circulated.
In a statement following the publication of his report, Lord Hughes said Ms Sturgess’s death was “needless and arbitrary”, while the circumstances are “clear but quite extraordinary”.
“She was the entirely innocent victim of the cruel and cynical acts of others,” he said.
Image: ‘We can finally put her to peace’ . Pic: Met Police/PA
‘We can have Dawn back now’
Speaking after the report was published, Ms Sturgess’s father, Stanley Sturgess, said: “We can have Dawn back now. She’s been public for seven years. We can finally put her to peace.”
In a statement, her family said they felt “vindicated” by the report, which recognised how Wiltshire police wrongly characterised Ms Sturgess as a drug user.
But they said: “Today’s report has left us with some answers, but also a number of unanswered questions.
“We have always wanted to ensure that what happened to Dawn will not happen to others; that lessons should be learned and that meaningful changes should be made.
“The report contains no recommendations. That is a matter of real concern. There should, there must, be reflection and real change.”
Wiltshire Police Chief Constable Catherine Roper admitted the pain of Ms Sturgess’s family was “compounded by mistakes made” by the force, adding: “For this, I am truly sorry.”
Russia has denied involvement
The Russian Embassy has firmly denied any connection between Russia and the attack on the Skripals.
But the chairman dismissed Russia’s explanation that the Salisbury and Amesbury poisonings were the result of a scheme devised by the UK authorities to blame Russia, and the claims of Petrov and Borisov in a television interview that they were sightseeing.
The inquiry chairman said the evidence of a Russian state attack was “overwhelming” and was designed not only as a revenge attack against Mr Skripal, but amounted to a “public statement” that Russia “will act decisively in its own interests”.
Lord Hughes found “some features of the management” of Mr Skripal “could and should have been improved”, including insufficient regular written risk assessments.
But although there was “inevitably” some risk of harm at Russia’s hands, the analysis that it was not likely was “reasonable”, he said.
“There is no sufficient basis for concluding that there ought to have been assessed to be an enhanced risk to him of lethal attack on British soil, such as to call for security measures,” such as living under a new identity or at a secret address, the chairman said.
He added that CCTV cameras, alarms or hidden bugs inside Mr Skripal’s house might have been possible but wouldn’t have prevented the “professionally mounted attack with a nerve agent”.
Sky News has approached the Russian Embassy for comment on the report.