Earlier, I mentioned Hull Prison Special Unit. The name changed from the days when we had Control Units. It was designed for those deemed to be "the mad, and the bad, the difficult and the dangerous". I admit that I was difficult, even go as far as saying that some people would say that I am still difficult. It was a pressure cooker environment, only six of us in there, even though it had capacity for twenty. The Prison Officer's Association said that they would only man it with six inmates, they felt any more was too much of a threat to safety. A "gangster" from Doncaster, when I went to see him in his cell to have a chat with him said, "You're more intimidating than the Kray Twins and the Richardson's put together". We reached an understanding that he would not play any more prison politics, or "mind games" with me, via others, and it ended a peaceful meeting.
I volunteered for the experiment in the Special Unit. I did not take the decision lightly, but had thought it out by examining my options. I was selected because I had, a couple of months before, put an Acting Senior Officer in intensive care. His "crime" was that he had broken an "unwritten rule", power had gone to his head with this temporary promotion, and he decided to change a custom and practice that has been accepted ever since I first went to prison in April 1971. He was going to put an end to the perks behind the Hot-Plate. He offered three other inmates out before I took him up on the challenge. I waited for him on the stairwell, unseen by the landing screws who were sat down at their tables, smoking fags, drinking coffee or tea, and reading their Sunday newspapers. Generally, The News of the World, hence the nick name "News of the Screws".
I had put my rock in a sock, which I kept under my bed, within easy reach, in case anyone had decided to give me "breakfast in bed" which I had not ordered from the Hall Porter the night before. He was supposed to be a tasty bastard, so I was taking no chances, I watched him as he climbed the stairs, a pile of prisoners newspapers in one hand, and his keys in the other. When he inserted the key to unlock the stairwell door to the "Ones", he was attached to a chain and the turned key in the lock meant that he had no escape. That's when I struck him over the head, he staggered and slumped a bit but did not go down. So, I hit him again. That did the trick, he was out cold on the floor. I fully expected the alarm bell to sound straight away. But it didn't, the act was not witnessed by any member of staff. I became a bit concerned that he was in need of medical attention, and that this could have happened in a maximum security prison, and by a Category "A" prisoner who was supposed to be under close supervision.
It was eight or ten minutes later, that a black lad came by who had been one of those offered out earlier. He wanted to go down stairs which would have brought a landing officer to the scene, so I disappeared. I heard swearing and then the sound of the alarm bell ringing. Even though I was expecting it, it still made me jump. I heard "Hirst", "Get Hirst". As the "Heavy Mob" approached, I said to them, "I'll walk". It was a policy that if a prisoner was prepared to go down to the "Block" without a fight, then he should be allowed to do so. "Oh, no, you won't" said the Physical Training Instructor (PTI), with a malicious grin on his face. He put my head into a neck lock, two others grabbed my hands and pushed my thumbs down onto my wrists, two more grabbed a leg a piece, and another grabbed and twisted my balls. I could see a governor watching, but he was too scared to intervene with these heavy handed tactics.
I was carried face down down the stairs, and along the ground floor landing out into the corridor towards the Segregation Unit. I could hear and see a Principal Officer shouting into my ear, over and over again, "You are going to suffer for this...". Someone else said, "Slower, slower", not so that I wasn't hurt, but to prolong the suffering. I kept feeling the air and blood supply being cut off in my neck. I must have passed out. At one stage, I was above it all looking down at my self being carried down to the Seg. I suppose it is what is called an out of body experience. I had not realised the journey could take as long as it did. In the "Strong Box", I was slammed down face first on the concrete bed. "God", I said. "Yes", one said, "God help you". He had misunderstood, it wasn't a plea for help, I was thinking how soft the concrete felt in comparison to the torture I had just endured. I was stripped naked, and a doctor administered some "liquid cosh" by injection into my arse. They released their grip one by one and left, slamming first one door locked, and then the outer door. The last thing I remembered was the spyhole cover scraping across and seeing an eye at the glass.
The adjudication was something of a farce, a kangaroo court, it started off with three members of the Board of Visitors, one of whom was new, and he made the error of following the Adjudication Manual to the letter and questioning in the spirit of impartiality. The Board adjourned and when it resumed there were only two members. This was unlawful. No surprise that I was found guilty, and awarded 56 days "cellular confinement" (CC), the bed and mattress were removed during the day. The Prison Governor came to see me and asked why I had done it. He nodded understandingly, without condoning my action. He said that he had a problem, and that was that the Prison Officer's Association (POA) wanted me transferred. However, as soon as he mentioned my name on the phone to other governors they all said no as whoever their worst was I was deemed to be even worse. I mulled this over for a bit, and asked to see the governor again. I told him that I believed that I had a solution to his problem, he looked relieved and asked "Have you really?". I told him what I had read in the Torygraph, about the Hull Prison Special Unit experiment. And informed him that I knew the Governor at Hull Prison, Phil Wheatley, and to call him as I was sure he would have me. "That's a relief", he said, "because I fear for your safety if I am not able to move you". And, I had already come to the conclusion that to stay I would either kill again or someone would kill me.
I was pacing the cage, outside, when a small, bald headed chap, came up to the wire. He looked at me, then looked about, and said "You don't want to be doing this for the next 20 years do you?". "No", I replied, "not really". "Right, then, leave it to me", and with that he was gone, back to the Home Office. It is said, that the authorities don't strike deals with prisoners. Experience would suggest otherwise. I was selected, but it was against the wishes of the Hull branch of the POA. Phil Wheatley had instructed Dr Peter Bennett, that he wanted me, and to get me. Phil is a powerful man and tends to get what he wants. I wrote to him beforehand asking what he expected of me. He replied "No unwarranted violence". I thought there's trust for you, leaving it too me to decide what constituted warranted violence. As it happened, I never had to use violence again, but there were a few close scrapes, where I thought I hope the "Heavy Mob" gets here quick before I felt I had to start.
It was where the transformation from law breaker to law-maker began.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
Saturday, March 03, 2007
It's close, it's very close...
A source in London has informed me that it is close, very close. And, that the BBC was about to broadcast a story which the police intend to use as evidence in a prosecution. My source, reflected on Thatcher, and said that she was bad, but that this is worse, a lot worse. My source said, that we used to call Fleet Street the street of shame. Now it is Downing Street which is the street of shame. I find myself agreeing with my source who has close links with the BBC. Vivien Stern wrote a book about the prison system entitled Bricks of Shame. I think it is a shame for the Labour Party, those who are no way involved. And, a shame for the electorate who trusted the Tony Blair Mafia.
Perceptions.
I have just taken Rocky out for his afternoon walk. He keeps his nose to the ground, sniffing here, there, and everywhere. So interested is he in the scents, reading the messages, that he often does not see what is going on about him. For example, a black woman was coming out of a shop just as we were passing. The sudden movement of the door and her presence startled him, and he barks and lunges forward a bit. She jumps back as he startled her. She fears dogs, I sense that and so does Rocky. She mumbles something to the shopkeeper which I don't hear, but her look of protest is censuring me and she is looking for an explanation. I just tell her, in passing, "you startled him".
I get my Russian made but American brand cigarettes for £2.50 for 20, from a shop further down the road. The Chancellor is tax avoided. The shopkeepers here call me Mr Policeman. I get a warm welcome, "Hello Mr Policeman", it also warns the other shoppers of my presence. A while back, I opened my wallet to pay for my fags and they saw a business card with the Humberside Police badge on it, which a policeman had given me after a local yob had tried to show my neck how sharp the blade of his samurai sword was, and they had mistaken it for a warrant card. "No, no, we not sell you anymore" was their first response. As I was trying to explain to them what it was that they had seen, I saw someone passing by who knows the Russian/Latvian Mafia in Hull, and this person just said to the shopkeepers, "He's alright". So, now they think that I am a bent copper!
As we came back from Pearson Park, a group of black footballers were talking by a park bench. I had to watch Rocky carefully, sometimes he just wants to play football and at other times he takes exception to the studs in the boots and barks at the feet. Some of them moved away, and only two remained. Then another crossed the little path out of the way. I heard one say to the other as I passed, "That's the man I was telling you about". I did not ask why I was the topic of conversation. I preferred to think it was just to do with Rocky having met them before when he was in a less sociable mood.
Walking back along Pearson Avenue, I noticed a police van parked at the side of the road, and it appeared as though they were just studying their notebooks. They stared at me, and I saw that the female officer in the passenger seat had that 'I know that man' look on her face. But I was not the target of their attention. Across Beverley Road, I saw standing on the corner, a man with a serious look on his face, peering towards the city centre, and thought 'police'. Before I could cross, A police Volvo estate approached from the direction of the city centre, and the man signalled the driver to pull into the road I was about to walk down. He indicated towards a maroon Renault saloon, I had wondered why its driver's door was ajar when I passed it on my outward journey. The plain clothes officer was looking towards a house on Beverley Road where I had seen a couple of drug raids occur previously. I assumed that it was going to be another drugs bust.
When I got home, the police Volvo drove down to the entrance where I live and reversed in and pulled forward again doing a three point turn. Then it reversed again blocking the entrance, but from the road in front. I adjusted the switch on my CCTV to cover just the front of the house. 'Surely not', I thought, 'they haven't come to arrest me for daring to ignore the injunction?'. That would have been a big mistake. 'No', I reasoned 'the back of the alleged drug den was at the end of the cul-de-sac'. They were just covering all exits. Once I had seen a youthful girl scale the wall, run in front of my house and scale the other wall and disappear into the small park the other side. By the time two policemen ran into the cul-de-sac, looked around, and scratched their heads, she could have already been down Scully and away.
I get my Russian made but American brand cigarettes for £2.50 for 20, from a shop further down the road. The Chancellor is tax avoided. The shopkeepers here call me Mr Policeman. I get a warm welcome, "Hello Mr Policeman", it also warns the other shoppers of my presence. A while back, I opened my wallet to pay for my fags and they saw a business card with the Humberside Police badge on it, which a policeman had given me after a local yob had tried to show my neck how sharp the blade of his samurai sword was, and they had mistaken it for a warrant card. "No, no, we not sell you anymore" was their first response. As I was trying to explain to them what it was that they had seen, I saw someone passing by who knows the Russian/Latvian Mafia in Hull, and this person just said to the shopkeepers, "He's alright". So, now they think that I am a bent copper!
As we came back from Pearson Park, a group of black footballers were talking by a park bench. I had to watch Rocky carefully, sometimes he just wants to play football and at other times he takes exception to the studs in the boots and barks at the feet. Some of them moved away, and only two remained. Then another crossed the little path out of the way. I heard one say to the other as I passed, "That's the man I was telling you about". I did not ask why I was the topic of conversation. I preferred to think it was just to do with Rocky having met them before when he was in a less sociable mood.
Walking back along Pearson Avenue, I noticed a police van parked at the side of the road, and it appeared as though they were just studying their notebooks. They stared at me, and I saw that the female officer in the passenger seat had that 'I know that man' look on her face. But I was not the target of their attention. Across Beverley Road, I saw standing on the corner, a man with a serious look on his face, peering towards the city centre, and thought 'police'. Before I could cross, A police Volvo estate approached from the direction of the city centre, and the man signalled the driver to pull into the road I was about to walk down. He indicated towards a maroon Renault saloon, I had wondered why its driver's door was ajar when I passed it on my outward journey. The plain clothes officer was looking towards a house on Beverley Road where I had seen a couple of drug raids occur previously. I assumed that it was going to be another drugs bust.
When I got home, the police Volvo drove down to the entrance where I live and reversed in and pulled forward again doing a three point turn. Then it reversed again blocking the entrance, but from the road in front. I adjusted the switch on my CCTV to cover just the front of the house. 'Surely not', I thought, 'they haven't come to arrest me for daring to ignore the injunction?'. That would have been a big mistake. 'No', I reasoned 'the back of the alleged drug den was at the end of the cul-de-sac'. They were just covering all exits. Once I had seen a youthful girl scale the wall, run in front of my house and scale the other wall and disappear into the small park the other side. By the time two policemen ran into the cul-de-sac, looked around, and scratched their heads, she could have already been down Scully and away.
The Temple of Truth - The butterfly effect...
Some years ago, I wrote a poem entitled The Temple of Truth. It is situated at the crossroads. We are at a political crossroad now. It is a matter of public record which political direction I cast my vote at the last General Election. It is mentioned in Hansard, my local MP, Diana Johnson referred to it in her maiden speech. I thought long and hard before casting it. I even told Diana Johnson that I was bothered about the Iraq Question. But, I was also bothered about the damage caused by Thatcherism. Diana Johnson MP got my vote on the strength of her predecessor, Kevin MacNamarra, and a link going back to the Special Unit in HM Prison Hull.
Tony Blair took a gamble backing George W. Bush, and lost. He gambled on winning over the UN Security Council, and lost. He gambled on winning over the country, and lost. He threw it all away, this remains his legacy. Power is a wonderful thing, it can also be dangerous if used for the wrong reason and ends up backfiring.
Hands up all those in the House of Lords who bought their seats? Come on, don't be shy. It is a good thing to be honoured. But, to receive a honour for the right reason. Some years ago, someone I know was in a position to help me. But, then, he was cautioned that to do so might cost him his prospective MBE. He felt honoured by this award, but he knows and I know that it was gained at the price of human suffering. I am a poor man, but the promise that he would leave me some money in his will was no consolation. I had trusted him, and the selling me down the river was the real value. This is now on his conscience.
In prison, when you get 3 in a cell, personal experience has shown me that two gang up on the other. I call this the vicious triangle. It's not going to happen, but try and imagine what it would be like with Tony Blair, Lord Levy and Ruth Turner sharing a cell designed for one?
It is ironic that each Chief Inspector of Prisons has been chosen in the belief that he or she would turn a blind eye. Instead, it opened their eyes. If this was the purpose of appointing Commander Yates of the Yard to the cash for honours inquiry, instead of him turning a Nelsonian blind eye, they both boggled like Marty Feldman's at what he saw!
What is amazing is that, the political leader of the country lives at Number Ten Downing Street and Tony Blair was not aware of what was happening until the News At Ten on BBC1! We already know that Iain Dale's Diary is compulsory reading for politicians, let alone for those in the media, and Iain posted a short piece at 7.01pm, and he is 3,000 miles away in America. How much closer to Lord Goldsmith is Tony Blair? Of course, his good friend, suddenly becomes public spirited and says nowt! LOL. Where was this independence when it mattered most, on the advice that it was illegal to go to war with Iraq? So independent that he changed it to suit Tony Blair's plan to go to war anyway. And, what happened to the public interest then? We did not matter, we are all stupid, we would buy anything, even a dodgy dossier. Wrong! Besides, I already know that Lord Falconer is psychic. For example, he was telling the World At One what the judgment in the prisoners votes case was before the European Court of Human Rights had published it! All of a sudden his crystal ball had got cloudy? He was rendered speechless?
True, there have been occasions in the past when the media have published information which prejudiced a fair trial. However, in this case the public already know that seats in the House of Lords and Knighthoods have been sold. All the BBC sought to do was bring the public up to scratch with a recent development. The public have learned that truth no longer emanates from Number Ten, and hasn't since the time that bowler tampered with the cricket ball to deliver his brand of spin. We now have the absurd situation where Tony Blair is parodying Rory Bremner mimicing Tony Blair! The hands start to sleight, the eyes go to the left, the tongue licks the lips. One Foot in the Grave, springs to mind, "I don't believe it!". Do you? Peter and the Wolf also springs to mind.
Lord Chief Justice Woolf would have made a good Lord Chancellor. He has made a couple of decisions in court that I would question. But, anybody can make a mistake or two. I do not believe that he is corrupt. His appointment would have been on merit as opposed to the job going to a Tony Crony. This nepotism only leads to corruption.
A problem with the High Court "Protect the poor, defend the weak", in relation to Judicial Review, and it stems from a prison law case, following the Hull Prison riot in 1976, is that if anyone now wants to attack a public decision-maker, they must first seek permission from a judge to proceed. Whereas, in the US, any citizen can take the matter straight into court and the public authority has to defend the action. What can happen over here is that a judge acts as a goalkeeper for the government. That is, he or she reaches a political rather than a judicial decision. I am not saying that that is what the judge did in granting an injunction in this case. But, there is a legal principle and that is: "Not only must justice be done, it must manifestly be seen to be done". What was missing in this case, the public was excluded. Therefore, how can they see justice being done?
Part of democracy, is having a free press and an independent Judiciary. What have the government got to hide from us this time? The public need to scrutinise this very carefully, be very vigilant, and seek the accountability that the government has promised but failed to deliver on.
Tony Blair took a gamble backing George W. Bush, and lost. He gambled on winning over the UN Security Council, and lost. He gambled on winning over the country, and lost. He threw it all away, this remains his legacy. Power is a wonderful thing, it can also be dangerous if used for the wrong reason and ends up backfiring.
Hands up all those in the House of Lords who bought their seats? Come on, don't be shy. It is a good thing to be honoured. But, to receive a honour for the right reason. Some years ago, someone I know was in a position to help me. But, then, he was cautioned that to do so might cost him his prospective MBE. He felt honoured by this award, but he knows and I know that it was gained at the price of human suffering. I am a poor man, but the promise that he would leave me some money in his will was no consolation. I had trusted him, and the selling me down the river was the real value. This is now on his conscience.
In prison, when you get 3 in a cell, personal experience has shown me that two gang up on the other. I call this the vicious triangle. It's not going to happen, but try and imagine what it would be like with Tony Blair, Lord Levy and Ruth Turner sharing a cell designed for one?
It is ironic that each Chief Inspector of Prisons has been chosen in the belief that he or she would turn a blind eye. Instead, it opened their eyes. If this was the purpose of appointing Commander Yates of the Yard to the cash for honours inquiry, instead of him turning a Nelsonian blind eye, they both boggled like Marty Feldman's at what he saw!
What is amazing is that, the political leader of the country lives at Number Ten Downing Street and Tony Blair was not aware of what was happening until the News At Ten on BBC1! We already know that Iain Dale's Diary is compulsory reading for politicians, let alone for those in the media, and Iain posted a short piece at 7.01pm, and he is 3,000 miles away in America. How much closer to Lord Goldsmith is Tony Blair? Of course, his good friend, suddenly becomes public spirited and says nowt! LOL. Where was this independence when it mattered most, on the advice that it was illegal to go to war with Iraq? So independent that he changed it to suit Tony Blair's plan to go to war anyway. And, what happened to the public interest then? We did not matter, we are all stupid, we would buy anything, even a dodgy dossier. Wrong! Besides, I already know that Lord Falconer is psychic. For example, he was telling the World At One what the judgment in the prisoners votes case was before the European Court of Human Rights had published it! All of a sudden his crystal ball had got cloudy? He was rendered speechless?
True, there have been occasions in the past when the media have published information which prejudiced a fair trial. However, in this case the public already know that seats in the House of Lords and Knighthoods have been sold. All the BBC sought to do was bring the public up to scratch with a recent development. The public have learned that truth no longer emanates from Number Ten, and hasn't since the time that bowler tampered with the cricket ball to deliver his brand of spin. We now have the absurd situation where Tony Blair is parodying Rory Bremner mimicing Tony Blair! The hands start to sleight, the eyes go to the left, the tongue licks the lips. One Foot in the Grave, springs to mind, "I don't believe it!". Do you? Peter and the Wolf also springs to mind.
Lord Chief Justice Woolf would have made a good Lord Chancellor. He has made a couple of decisions in court that I would question. But, anybody can make a mistake or two. I do not believe that he is corrupt. His appointment would have been on merit as opposed to the job going to a Tony Crony. This nepotism only leads to corruption.
A problem with the High Court "Protect the poor, defend the weak", in relation to Judicial Review, and it stems from a prison law case, following the Hull Prison riot in 1976, is that if anyone now wants to attack a public decision-maker, they must first seek permission from a judge to proceed. Whereas, in the US, any citizen can take the matter straight into court and the public authority has to defend the action. What can happen over here is that a judge acts as a goalkeeper for the government. That is, he or she reaches a political rather than a judicial decision. I am not saying that that is what the judge did in granting an injunction in this case. But, there is a legal principle and that is: "Not only must justice be done, it must manifestly be seen to be done". What was missing in this case, the public was excluded. Therefore, how can they see justice being done?
Part of democracy, is having a free press and an independent Judiciary. What have the government got to hide from us this time? The public need to scrutinise this very carefully, be very vigilant, and seek the accountability that the government has promised but failed to deliver on.
Shouldn't the public get a rebate on the TV Licence fee when the BBC let's the public down?
This from Nick Robinson's (Not)Newslog. Give the man a banana from this banana republic for at least trying.
Strict limits
* Nick
* 2 Mar 07, 10:55 PM
It's been an interesting evening for lawyers - and a rather more frustrating one for journalists.
Lawyers representing the BBC and lawyers representing the Attorney General spent about two hours locked away at the Royal Courts of Justice this evening. The decision came about 21:00 - and that decision was an injunction, sought by the Attorney General, preventing the BBC from broadcasting an item it had planned to show tonight about the cash-for-honours investigation.
This will be baffling for the public, and I'm afraid I can't unbaffle many of you - there are strict limits on what we can say and report. But what we can say is that as far as we are aware, this is the first injunction that has been sought - and it is certainly the first successful one - in a long process of media reporting on this investigation.
A spokesman for the Attorney has said that the move was taken in response to a request from the Metropolitan Police, who were concerned that the disclosure of information contained in the story could have harmed their inquiry. The spokesman added that Lord Goldsmith - a member of the Cabinet - was acting independently of the Government in seeking the injunction.
Readers will know that there have been complaints from those involved in the investigation that there has been so much reporting - so much of what they refer to as speculation - during an ongoing police investigation. And while this injunction means that this particular news item cannot be broadcast, it's not yet clear what the implication is for any future broadcast.
PS: You may notice below that I've closed this post to comments. Sorry about that, but as I mentioned above, there are strict limits on what can be said.
Strict limits
* Nick
* 2 Mar 07, 10:55 PM
It's been an interesting evening for lawyers - and a rather more frustrating one for journalists.
Lawyers representing the BBC and lawyers representing the Attorney General spent about two hours locked away at the Royal Courts of Justice this evening. The decision came about 21:00 - and that decision was an injunction, sought by the Attorney General, preventing the BBC from broadcasting an item it had planned to show tonight about the cash-for-honours investigation.
This will be baffling for the public, and I'm afraid I can't unbaffle many of you - there are strict limits on what we can say and report. But what we can say is that as far as we are aware, this is the first injunction that has been sought - and it is certainly the first successful one - in a long process of media reporting on this investigation.
A spokesman for the Attorney has said that the move was taken in response to a request from the Metropolitan Police, who were concerned that the disclosure of information contained in the story could have harmed their inquiry. The spokesman added that Lord Goldsmith - a member of the Cabinet - was acting independently of the Government in seeking the injunction.
Readers will know that there have been complaints from those involved in the investigation that there has been so much reporting - so much of what they refer to as speculation - during an ongoing police investigation. And while this injunction means that this particular news item cannot be broadcast, it's not yet clear what the implication is for any future broadcast.
PS: You may notice below that I've closed this post to comments. Sorry about that, but as I mentioned above, there are strict limits on what can be said.
Friday, March 02, 2007
Exclusive: Ruth Turner to be charged.
Ruth Turner is to be charged by the police in relation to an email linked to the cash-for-honours inquiry. Earlier this evening, Iain Dale's Diary exclusively posted that there was a rumour that a injunction had been sought against the BBC preventing them from broadcasting this story. However, he then claims an exclusive which featured on the BBC Ten O' Clock News. Meanwhile, Guido merely posted a picture of a smoking gun, as though that gives anyone any information at all.
The Attorney General, the corrupt Lord Goldsmith, sought the injunction in the public interest. However, too frequently the government claims that it is acting in the public interest when in reality it is seeking to protect its own interest from political embarrassment. Had Lord Goldsmith not lost his integrity over the changed legal advice in relation to the Iraq war, I might of believed him. This reminds me of the attempt by Margaret Thatcher to ban Spycatcher.
Update: It is interesting to note that Iain Dale has removed the Ruth Turner label in his post, whereas Guido has added other names in addition to Ruth Turner. It is doubtful that Israel would have extradited Lord Levy, the subject of the email, if he had stayed there during his recent trip. What amazes me is that with so many lawyers involved, how did they manage not to notice that perverting the course of justice is a crime? Like a house of cards, pull one out and the others are likely to fall. I would have preferred it if the card had been an Ace, or a King, as opposed to a Queen.
The Attorney General, the corrupt Lord Goldsmith, sought the injunction in the public interest. However, too frequently the government claims that it is acting in the public interest when in reality it is seeking to protect its own interest from political embarrassment. Had Lord Goldsmith not lost his integrity over the changed legal advice in relation to the Iraq war, I might of believed him. This reminds me of the attempt by Margaret Thatcher to ban Spycatcher.
Update: It is interesting to note that Iain Dale has removed the Ruth Turner label in his post, whereas Guido has added other names in addition to Ruth Turner. It is doubtful that Israel would have extradited Lord Levy, the subject of the email, if he had stayed there during his recent trip. What amazes me is that with so many lawyers involved, how did they manage not to notice that perverting the course of justice is a crime? Like a house of cards, pull one out and the others are likely to fall. I would have preferred it if the card had been an Ace, or a King, as opposed to a Queen.
Evidence that Tony Blair is a wanker.
At the last Labour Party conference, Gordon Brown is seen to mouth the word "wanker" during Tony Blair's speech. I wonder if he had this image in his mind at the time?
Anti-Slavery March. And, has McCain had his chips?
Yesterday, a handful of protesters began a march from Hull to London. It is to mark the bicentennial of the abolishment of slavery, by William Wilberforce, Hull's most famous son. Whilst I agree that slavery is man's inhumanity towards man, I have a couple of issues. One of the people on the march told BBC Look North, that she was saying sorry for what had happened and that by going on this march she was putting right a historical wrong. I don't believe that saying sorry 200 years later, and going on a march eradicates this black mark in our history books. More recently, a million marched against the invasion of Iraq and it had no affect on the government.
I was slightly bemused to hear that Senator McCain had said sorry for stating that America had wasted the lives of its soldiers in Iraq, and that what he should have said was that they had sacrificed their lives. I cannot see anything wrong with stating that these lives were wasted, given that it is an illegal war. It is an unnecessary waste of lives. I cannot see how changing the term to sacrifice alters anything. It just made me think about leading lambs to the slaughter, sacrificial lambs.
The anti-slavery marchers are missing a vital point. In effect, slavery is still going on in Hull and the surrounding areas. I am referring to the grip that the Russian/Latvian Mafia has on Eastern Europeans migrants, who are paying to work and are not being paid for weeks at a time by firms such as M.H. Poskitt Ltd, in Goole. I am aware that DEFRA is investigating Poskitt's, however, as I understand it this is only in relation to the use of unsafe machinery. I would like to see these marchers picketing Poskitt's to bring public awareness to what is happening in our own backyard.
I was slightly bemused to hear that Senator McCain had said sorry for stating that America had wasted the lives of its soldiers in Iraq, and that what he should have said was that they had sacrificed their lives. I cannot see anything wrong with stating that these lives were wasted, given that it is an illegal war. It is an unnecessary waste of lives. I cannot see how changing the term to sacrifice alters anything. It just made me think about leading lambs to the slaughter, sacrificial lambs.
The anti-slavery marchers are missing a vital point. In effect, slavery is still going on in Hull and the surrounding areas. I am referring to the grip that the Russian/Latvian Mafia has on Eastern Europeans migrants, who are paying to work and are not being paid for weeks at a time by firms such as M.H. Poskitt Ltd, in Goole. I am aware that DEFRA is investigating Poskitt's, however, as I understand it this is only in relation to the use of unsafe machinery. I would like to see these marchers picketing Poskitt's to bring public awareness to what is happening in our own backyard.
Bob Piper eat your heart out as Hull City revealed its secret weapon.
Hull City v Birmingham City. Hull City mascot Roary the Tiger balances the ball on his nose during half time. Final score: Hull City 2 Birmingham 0
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Exclusive - Director General of Prison Service, Phil Wheatley's speech to the General Synod.
It gives me great honour to be able to publish, in full, to a wider audience, the following speech, given to a selective audience today.
ADDRESS TO THE GENERAL SYNOD OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
1 MARCH 2007
I thought the most useful contribution I could make to your debate was to:
give you some information about the make-up of the prison population;
explain what levels of overcrowding we are experiencing as we run the Prison Service near to maximum capacity and to comment on the effects of overcrowding and population pressure;
give a prison manager's perspective on the balance between punishment and rehabilitation while maintaining order and security and ensuring prison is a survivable experience.
Prison Population
I should make absolutely clear that I am not an expert on sentencing. I avoid public comment on the sentencing debate. Nearly three-quarters of the total of 66,000 sentenced prisoners are sentenced for offences of burglary, robbery, violence, sexual crime and drug offences (drug dealing rather than simple possession). 11% (8,800) are serving indeterminate sentences; just over 33% (26,000) have got determinate sentences of 4 years or over; and about 28% (22,500) are serving between 12 months and less than 4 years. 10% (7,900) are serving less than 12 months.
The 10% who are who are serving less than a year break down into 4 large offence groups - theft and handling (most commonly for shoplifting), violence against the person (most commonly actual bodily harm), a group of offences, including breaches of ASBO, affray, absconding from bail, provocation of violence and criminal damage, and finally a slightly smaller group for motoring offences (most commonly for driving whilst disqualified). The majority in all these groups are heavily convicted with more than 10 previous convictions. Less than 10% have less than 3 pre‑convictions.
I should draw Synod's attention to the increase in the number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners which is already much higher than any other European jurisdiction, and increasing at over 1,500 per year.
The rest of the prison population is made up of about 10% (8,200) awaiting trial and 6% (4,600) who are convicted and unsentenced.
In short, therefore, in the prison population of just under 80,000 prisoners, the vast majority of offenders are convicted and sentenced, more likely to be serving long sentences for very serious offences with only a minority sentenced for what might, at first sight, appear to be less serious offences and, in those cases, courts are only likely to have used custody if the offences are persistent.
The rate of overcrowding is the number of prisoners who are being required to share cells which were designed to hold a smaller number of people. Currently, approximately 24% of the population are held in these conditions. The number who are sharing is much higher because larger cells are certified to hold more than one prisoner without being overcrowded. Overall, about 40% of the population can expect to share a cell with another prisoner. Overcrowded conditions which amount to 2 people sharing a toilet are far from ideal. Prisoners do not get to select their companions and being locked up for two-thirds of every 24 hours in such enforced closeness to someone else is, for many prisoners, disturbing. Some prisoners, however, facing long periods of lock up, would prefer to share. The vast majority of cells now have, not only integral sanitation and a wash basin, but also in‑cell electricity and, for prisoners who are conforming and choose to pay a £1 a week, access to in‑cell TV and often a small kettle. It is still far from the lap of luxury.
Each prison has been assessed to ensure that the level of overcrowding in that prison does not exceed the level at which we can hold prisoners in a decent and humane fashion. The levels set by my Area Managers are the maximum capacity and we are not prepared to breach that capacity. In this way, we ensure that we do not go beyond the bounds of what is decent and lawful.
The problem for prisoners is not simply overcrowding, which is uncomfortable, but is the resulting restriction on regime caused by the increasing pressure of numbers. For example, with a limited number of education places; if the prison is absolutely full for each prisoner there is less chance of being allocated to education.
In order to use all the accommodation available, we have to move prisoners long distances. The prison estate has not been developed over the last 100 years in a way which best matches the needs and locations from which the current population comes. Frankly there are very few prisoners received directly from the area around Dartmoor and a similarly small number from the Isle of Sheppey or from Cumbria around Haverigg. Although we try to ensure that moves are not unnecessarily disruptive, keeping everywhere full involves short notice moves which do not always take account of the needs of prisoners. Though we try to ensure that they do not disrupt training courses and offending behaviour work. Such moves are most likely to affect short sentenced prisoners who, because of the pressure on the system, have the least access to interventions designed to reduce re‑offending.
Purposes of Prison
Turning from overcrowding to the purposes of imprisonment.
Prisons have a number of different and sometimes conflicting functions.
Punishment
Sir Alexander Patterson, one of my predecessors, said that punishment was the deprivation of liberty and that the prisons purpose was not to punish further. I think that approach obscures the complexity. Reducing the argument to absurdity would suggest that putting fence around a 5 star hotel and confining people to its luxurious facilities for the period of their sentence would be acceptable as a punishment. I do not think it would be. It would excite public outrage and derision. There is no doubt that the deprivation of liberty inherent in being confined is a substantial punishment but prisons are expected to provide facilities which are less generous than most members of society enjoy. Michael Howard, when Home Secretary, used the word "austere" to describe the imprisonment that he wished to create. Actually, austere describes rather well the conditions of imprisonment because under-pinning many decisions on prison administration has been a political judgement that prisoners should be seen to be comparatively deprived when compared with the rest of the population.
Punishment is therefore a legitimate part of our work and prisoners are sent to prison as a punishment and their conditions have to be seen by society as amounting to a punishment. Confinement within a perimeter, restricted contact with loved ones, adherence to a regular, but spartan regime, with no opportunity to use personal economic wealth to mitigate those austerities amount to a punishment.
It is a question of getting the balance right. Too austere a regime with too much emphasis on deprivation and punishment carries risk. The first Victorian prison in the new style, the model prison of Pentonville, which had a regime based on separation and religious contemplation with very little freedom of movement or social contact for prisoners produced, even for the Victorians, an unacceptable rate of mental breakdown. A regime that concentrated solely on punishment would be regarded by many of us as morally unacceptable and, on a purely practical note, is likely to embitter those subject to it and increase the risk of return to crime.
Rehabilitation
From the late 18th Century onwards, when imprisonment began to be used as the primary punishment, there was a belief that prisoners could be reformed or rehabilitated. The methods that have been used have varied. Early reformers believed in the power of discipline, order and religion. The Victorians added a practical emphasis on education and learning a trade. In the last century the borstal system was based on the public school with a house system, hard work, outward bound activities, team games and religion. In the post-war period, we recreated Army discipline with the introduction of detention centres. In the 1960s we moved towards group work and therapy. In the late 1970s, as a result of the increasing volume of research indicating treatment was unsuccessful, the pendulum swung towards humane containment. Only in the late 1980s, when large studies enabled criminologists for the first time to measure the small but positive effects of some interventions, did a belief in rehabilitation return.
That people do change their behaviour after being in prison is obviously true. Of those who come to prison, 34% do not re‑offend within 2 years of their release. The question is whether we can increase the proportion of prisoners who do not re‑offend. Measuring the results of our efforts in prison is not easy and requires at least a 2 year follow-up to get a robust result. The latest information, which draws on data from all the offenders who are released in the first quarter of each calendar year from 2000 up to 2003 is now suggesting positive results. The research examines the rate at which offenders are predicted to re‑offend and then compares the difference between that and the actual re‑conviction rate. The results since 2000 indicate that, for short term imprisonment (less than 12 months) the results have been slightly worse than the prediction. Short term imprisonment appears to make prisoners just over 1% more likely to be reconvicted than might otherwise have been expected. This is not entirely surprising; short term imprisonment normally involves confinement for very short periods in our most overcrowded and deprived prisons with little by way of interventions other than limited detoxification of those who had been using hard drugs. For those serving over 12 months but less than 2 years, there is a small, but important, treatment gain of just over 4%. In the 2-4 year group, this rises to slightly over 8% and for the 4 year and over group it goes up to 9%. The trend over time with all these treatment gains is upwards. However, the data is not so clear and unambiguous that anyone should jump to the conclusion that longer custodial sentences are better.
This is good news, and comes at a time when we in the Prison Service have been adopting what we would describe as a multi-modal approach to trying to reduce re‑offending. In other words, we try and address a variety of different needs and not rely on any single intervention to produce results. This has been possible as a result of increased Government investment in reducing re‑offending which has allowed us to do much more education, particularly targeting basic skills, better detoxification of drug users (as many as 60% of receptions have got a hard drug problem), improved health intervention with the National Health Service through Primary Care Trusts now commissioning health in prison with new money which has allowed much better provision. In the mental health field, Community Psychiatric Nurses now work alongside prison staff to improve both the diagnosis and treatment of offenders with mental health problems. New money has also improved the supply of cognitive behavioural programmes designed to improve prisoners' thinking ability including improved drug treatment provision in prison. These improvements have been accompanied by better work to link the inside to the outside with much greater emphasis on the practical elements of resettlement, finding a job and having somewhere decent to live. Great efforts have also gone into making sure that specialist treatment can be followed through in the community, particularly for those returning drug addicts going back into the community. Prisoners serving over a year get the benefit of probation supervision on release.
All these treatment measures have been accompanied by a drive to improve the quality of relationships between prison staff and prisoners. We know from detailed research done into the risk of suicide that the quality of relationships is crucial to preventing suicide and it seems likely that the same good relationships improve rehabilitation prospects. The Prison Service's decency agenda which addresses the quality of these relationships and the provision of a proper caring approach to those in prison is vital to the success of our work. It might, perhaps, best be seen as ensuring the soil in which interventions can grow and flourish is properly prepared and fertile.
Doing Time - Surviving Prison
We need to remind ourselves that prison has to be survivable if it is to be morally defensible. This is a real issue, given the increase in the number of long sentenced prisoners. The number of suicides is still significant, although the numbers are reducing. The 67 suicides last year, indicate that surviving imprisonment is a real matter of life and death. Doing long sentences is very difficult. To make prison bearable, we must ensure that there is sufficient variety of activity and sufficient social contact to enable the process of imprisonment to seem endurable. Time is always more bearable if there is a feeling of progress - things to be achieved and improvements secured. Education, provision for spiritual needs, the Arts, sport, ordinary social interaction are all necessary to give this sense of progress and variety.
Maintaining Order and Security
Prisons can only function effectively if they are able to maintain order and security. A prison which is insecure is effectively not a prison. Security can be achieved by physical barriers and restrictions which prevent access to escape equipment. It can also be achieved by gaining prisoners' acceptance that what is happening to them is fair, inevitable and not to be resisted. In practice, a combination of the two is what works to maintain security. In open prisons where, contrary to recent publicity, there is a falling abscond rate, now at its lowest level for at least 10 years, prisoners' willingness to accept their imprisonment is the main means of security. Whereas in high security prisons, there is a heavy reliance on security barriers, intensive surveillance, backed up by security procedures to prevent escape. There are tensions generated by security. Security can be intrusive, intensive searching which involves stripping prisoners and closely examining their belongings and property can be demeaning, while surveillance can mean that there is no privacy. The constant need for prison staff to question and to be alert and never to completely trust anyone can undermine the sort of relationships that are therapeutic. A compromise has to be struck which enables security to be maintained at an acceptable level but without unacceptable risks. Primarily this relies on having carefully thought through security arrangements which are designed to realistically match the degree of risk. Prisoners are carefully classified so that unnecessary security is not applied. Achieving this compromise is one of the most difficult parts of prison management. Our success in preventing escapes with one only escape from within prison so far this financial year and with a reduced suicide rate, suggests we are making this compromise successfully.
Just a word or two on order which is not the same as maintaining security. Keeping prisoners safe from each other ensuring that they co‑operate to achieve the smooth running of what are complicated institutions is not done by force of staff numbers. Typically, two officers supervise up to 50 prisoners unlocked in a medium-security establishment. Order depends upon good relationships between staff and prisoners, fair decisions about prisoners, clear boundaries in behaviour, with rewards for those who conform and effective intervention for those who do not. This is a positive approach to ensuring order, not one of standing back and leaving prisoners to get on with each other. If we are to persuade prisoners to become ex‑offenders, it is important that we ensure that criminal behaviour in prison, particularly use of drugs, is firmly controlled. With a falling drug use rate, measured by mandatory drug testing, and so far this year with no major loss of control in any of our establishments, I think we are getting this balance right.
Summary
In summary, prisons are under pressure, dealing with an increasingly long sentenced population, the majority in prison for serious offences. We have found ways to work with offenders which are reducing the risk of re‑offending, although we have not found a cure for crime and many prisoners will re‑offend. This good work is continuing in spite of pressure of population, and I am determined not to allow overcrowding to become so great that it prevents us continuing to do positive work or stops us treating prisoners decently and humanely.
ADDRESS TO THE GENERAL SYNOD OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
1 MARCH 2007
I thought the most useful contribution I could make to your debate was to:
give you some information about the make-up of the prison population;
explain what levels of overcrowding we are experiencing as we run the Prison Service near to maximum capacity and to comment on the effects of overcrowding and population pressure;
give a prison manager's perspective on the balance between punishment and rehabilitation while maintaining order and security and ensuring prison is a survivable experience.
Prison Population
I should make absolutely clear that I am not an expert on sentencing. I avoid public comment on the sentencing debate. Nearly three-quarters of the total of 66,000 sentenced prisoners are sentenced for offences of burglary, robbery, violence, sexual crime and drug offences (drug dealing rather than simple possession). 11% (8,800) are serving indeterminate sentences; just over 33% (26,000) have got determinate sentences of 4 years or over; and about 28% (22,500) are serving between 12 months and less than 4 years. 10% (7,900) are serving less than 12 months.
The 10% who are who are serving less than a year break down into 4 large offence groups - theft and handling (most commonly for shoplifting), violence against the person (most commonly actual bodily harm), a group of offences, including breaches of ASBO, affray, absconding from bail, provocation of violence and criminal damage, and finally a slightly smaller group for motoring offences (most commonly for driving whilst disqualified). The majority in all these groups are heavily convicted with more than 10 previous convictions. Less than 10% have less than 3 pre‑convictions.
I should draw Synod's attention to the increase in the number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners which is already much higher than any other European jurisdiction, and increasing at over 1,500 per year.
The rest of the prison population is made up of about 10% (8,200) awaiting trial and 6% (4,600) who are convicted and unsentenced.
In short, therefore, in the prison population of just under 80,000 prisoners, the vast majority of offenders are convicted and sentenced, more likely to be serving long sentences for very serious offences with only a minority sentenced for what might, at first sight, appear to be less serious offences and, in those cases, courts are only likely to have used custody if the offences are persistent.
The rate of overcrowding is the number of prisoners who are being required to share cells which were designed to hold a smaller number of people. Currently, approximately 24% of the population are held in these conditions. The number who are sharing is much higher because larger cells are certified to hold more than one prisoner without being overcrowded. Overall, about 40% of the population can expect to share a cell with another prisoner. Overcrowded conditions which amount to 2 people sharing a toilet are far from ideal. Prisoners do not get to select their companions and being locked up for two-thirds of every 24 hours in such enforced closeness to someone else is, for many prisoners, disturbing. Some prisoners, however, facing long periods of lock up, would prefer to share. The vast majority of cells now have, not only integral sanitation and a wash basin, but also in‑cell electricity and, for prisoners who are conforming and choose to pay a £1 a week, access to in‑cell TV and often a small kettle. It is still far from the lap of luxury.
Each prison has been assessed to ensure that the level of overcrowding in that prison does not exceed the level at which we can hold prisoners in a decent and humane fashion. The levels set by my Area Managers are the maximum capacity and we are not prepared to breach that capacity. In this way, we ensure that we do not go beyond the bounds of what is decent and lawful.
The problem for prisoners is not simply overcrowding, which is uncomfortable, but is the resulting restriction on regime caused by the increasing pressure of numbers. For example, with a limited number of education places; if the prison is absolutely full for each prisoner there is less chance of being allocated to education.
In order to use all the accommodation available, we have to move prisoners long distances. The prison estate has not been developed over the last 100 years in a way which best matches the needs and locations from which the current population comes. Frankly there are very few prisoners received directly from the area around Dartmoor and a similarly small number from the Isle of Sheppey or from Cumbria around Haverigg. Although we try to ensure that moves are not unnecessarily disruptive, keeping everywhere full involves short notice moves which do not always take account of the needs of prisoners. Though we try to ensure that they do not disrupt training courses and offending behaviour work. Such moves are most likely to affect short sentenced prisoners who, because of the pressure on the system, have the least access to interventions designed to reduce re‑offending.
Purposes of Prison
Turning from overcrowding to the purposes of imprisonment.
Prisons have a number of different and sometimes conflicting functions.
Punishment
Sir Alexander Patterson, one of my predecessors, said that punishment was the deprivation of liberty and that the prisons purpose was not to punish further. I think that approach obscures the complexity. Reducing the argument to absurdity would suggest that putting fence around a 5 star hotel and confining people to its luxurious facilities for the period of their sentence would be acceptable as a punishment. I do not think it would be. It would excite public outrage and derision. There is no doubt that the deprivation of liberty inherent in being confined is a substantial punishment but prisons are expected to provide facilities which are less generous than most members of society enjoy. Michael Howard, when Home Secretary, used the word "austere" to describe the imprisonment that he wished to create. Actually, austere describes rather well the conditions of imprisonment because under-pinning many decisions on prison administration has been a political judgement that prisoners should be seen to be comparatively deprived when compared with the rest of the population.
Punishment is therefore a legitimate part of our work and prisoners are sent to prison as a punishment and their conditions have to be seen by society as amounting to a punishment. Confinement within a perimeter, restricted contact with loved ones, adherence to a regular, but spartan regime, with no opportunity to use personal economic wealth to mitigate those austerities amount to a punishment.
It is a question of getting the balance right. Too austere a regime with too much emphasis on deprivation and punishment carries risk. The first Victorian prison in the new style, the model prison of Pentonville, which had a regime based on separation and religious contemplation with very little freedom of movement or social contact for prisoners produced, even for the Victorians, an unacceptable rate of mental breakdown. A regime that concentrated solely on punishment would be regarded by many of us as morally unacceptable and, on a purely practical note, is likely to embitter those subject to it and increase the risk of return to crime.
Rehabilitation
From the late 18th Century onwards, when imprisonment began to be used as the primary punishment, there was a belief that prisoners could be reformed or rehabilitated. The methods that have been used have varied. Early reformers believed in the power of discipline, order and religion. The Victorians added a practical emphasis on education and learning a trade. In the last century the borstal system was based on the public school with a house system, hard work, outward bound activities, team games and religion. In the post-war period, we recreated Army discipline with the introduction of detention centres. In the 1960s we moved towards group work and therapy. In the late 1970s, as a result of the increasing volume of research indicating treatment was unsuccessful, the pendulum swung towards humane containment. Only in the late 1980s, when large studies enabled criminologists for the first time to measure the small but positive effects of some interventions, did a belief in rehabilitation return.
That people do change their behaviour after being in prison is obviously true. Of those who come to prison, 34% do not re‑offend within 2 years of their release. The question is whether we can increase the proportion of prisoners who do not re‑offend. Measuring the results of our efforts in prison is not easy and requires at least a 2 year follow-up to get a robust result. The latest information, which draws on data from all the offenders who are released in the first quarter of each calendar year from 2000 up to 2003 is now suggesting positive results. The research examines the rate at which offenders are predicted to re‑offend and then compares the difference between that and the actual re‑conviction rate. The results since 2000 indicate that, for short term imprisonment (less than 12 months) the results have been slightly worse than the prediction. Short term imprisonment appears to make prisoners just over 1% more likely to be reconvicted than might otherwise have been expected. This is not entirely surprising; short term imprisonment normally involves confinement for very short periods in our most overcrowded and deprived prisons with little by way of interventions other than limited detoxification of those who had been using hard drugs. For those serving over 12 months but less than 2 years, there is a small, but important, treatment gain of just over 4%. In the 2-4 year group, this rises to slightly over 8% and for the 4 year and over group it goes up to 9%. The trend over time with all these treatment gains is upwards. However, the data is not so clear and unambiguous that anyone should jump to the conclusion that longer custodial sentences are better.
This is good news, and comes at a time when we in the Prison Service have been adopting what we would describe as a multi-modal approach to trying to reduce re‑offending. In other words, we try and address a variety of different needs and not rely on any single intervention to produce results. This has been possible as a result of increased Government investment in reducing re‑offending which has allowed us to do much more education, particularly targeting basic skills, better detoxification of drug users (as many as 60% of receptions have got a hard drug problem), improved health intervention with the National Health Service through Primary Care Trusts now commissioning health in prison with new money which has allowed much better provision. In the mental health field, Community Psychiatric Nurses now work alongside prison staff to improve both the diagnosis and treatment of offenders with mental health problems. New money has also improved the supply of cognitive behavioural programmes designed to improve prisoners' thinking ability including improved drug treatment provision in prison. These improvements have been accompanied by better work to link the inside to the outside with much greater emphasis on the practical elements of resettlement, finding a job and having somewhere decent to live. Great efforts have also gone into making sure that specialist treatment can be followed through in the community, particularly for those returning drug addicts going back into the community. Prisoners serving over a year get the benefit of probation supervision on release.
All these treatment measures have been accompanied by a drive to improve the quality of relationships between prison staff and prisoners. We know from detailed research done into the risk of suicide that the quality of relationships is crucial to preventing suicide and it seems likely that the same good relationships improve rehabilitation prospects. The Prison Service's decency agenda which addresses the quality of these relationships and the provision of a proper caring approach to those in prison is vital to the success of our work. It might, perhaps, best be seen as ensuring the soil in which interventions can grow and flourish is properly prepared and fertile.
Doing Time - Surviving Prison
We need to remind ourselves that prison has to be survivable if it is to be morally defensible. This is a real issue, given the increase in the number of long sentenced prisoners. The number of suicides is still significant, although the numbers are reducing. The 67 suicides last year, indicate that surviving imprisonment is a real matter of life and death. Doing long sentences is very difficult. To make prison bearable, we must ensure that there is sufficient variety of activity and sufficient social contact to enable the process of imprisonment to seem endurable. Time is always more bearable if there is a feeling of progress - things to be achieved and improvements secured. Education, provision for spiritual needs, the Arts, sport, ordinary social interaction are all necessary to give this sense of progress and variety.
Maintaining Order and Security
Prisons can only function effectively if they are able to maintain order and security. A prison which is insecure is effectively not a prison. Security can be achieved by physical barriers and restrictions which prevent access to escape equipment. It can also be achieved by gaining prisoners' acceptance that what is happening to them is fair, inevitable and not to be resisted. In practice, a combination of the two is what works to maintain security. In open prisons where, contrary to recent publicity, there is a falling abscond rate, now at its lowest level for at least 10 years, prisoners' willingness to accept their imprisonment is the main means of security. Whereas in high security prisons, there is a heavy reliance on security barriers, intensive surveillance, backed up by security procedures to prevent escape. There are tensions generated by security. Security can be intrusive, intensive searching which involves stripping prisoners and closely examining their belongings and property can be demeaning, while surveillance can mean that there is no privacy. The constant need for prison staff to question and to be alert and never to completely trust anyone can undermine the sort of relationships that are therapeutic. A compromise has to be struck which enables security to be maintained at an acceptable level but without unacceptable risks. Primarily this relies on having carefully thought through security arrangements which are designed to realistically match the degree of risk. Prisoners are carefully classified so that unnecessary security is not applied. Achieving this compromise is one of the most difficult parts of prison management. Our success in preventing escapes with one only escape from within prison so far this financial year and with a reduced suicide rate, suggests we are making this compromise successfully.
Just a word or two on order which is not the same as maintaining security. Keeping prisoners safe from each other ensuring that they co‑operate to achieve the smooth running of what are complicated institutions is not done by force of staff numbers. Typically, two officers supervise up to 50 prisoners unlocked in a medium-security establishment. Order depends upon good relationships between staff and prisoners, fair decisions about prisoners, clear boundaries in behaviour, with rewards for those who conform and effective intervention for those who do not. This is a positive approach to ensuring order, not one of standing back and leaving prisoners to get on with each other. If we are to persuade prisoners to become ex‑offenders, it is important that we ensure that criminal behaviour in prison, particularly use of drugs, is firmly controlled. With a falling drug use rate, measured by mandatory drug testing, and so far this year with no major loss of control in any of our establishments, I think we are getting this balance right.
Summary
In summary, prisons are under pressure, dealing with an increasingly long sentenced population, the majority in prison for serious offences. We have found ways to work with offenders which are reducing the risk of re‑offending, although we have not found a cure for crime and many prisoners will re‑offend. This good work is continuing in spite of pressure of population, and I am determined not to allow overcrowding to become so great that it prevents us continuing to do positive work or stops us treating prisoners decently and humanely.
Even more common sense - judge attacks victim impact statements
The whole point of having a doctrine of Separation of Powers, is that it provides balances and checks between the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament, to prevent abuses of power. What we have seen happening under New Labour is the Executive encroaching into the territory of the Judiciary. Knee-jerkism from the Home Office as it responds to the headlines and editorials of The Sun. In its attempt to placate victims of crime, the Home Office and the Department for Constitutional Affairs have victimised offenders and prisoners.
It is the judge's role to judge what is the appropriate sentencing decision to make in any given case. It is not part of a judge's role to pander to the whims of politicians. As judge John Samuels points out, justice is about being dispassionate and not allowing emotions to cloud the issues. In my view, judges should rebel and refuse to allow victim statement's any right of audience in any court.
It is a shame that Harriet Harman has sold out her principles of integrity since she became part of New Labour's legal machinery. She used to be a staunch advocate of prisoners rights. It is true that power corrupts. Judge John Samuels should be praised for his correcting the scales of justice which the DCA has imbalanced with its grubby finger.
It is the judge's role to judge what is the appropriate sentencing decision to make in any given case. It is not part of a judge's role to pander to the whims of politicians. As judge John Samuels points out, justice is about being dispassionate and not allowing emotions to cloud the issues. In my view, judges should rebel and refuse to allow victim statement's any right of audience in any court.
It is a shame that Harriet Harman has sold out her principles of integrity since she became part of New Labour's legal machinery. She used to be a staunch advocate of prisoners rights. It is true that power corrupts. Judge John Samuels should be praised for his correcting the scales of justice which the DCA has imbalanced with its grubby finger.
Common sense prevails
From Times Online
March 01, 2007
Hunger strike Eta prisoner released from hospital custody
Inaki de Juana Chaos
Thomas Catán, Madrid and Devika Bhat
An Eta prisoner on hunger-strike for 114 days has been released from a hospital in Madrid and taken to a clinic in the Basque region, The Times has been told, in what is understood to be the first step to allowing him to serve the rest of his sentence at home under police supervision.
Iñaki De Juana Chaos, one of the Basque separatist group's most notorious killers, was taken by ambulance to a hospital close to the Basque city of San Sebastian, according to local media reports.
He is then expected to be put under house arrest to serve the last year of his sentence for making threats at home under police supervision, having already completed an 18-year sentence for heading a cell responsible for killing 25 soldiers and policemen in the 1980s.
The decision to free de Juana Chaos is likely to spark uproar among victims of the armed Basque separatist group. More than 75,000 people held a rally in Madrid last weekend to demand his continued imprisonment. Several people were injured when a rival rally in Bilbao by his supporters was broken up by riot police.
Background
* Eta killer's deathbed plea for peace
* Madrid’s Dilemma
* Uproar over early release for Eta hunger-striker
Supporters of De Juana Chaos said yesterday that he could no longer stand and would enter a coma if his blood sugar dropped any lower. They said he had managed to rip-out his feeding tube three times on Tuesday, as prison authorities struggled to replace it.
Senior figures from the ruling Socialist Party have apparently been laying the groundwork for his release for days, saying that allowing him to die would merely hand Eta a “martyr”.
“There are many people around (De Juana Chaos) that hope he dies,” said José Blanco, the Socialist Party secretary. “I don’t wish anyone to die, I have a respect for life that terrorists do not.”
The leader of the Opposition Popular Party, Mariano Rajoy, said that “the worst possible scenario” in the case was for the Government to “cede to the blackmail of terrorists”. He said that tens, or hundreds of other Eta prisoners could follow suit.
March 01, 2007
Hunger strike Eta prisoner released from hospital custody
Inaki de Juana Chaos
Thomas Catán, Madrid and Devika Bhat
An Eta prisoner on hunger-strike for 114 days has been released from a hospital in Madrid and taken to a clinic in the Basque region, The Times has been told, in what is understood to be the first step to allowing him to serve the rest of his sentence at home under police supervision.
Iñaki De Juana Chaos, one of the Basque separatist group's most notorious killers, was taken by ambulance to a hospital close to the Basque city of San Sebastian, according to local media reports.
He is then expected to be put under house arrest to serve the last year of his sentence for making threats at home under police supervision, having already completed an 18-year sentence for heading a cell responsible for killing 25 soldiers and policemen in the 1980s.
The decision to free de Juana Chaos is likely to spark uproar among victims of the armed Basque separatist group. More than 75,000 people held a rally in Madrid last weekend to demand his continued imprisonment. Several people were injured when a rival rally in Bilbao by his supporters was broken up by riot police.
Background
* Eta killer's deathbed plea for peace
* Madrid’s Dilemma
* Uproar over early release for Eta hunger-striker
Supporters of De Juana Chaos said yesterday that he could no longer stand and would enter a coma if his blood sugar dropped any lower. They said he had managed to rip-out his feeding tube three times on Tuesday, as prison authorities struggled to replace it.
Senior figures from the ruling Socialist Party have apparently been laying the groundwork for his release for days, saying that allowing him to die would merely hand Eta a “martyr”.
“There are many people around (De Juana Chaos) that hope he dies,” said José Blanco, the Socialist Party secretary. “I don’t wish anyone to die, I have a respect for life that terrorists do not.”
The leader of the Opposition Popular Party, Mariano Rajoy, said that “the worst possible scenario” in the case was for the Government to “cede to the blackmail of terrorists”. He said that tens, or hundreds of other Eta prisoners could follow suit.
God's Truth! You don't say? Well, I never!
It has been reported that Jesus has been found dead in his grave. Under the circumstances, I am not surprised by this finding. It would have been a miracle, indeed, had he been found alive in his grave. No doubt Scotland Yard will be offering its services to determine whether he died of natural causes, or whether foul play is suspected. Police will not confirm whether the remains of a crashed light aircraft, found close by, belonged to Ponshush Pilot.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Reflections on prison life.
It is said that, prison is a great leveller in society. Everybody started off in the mailbag workshop. We had to sew, by hand, eight stitches to the inch, hessian mail bags for the Royal Mail. There was always dust particles in the air, which became more apparent when the sun shone, and its rays filtered in through the windows. We had to sit in rows of chairs, and the seats had a toblerone-shaped ridge on them which fitted into the cheeks of your arse to ensure that we all faced the front. The Silent Rule had gone and we were allowed to talk quietly to the prisoner immediately to our left or right. We were watched over by one guard sat in front on a high platform, and another patrolled the shop floor. We were not allowed to smoke in the workshop, but we were permitted to smoke in the toilet. Only two prisoners were allowed to occupy the two cubicles at any one time, and one at the urinal. We had to put our hand up to attract the attention of the guard in the box, and then ask for permission to go to the toilet.
Wages were very low, and poverty rife. The tobacco ration never seemed to last a whole week. Sometimes we would find ourselves scraping out the pockets of our clothes with a toothbrush to find tobacco dust which we could roll up in toilet paper or pages of the Bible and get a light by wrapping our underpants around the light bulb until it smouldered and caught alight. I wonder wherever did newspaper editors get the impression that prisons are like holiday camps?
Wages were very low, and poverty rife. The tobacco ration never seemed to last a whole week. Sometimes we would find ourselves scraping out the pockets of our clothes with a toothbrush to find tobacco dust which we could roll up in toilet paper or pages of the Bible and get a light by wrapping our underpants around the light bulb until it smouldered and caught alight. I wonder wherever did newspaper editors get the impression that prisons are like holiday camps?
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
On this note, what memo?
The corrupt Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, who altered his legal advice, which stated that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, to suit Tony Blair's plan to invade. And, who threatened to prosecute newspapers if they dared to refer to the leaked memo in which George Bush sought to bomb the Al-jazeera television station in Qatar, is urging the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute under the Official Secrets Act two former Labour MPs, Peter Kilfoyle and Tony Clarke for leaking the memo.
Strangely, Downing Street sources are claiming that no record exists of the secret meeting between Blair and Bush, therefore the memo does not exist. If this is the case, then there can be no prosecution because no offence has been committed. On the other hand, there are examples where the jury has refused to convict in such cases where they believe that it was in the public interest to disclose the dirty tricks used by a government department. This is not a case of official secrets, this is a case of political embarrassment for the government.
Strangely, Downing Street sources are claiming that no record exists of the secret meeting between Blair and Bush, therefore the memo does not exist. If this is the case, then there can be no prosecution because no offence has been committed. On the other hand, there are examples where the jury has refused to convict in such cases where they believe that it was in the public interest to disclose the dirty tricks used by a government department. This is not a case of official secrets, this is a case of political embarrassment for the government.
Why we should be afraid, be very afraid.
It is a known fact that Tony Blair and George Bush entered into a conspiracy to invade Iraq, which was not only in contravention of international law but is also an offence under the criminal law of England. Under The Intelligence Services Act 1994 the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS)(formally MI6), is empowered to obtain and provide information relating to the acts and intentions of persons overseas. It was ultra vires (outside the power of) Tony Blair's public office, to obtain and provide the dodgy dossier which he claimed justified the invasion of Iraq. He can, and should be, subject to a judicial review. At the very least, Tony Blair's conduct constituted a misfeasance in public office.
We know that an attempt was made to drag the SIS into this conspiracy to provide false information, and that the then Head of SIS, Sir Richard Dearlove resigned because he was aware that the intelligence presented by Tony Blair had no foundation in fact. John Scarlett (nick named "The Scarlet Pimpenel" for obvious reasons), who was Dearlove's deputy, and involved in preparing the dodgy dossier, was appointed as the new Head of SIS. It is rumoured that Scarlett ensured Dearlove's resignation with the threat of blackmail.
Whereas traditionally, SIS is responsible to and reports to the Foreign Secretary, next month both MI5 and MI6 will report to and be responsible to the new Security Supremo, the present Home Secretary, John Reid. Not since the Cold War has a communist been able to infiltrate the SIS, as easily as John Reid has sneaked in through the back door. It is frightening that this megalomaniac should have been allowed to amass so much power, and without any real sign of any accountability to the electorate. It maybe that this placing him in this position in preparedness for the Iran war is the secret legacy of Tony Blair.
We know that an attempt was made to drag the SIS into this conspiracy to provide false information, and that the then Head of SIS, Sir Richard Dearlove resigned because he was aware that the intelligence presented by Tony Blair had no foundation in fact. John Scarlett (nick named "The Scarlet Pimpenel" for obvious reasons), who was Dearlove's deputy, and involved in preparing the dodgy dossier, was appointed as the new Head of SIS. It is rumoured that Scarlett ensured Dearlove's resignation with the threat of blackmail.
Whereas traditionally, SIS is responsible to and reports to the Foreign Secretary, next month both MI5 and MI6 will report to and be responsible to the new Security Supremo, the present Home Secretary, John Reid. Not since the Cold War has a communist been able to infiltrate the SIS, as easily as John Reid has sneaked in through the back door. It is frightening that this megalomaniac should have been allowed to amass so much power, and without any real sign of any accountability to the electorate. It maybe that this placing him in this position in preparedness for the Iran war is the secret legacy of Tony Blair.
Dirty Old Man in raincoat questioned by police about his relationship with boyish looking LibDem
I have not bothered to include points one to three (anyone interested can click the title and it will link to the original piece), as they are not relevant here. This comedy duo, are making the claim that they can achieve what the Tories and Labour have failed to achieve, that is, make prisons work. Tony Blair took the centre ground from the Tories, forcing the Tories to move Left in an attempt to recapture the lost ground. Now the LibDems are moving to the Right and pitching their tent on the ground that the Tories have vacated. What Menzies Campbell and Nick Clegg are proposing, are policies advocated by Anne Widdecombe MP, who was the Prisons Minister under Michael Howard MP, one of the worst Home Secretary's in the Tory Party, and one of the worst in recent penal history.
"Point four, we will make prison work. The current situation fails both the prisoner and society. Prisoners who do not participate in education or training are three times more likely to go back to crime. Yet well over half of offenders receive no training. And only one in five of prisoners exceed the standards expected of an 11 year old in writing.
Instead, we will treble the number of prisoners working, and make education and training compulsory. And for those with serious mental health problems there will be increased provision of secure mental health services. We can foster skills amongst our prison population and create opportunities for those who would otherwise return to a life of crime. That is why Liberal Democrats say that we can cut crime.
Point five, we will introduce an entirely new approach to compensating victims of crime. It will be fairer. It will be simpler. And it will be swifter. It is only fair that money raised by prisoners in employment should go towards compensating their victims. Prisoners shouldn't sit in their cells for twenty three hours a day: they ought to be engaged in work that is productive and useful.
By making prisoners do real work for a real wage, we can also instil a sense of responsibility, enhance their skills and ensure that victims are properly compensated. Prisoners will literally pay for their crimes, whilst gaining the skills and experiences needed to dissuade them from further offences".
Suddenly, the talk went from making prison work to making prisoners work! There is a big legal problem with their idea. And that is, that there is nothing fair about robbing prisoners who are entitled to receive the National Minimum Wage for their labours, and giving it to people who have not worked for it. Prisoners are already paying for their crimes, by loss of liberty, what Winston Churchill termed "the hard coin of the realm". Nobody can be punished twice for the same offence.
I don't want to hear silly ideas like this. These are not policies, but soundbites. And soundbites that are toothless. Want I want to hear is how do they plan to overcome the legal obstacles in the path of such fancy ideas. Over to you Ming and Nick...
Monday, February 26, 2007
How many dumb blondes does it take to change a light bulb?
Zoe Phillips, who is blonde, attempted to present Blogger TV on 18DoughtyStreet.com - Politics for adults, because Iain Dale is away in Washington, USA. My first ground for complaint is that 18DS has taken to placing a logo on the screen, so that the adults who do tune in know what they are watching. My second ground of complaint, is that the studio backdrop is an 18DS logo, no doubt to underline the fact for the adults tuning in that they are watching 18DS politics for adults. Take it from me, no child would find this programme interesting enough to watch it!
Zoe Phillips announces that she is standing in for Iain Dale, when it is obvious to any viewer that she is sitting down on a sofa. My next complaint is that she invites people to email in or MSN to express their views. And then takes a leaf out of Tony Blair's book by failing to read out any emails or MSN messages for the 55 minutes that the programme was on air. The laptop by her side was not a studio prop, it actually works. Oddly, she stated that people had signed in and that the MSNs were lighting up and turned to the screen and said "I hope you are watching?". Duh!
The programme is called Blogger TV, and for the first five minutes she and the guests actually talked about blogs. But, then it got side tracked onto the subject of the EU and stayed on that for the next 45 minutes. Then Zoe Phillips mentioned a blogger called Elle, and stated "staying on the subject of Europe", and asked why energy saving light bulbs don't come on when you switch them on. Duh! But they do come on, they just take awhile to get up to full brightness! James Oates, one of the guest's, suggested that she change her light bulb. He really should not expect so much from the presenter, and I think he was being unfair assuming that she would know how to do this.
The saving grace was that the arrogant sod Croydonian, was not wearing his day glow yellow socks again! The programme ended 5 minutes early, this was a relief, given that it was advertised as one thing and another programme was being shown. It was not Vox Politix, but Zoe Phillips must have got confused or she did not know how to steer the conversation or keep it on topic. This raises the question why is she a presenter on 18DS? When the credits rolled, I noted that there was no producer credited. I feel that 18DS should spend less on smear ads and hire a producer instead. Vox Politix started 3 minutes late, which meant that we were treated to 8 minutes of looped music and pictures of a blue sky. Someone had thoughtfully invited a psychiatrist to attend Zoe Phillips on the couch...
Has 18DS lost the plot?
Zoe Phillips announces that she is standing in for Iain Dale, when it is obvious to any viewer that she is sitting down on a sofa. My next complaint is that she invites people to email in or MSN to express their views. And then takes a leaf out of Tony Blair's book by failing to read out any emails or MSN messages for the 55 minutes that the programme was on air. The laptop by her side was not a studio prop, it actually works. Oddly, she stated that people had signed in and that the MSNs were lighting up and turned to the screen and said "I hope you are watching?". Duh!
The programme is called Blogger TV, and for the first five minutes she and the guests actually talked about blogs. But, then it got side tracked onto the subject of the EU and stayed on that for the next 45 minutes. Then Zoe Phillips mentioned a blogger called Elle, and stated "staying on the subject of Europe", and asked why energy saving light bulbs don't come on when you switch them on. Duh! But they do come on, they just take awhile to get up to full brightness! James Oates, one of the guest's, suggested that she change her light bulb. He really should not expect so much from the presenter, and I think he was being unfair assuming that she would know how to do this.
The saving grace was that the arrogant sod Croydonian, was not wearing his day glow yellow socks again! The programme ended 5 minutes early, this was a relief, given that it was advertised as one thing and another programme was being shown. It was not Vox Politix, but Zoe Phillips must have got confused or she did not know how to steer the conversation or keep it on topic. This raises the question why is she a presenter on 18DS? When the credits rolled, I noted that there was no producer credited. I feel that 18DS should spend less on smear ads and hire a producer instead. Vox Politix started 3 minutes late, which meant that we were treated to 8 minutes of looped music and pictures of a blue sky. Someone had thoughtfully invited a psychiatrist to attend Zoe Phillips on the couch...
Has 18DS lost the plot?
Forward planning.
About this time last month, I received an email from:
Dr Paul Mason
Director of Postgraduate Research
School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies
Bute Building
Cardiff University
informing me about this
"I'm organising a session on prisons, media and public opinion as part of the 'The Progressive Prison? Historical Narratives, Contemporary Realties' conference which Yvonne Jewkes is running at the Open University, Thurs 21st and Friday 22nd June.
Its a roundtable format in which I'm asking participants to give their views on the role of the media and public views on prison, and then to open it to the floor for discussion. Would you be willing to take part? I'm trying to get as diverse panel as I can - journalist, ex prisoner, academic, pressure groups etc. I thought you could offer some interesting insights into how you see prisons in the public domain and in the press".
I responded that I was happy to take part, and asked whether he had started to take into account blogs in his media study. He said that he had not, but would consider it when the study into newspapers concluded.
The International Centre for Comparative Criminological Research (ICCCR) emailed me today to thank me for agreeing to speak at the ICCCR conference. I am assured that:
"The conference promises to be an exciting event and I look forward to welcoming you to the Open University in June".
My barrister and friend Flo Krause, recently moved to Milton Keynes from Sheffield to live with her partner. I will have to get her to check her diary to see if she is free on those dates, and I might be able to kill two birds with one stone and do a bit of socialising whilst I am down there.
Dr Paul Mason
Director of Postgraduate Research
School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies
Bute Building
Cardiff University
informing me about this
"I'm organising a session on prisons, media and public opinion as part of the 'The Progressive Prison? Historical Narratives, Contemporary Realties' conference which Yvonne Jewkes is running at the Open University, Thurs 21st and Friday 22nd June.
Its a roundtable format in which I'm asking participants to give their views on the role of the media and public views on prison, and then to open it to the floor for discussion. Would you be willing to take part? I'm trying to get as diverse panel as I can - journalist, ex prisoner, academic, pressure groups etc. I thought you could offer some interesting insights into how you see prisons in the public domain and in the press".
I responded that I was happy to take part, and asked whether he had started to take into account blogs in his media study. He said that he had not, but would consider it when the study into newspapers concluded.
The International Centre for Comparative Criminological Research (ICCCR) emailed me today to thank me for agreeing to speak at the ICCCR conference. I am assured that:
"The conference promises to be an exciting event and I look forward to welcoming you to the Open University in June".
My barrister and friend Flo Krause, recently moved to Milton Keynes from Sheffield to live with her partner. I will have to get her to check her diary to see if she is free on those dates, and I might be able to kill two birds with one stone and do a bit of socialising whilst I am down there.
836208
I was 20 and looked and had the mental age of a 14 year old when I first entered prison, in April 1971, for arson, burglary and deception, and received 5 years. Armley Prison, in Leeds, is a grim looking fortress overlooking the city centre.
My first impression upon entering the gates was that the law stopped outside of the gates, and that I was entering a lawless land. I noted that some of the guards wore slashed peaked caps and I was reminded of the SS. I also noted that the step beneath the locked gate to the Reception Area had worn down over the years to such an extent that I knew that I could crawl beneath the gate if I had wanted to. But, there was still the 20ft high wall to negotiate so I put the thought of immediate escape out of my mind. The smell was a mixture of decay, urine, sweat and disinfectant. I was processed at the long desk and given a number, 836208, and had a bath in 6 inches of water, and given a set of badly fitting clothes, the prison uniform had an itchy feeling about it.
I noticed that the Reception Officer gave a nod and a wink to the prisoner orderlies identifying those prisoners who had been convicted of sex offences against children or rapists, and they were dealt with violently when they visited the bathhouse. These prisoners would ask for protection under Rule 43, but before they could get to the relative safety of the Rule 43 landing, in effect, they had to run the gauntlet. I was not happy about this kind of treatment, and what made it worse in my eyes was that the prison doctor was in on this conspiracy. Before going into the main prison we were fed stodge and given a cup of transparent looking luke warm tea. The sex offenders had the added ingredients of urine and spit in their cups of tea.
When the cell door was slammed shut and locked behind me, my sense of bewilderment was distracted by this buff coloured booklet swinging from a hook attached to the back of the cell door. On the cover it stated "General Notes for the Guidance of Convicted Prisoners". I read the booklet, but later found that it bore little or no relation to the day to day realities of prison life that went on on the other side of the cell door. The booklet contained the disciplinary rules, some of which were clearly "catch-all" rules, and it was frustrating that I was not allowed to know all the Prison Rules and yet we were expected to abide by them.
I remember looking up at the half moon shaped window high up in the back wall, and having to put the chair on top of the table and climb up to look out. The walls were 8ft thick. It was a shock to my system to see that the world was still going on out there without me. Rather foolishly, I had imagined that it would have stood still, frozen in time, until such time that I was released. I felt pangs of regret. These quickly disappeared when a screw appeared at the spy hole in the door and shouted for me to get down and not feed the pigeons as it was against the rules. It did not matter that I was not feeding the pigeons. This was just the first of many false allegations levelled against me during 35 years of prison.
People go through life looking for security. I found this in prison.
My first impression upon entering the gates was that the law stopped outside of the gates, and that I was entering a lawless land. I noted that some of the guards wore slashed peaked caps and I was reminded of the SS. I also noted that the step beneath the locked gate to the Reception Area had worn down over the years to such an extent that I knew that I could crawl beneath the gate if I had wanted to. But, there was still the 20ft high wall to negotiate so I put the thought of immediate escape out of my mind. The smell was a mixture of decay, urine, sweat and disinfectant. I was processed at the long desk and given a number, 836208, and had a bath in 6 inches of water, and given a set of badly fitting clothes, the prison uniform had an itchy feeling about it.
I noticed that the Reception Officer gave a nod and a wink to the prisoner orderlies identifying those prisoners who had been convicted of sex offences against children or rapists, and they were dealt with violently when they visited the bathhouse. These prisoners would ask for protection under Rule 43, but before they could get to the relative safety of the Rule 43 landing, in effect, they had to run the gauntlet. I was not happy about this kind of treatment, and what made it worse in my eyes was that the prison doctor was in on this conspiracy. Before going into the main prison we were fed stodge and given a cup of transparent looking luke warm tea. The sex offenders had the added ingredients of urine and spit in their cups of tea.
When the cell door was slammed shut and locked behind me, my sense of bewilderment was distracted by this buff coloured booklet swinging from a hook attached to the back of the cell door. On the cover it stated "General Notes for the Guidance of Convicted Prisoners". I read the booklet, but later found that it bore little or no relation to the day to day realities of prison life that went on on the other side of the cell door. The booklet contained the disciplinary rules, some of which were clearly "catch-all" rules, and it was frustrating that I was not allowed to know all the Prison Rules and yet we were expected to abide by them.
I remember looking up at the half moon shaped window high up in the back wall, and having to put the chair on top of the table and climb up to look out. The walls were 8ft thick. It was a shock to my system to see that the world was still going on out there without me. Rather foolishly, I had imagined that it would have stood still, frozen in time, until such time that I was released. I felt pangs of regret. These quickly disappeared when a screw appeared at the spy hole in the door and shouted for me to get down and not feed the pigeons as it was against the rules. It did not matter that I was not feeding the pigeons. This was just the first of many false allegations levelled against me during 35 years of prison.
People go through life looking for security. I found this in prison.
Reid my lips.
In the Torygraph this morning, John Reid, the Home Secretary, has written an article "Pull together to prevent re-offending" trying to gain support for his plan to inject more from the private sector into the probation service. I do not know whether this will prove to be a good thing or a bad thing. But what I do know, is that John Reid is setting a bad example: "Take the work that is now happening in prisons, where hundreds of different voluntary organisations are helping to rehabilitate and prevent re-offending". I say this because the re-offending rate amongst adults is 63% and amongst young offenders 80%. This is a clear indication that prison doesn't work in the majority of cases. As Jenni Russell argues "This lock-'em-up policy isn't just cruel. It isn't working" (Guardian, Comment is Free). John Reid needs to be concentrating on finding effective alternatives to custody. The public are already paying for both the public and private sector prisons, when I feel that they should only be paying for one or the other, and if he was to introduce the same in the probation service, the public would only be paying twice again and still not getting the desired result.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
The history of prisonlawinsideout.
There is the element of knowing a subject, and the common phrase when people refer to someone knowing a subject well, that is, inside out. It is only since the late 80s and early 90s, that prison law has come to be recognised as a specialist area of law in its own right. Prior to that, it was part of administrative law, public and private law, statutes, and the various circular instructions and standing orders issued by the Home Office. As a consequence of the Hull Prison riot in 1976, and the subsequent prisoner litigation, and reawakening of judicial review which established case-law, it was only a matter of time before it was shoved into its own bracket.
It was a coincidence that I found myself, late in 1989, in Hull Prison. And I wanted to legally challenge the Home Office for monetary damages for the loss of some of my personal property. I did exactly what anyone else would do in the same situation outside of prison, and that was contact a lawyer. In fact, I contacted six different lawyers over a period of time, for advice, and they all charged the public purse for their fees and yet none of them delivered the advice. I told a friend, Lucy, who visited me, about how frustrated I was at this state of affairs, and she said she had a friend called Humphrey, who worked at Humberside Law Centre, and she would ask him if he would visit me and see if he could help me out.
Humphrey said to forget about the Legal Aid forms, and confessed that he had no knowledge of prison law, and asked me to teach him. It was only at that point that I realised that those other six lawyers were also ignorant of prison law, but that they had not got the courage to admit their ignorance. We went ahead and won the case on the steps of the court house, the Home Office admitted liability and agreed to pay the full damages. Meanwhile, another case came up and Humphrey prepared the instructions for the barrister, and included within this the admission that he knew relatively little about prison law. The barrister, Tim Owen, was exactly the same, and he realised that lawyers knowledge of the law stopped outside of the prison gates. At best a lawyer could only approach the subject from an outside in perspective, I supplied the missing link by developing the law from an inside out perspective. Hence, prisonlawinsideout.
Once it was established that solicitors and barristers were ignorant of the law, and that judges are former barristers, it soon became apparent that judges were ignorant of the law. Whereas outside of prison things are taken for granted when reading instructions and briefs, this was not the case in prison law. Nothing could be taken for granted, and these things needed to be explained to the judges and how they related to the general principles of English law, for the judges to understand what the case was about and to enable them to judge. Tim Owen went onto to become a QC, and then a judge, and is now a Lord Justice. There is an old saying amongst prison officers, if you want to know something ask a prisoner. In this case, that is certainly true.
It was a coincidence that I found myself, late in 1989, in Hull Prison. And I wanted to legally challenge the Home Office for monetary damages for the loss of some of my personal property. I did exactly what anyone else would do in the same situation outside of prison, and that was contact a lawyer. In fact, I contacted six different lawyers over a period of time, for advice, and they all charged the public purse for their fees and yet none of them delivered the advice. I told a friend, Lucy, who visited me, about how frustrated I was at this state of affairs, and she said she had a friend called Humphrey, who worked at Humberside Law Centre, and she would ask him if he would visit me and see if he could help me out.
Humphrey said to forget about the Legal Aid forms, and confessed that he had no knowledge of prison law, and asked me to teach him. It was only at that point that I realised that those other six lawyers were also ignorant of prison law, but that they had not got the courage to admit their ignorance. We went ahead and won the case on the steps of the court house, the Home Office admitted liability and agreed to pay the full damages. Meanwhile, another case came up and Humphrey prepared the instructions for the barrister, and included within this the admission that he knew relatively little about prison law. The barrister, Tim Owen, was exactly the same, and he realised that lawyers knowledge of the law stopped outside of the prison gates. At best a lawyer could only approach the subject from an outside in perspective, I supplied the missing link by developing the law from an inside out perspective. Hence, prisonlawinsideout.
Once it was established that solicitors and barristers were ignorant of the law, and that judges are former barristers, it soon became apparent that judges were ignorant of the law. Whereas outside of prison things are taken for granted when reading instructions and briefs, this was not the case in prison law. Nothing could be taken for granted, and these things needed to be explained to the judges and how they related to the general principles of English law, for the judges to understand what the case was about and to enable them to judge. Tim Owen went onto to become a QC, and then a judge, and is now a Lord Justice. There is an old saying amongst prison officers, if you want to know something ask a prisoner. In this case, that is certainly true.
Freedom of expression in Spain...Just don't express it or you will be jailed
Eta prisoner 'close to death'
Violence erupts in Bilbao as hunger striker demanding Spanish government restarts peace talks has feeding tube removed
Alfonso Daniels in Bilbao
Sunday February 25, 2007
The Observer
A leading member of the Basque terrorist group Eta was last night close to death following a hunger strike that has lasted more than three months and inflamed tensions in Spain.
Doctors treating the emaciated body of Inaki de Juana Chaos in a secure unit in a hospital in Madrid said his feeding tube had been removed to allow him to continue his hunger strike. De Juana, who has served a 20-year sentence for leading Eta's 'Madrid Commando' unit, which killed 25 people during the Eighties, has been on hunger strike since November.
Article continues
News of his imminent death came as thousands of people waving red-and-yellow flags rallied in Madrid and the Basque country to protest a court ruling that has put de Juana on the verge of parole.
Police made several arrests and 17 people were hurt when violence broke out in the northern city of Bilbao after a banned pro-Eta march went ahead illegally.
Pictures of de Juana tied to his hospital bed, published last week, raised tensions across Spain. The emotive case has become a lightning rod for the country's deep political divisions.
The crowd screamed, 'Murderer, murderer' as they stood in the cold to accuse the Socialist government of being soft on ETA, which has killed more than 800 people in its 40-year fight for an independent state in the Basque region.
De Juana was on the verge of release last year when he was charged anew over newspaper articles he wrote from prison that were judged to be threats. He was sentenced to another 13 years in prison, but on 12 February the Spanish Supreme Court reduced this to three. As he had already been in jail for 17 months since the new charges had been filed, he is now eligible for release. De Juana's hunger strike is intended to put pressure on the government to restart peace talks, deadlocked since Eta killed two people in a car bombing at Madrid airport in December. Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has insisted he will not deal with Eta's outlawed political wing, Batasuna, unless it renounces violence.
But The Observer has learnt that the Socialist government has secretly continued to keep channels of communication with Batasuna open in an effort to revive talks. Their efforts have been kept quiet to avoid provoking Eta victims' families and the conservative opposition Popular Party (PP), which is strongly opposed to any dealings with Eta-Batasuna.
Yesterday the Association of Victims of Terrorism held the latest in a series of large demonstrations in Madrid. Its pressure threatens to derail attempts by the government and Batasuna to participate in local elections next May and push forward the peace process, which many fear could lead to the break-up of Spain.
'Zapatero is reopening old wounds: they kept telling us to be patient, that the state will bring the criminals to justice, and now they're talking about giving them everything they want,' said Salvador Ulayar, 42, who as a child saw his father, a former Basque mayor, gunned down by Eta.
However, Juan Mari Olano, leader of the Askatasuna organisation that takes care of Eta prisoners, said the Madrid attack was a wake-up call: 'They [the government] maintained repression and lost time, convinced that Eta was negotiating out of weakness and that with time it would find it more difficult to resume activities, but they were wrong.'
Experts warn that, unless progress is made, a resumption of Eta attacks could be just weeks away.
Violence erupts in Bilbao as hunger striker demanding Spanish government restarts peace talks has feeding tube removed
Alfonso Daniels in Bilbao
Sunday February 25, 2007
The Observer
A leading member of the Basque terrorist group Eta was last night close to death following a hunger strike that has lasted more than three months and inflamed tensions in Spain.
Doctors treating the emaciated body of Inaki de Juana Chaos in a secure unit in a hospital in Madrid said his feeding tube had been removed to allow him to continue his hunger strike. De Juana, who has served a 20-year sentence for leading Eta's 'Madrid Commando' unit, which killed 25 people during the Eighties, has been on hunger strike since November.
Article continues
News of his imminent death came as thousands of people waving red-and-yellow flags rallied in Madrid and the Basque country to protest a court ruling that has put de Juana on the verge of parole.
Police made several arrests and 17 people were hurt when violence broke out in the northern city of Bilbao after a banned pro-Eta march went ahead illegally.
Pictures of de Juana tied to his hospital bed, published last week, raised tensions across Spain. The emotive case has become a lightning rod for the country's deep political divisions.
The crowd screamed, 'Murderer, murderer' as they stood in the cold to accuse the Socialist government of being soft on ETA, which has killed more than 800 people in its 40-year fight for an independent state in the Basque region.
De Juana was on the verge of release last year when he was charged anew over newspaper articles he wrote from prison that were judged to be threats. He was sentenced to another 13 years in prison, but on 12 February the Spanish Supreme Court reduced this to three. As he had already been in jail for 17 months since the new charges had been filed, he is now eligible for release. De Juana's hunger strike is intended to put pressure on the government to restart peace talks, deadlocked since Eta killed two people in a car bombing at Madrid airport in December. Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has insisted he will not deal with Eta's outlawed political wing, Batasuna, unless it renounces violence.
But The Observer has learnt that the Socialist government has secretly continued to keep channels of communication with Batasuna open in an effort to revive talks. Their efforts have been kept quiet to avoid provoking Eta victims' families and the conservative opposition Popular Party (PP), which is strongly opposed to any dealings with Eta-Batasuna.
Yesterday the Association of Victims of Terrorism held the latest in a series of large demonstrations in Madrid. Its pressure threatens to derail attempts by the government and Batasuna to participate in local elections next May and push forward the peace process, which many fear could lead to the break-up of Spain.
'Zapatero is reopening old wounds: they kept telling us to be patient, that the state will bring the criminals to justice, and now they're talking about giving them everything they want,' said Salvador Ulayar, 42, who as a child saw his father, a former Basque mayor, gunned down by Eta.
However, Juan Mari Olano, leader of the Askatasuna organisation that takes care of Eta prisoners, said the Madrid attack was a wake-up call: 'They [the government] maintained repression and lost time, convinced that Eta was negotiating out of weakness and that with time it would find it more difficult to resume activities, but they were wrong.'
Experts warn that, unless progress is made, a resumption of Eta attacks could be just weeks away.
Barrels of oil but no WMD. Now isn't that a surprise Dubya?
Iraq poised to hand control of oil fields to foreign firms
Baghdad under pressure from Britain to pass a law giving multinationals rights to the country's reserves
Heather Stewart, economics correspondent
Sunday February 25, 2007
The Observer
Baghdad is under pressure from Britain and the US to pass an oil law which would hand long-term control of Iraq's energy assets to foreign multinationals, according to campaigners.
Iraqi trades unions have called for the country's oil reserves - the second-largest in the world - to be kept in public hands. But a leaked draft of the oil law, seen by The Observer, would see the government sign away the right to exploit its untapped fields in so-called exploration contracts, which could then be extended for more than 30 years.
Article continues
Foreign Office minister Kim Howells has admitted that the government has discussed the wording of the Iraqi law with Britain's oil giants.
In a written answer to a parliamentary question, from Labour's Alan Simpson, Howells said: 'These exchanges have included discussion of Iraq's evolving hydrocarbons legislation where British international oil companies have valuable perspectives to offer based on their experience in other countries.' The talks had covered 'the range of contract types which Iraq is considering'.
Control of oil is an explosive political issue in Iraq. Hasan Jumah Awwad al-Asadi, leader of the country's oil workers' union formed after the invasion in 2003, warned this month: 'History will not forgive those who play recklessly with the wealth and destiny of a people.'
With much of the country on the brink of civil war, and a fractious government in Baghdad, campaigners say Iraq is in a poor position to negotiate with foreign oil firms. 'Iraq is under occupation and its people are facing relentless insecurity and crippling poverty. Yet, with the support of our government, multinationals are poised to take control of Iraq's oil wealth,' said Ruth Tanner, senior campaigner at War On Want.
The law, which is being discussed by the Iraqi cabinet before being put to the parliament, says the untapped oil would remain state-owned but that contracts would be drawn up giving private sector firms the exclusive right to extract it.
'There is this fine line, that the wording is seeking to draw, that allows companies to claim that the oil is still Iraqi oil, whereas the extraction rights belong to the oil companies,' says Kamil Mahdi, an Iraqi economist at Exeter University. He criticised the US and Britain, saying: 'The whole idea of the law is due to external pressure. The law is no protection against corruption, or against weakness of government. It's not a recipe for stability.'
Simpson said 'This confirms the view of those who have said all along that the war in Iraq was not about weapons of mass destruction, but the control of the levers of mass production ... This is a cartel carve-up by the occupying powers.'
Oil production in Iraq has slipped to below two million barrels a day - less than before the invasion - and Britain and the US argue that Iraq urgently needs foreign investment to boost output. But Ewa Jasiewicz, of campaign group Platform, said all the other Gulf states had kept production in government hands. 'Iraq could borrow the money to develop its industry, and pay that off through oil revenues.'
Baghdad under pressure from Britain to pass a law giving multinationals rights to the country's reserves
Heather Stewart, economics correspondent
Sunday February 25, 2007
The Observer
Baghdad is under pressure from Britain and the US to pass an oil law which would hand long-term control of Iraq's energy assets to foreign multinationals, according to campaigners.
Iraqi trades unions have called for the country's oil reserves - the second-largest in the world - to be kept in public hands. But a leaked draft of the oil law, seen by The Observer, would see the government sign away the right to exploit its untapped fields in so-called exploration contracts, which could then be extended for more than 30 years.
Article continues
Foreign Office minister Kim Howells has admitted that the government has discussed the wording of the Iraqi law with Britain's oil giants.
In a written answer to a parliamentary question, from Labour's Alan Simpson, Howells said: 'These exchanges have included discussion of Iraq's evolving hydrocarbons legislation where British international oil companies have valuable perspectives to offer based on their experience in other countries.' The talks had covered 'the range of contract types which Iraq is considering'.
Control of oil is an explosive political issue in Iraq. Hasan Jumah Awwad al-Asadi, leader of the country's oil workers' union formed after the invasion in 2003, warned this month: 'History will not forgive those who play recklessly with the wealth and destiny of a people.'
With much of the country on the brink of civil war, and a fractious government in Baghdad, campaigners say Iraq is in a poor position to negotiate with foreign oil firms. 'Iraq is under occupation and its people are facing relentless insecurity and crippling poverty. Yet, with the support of our government, multinationals are poised to take control of Iraq's oil wealth,' said Ruth Tanner, senior campaigner at War On Want.
The law, which is being discussed by the Iraqi cabinet before being put to the parliament, says the untapped oil would remain state-owned but that contracts would be drawn up giving private sector firms the exclusive right to extract it.
'There is this fine line, that the wording is seeking to draw, that allows companies to claim that the oil is still Iraqi oil, whereas the extraction rights belong to the oil companies,' says Kamil Mahdi, an Iraqi economist at Exeter University. He criticised the US and Britain, saying: 'The whole idea of the law is due to external pressure. The law is no protection against corruption, or against weakness of government. It's not a recipe for stability.'
Simpson said 'This confirms the view of those who have said all along that the war in Iraq was not about weapons of mass destruction, but the control of the levers of mass production ... This is a cartel carve-up by the occupying powers.'
Oil production in Iraq has slipped to below two million barrels a day - less than before the invasion - and Britain and the US argue that Iraq urgently needs foreign investment to boost output. But Ewa Jasiewicz, of campaign group Platform, said all the other Gulf states had kept production in government hands. 'Iraq could borrow the money to develop its industry, and pay that off through oil revenues.'
Where is Dixon of Dock Green when he is most needed?
The other night I popped out for some bread buns and milk, and as I neared the end of the road I could see and hear a group of youths being a bit loud. Outside the police station, I noted two policemen sat in their police car. As I came out of the shop, I saw a youth across the main road running like a bat out of hell. Then one of the policemen crossing the road running towards the remainder of the group. As he reached them and blocked their path, I saw him depress the button on his radio which transmits the conversation back to the control room. The second policeman started running across the road to provide support. I don't know what had happened whilst I was in the shop, but I suspect that the second policeman was delayed because he was radioing for back up, and I could hear the wail of a siren screaming louder as it got closer.
What puzzles me, is why the control room dispatch police from Queen's Garden HQ in the City Centre and from Hessle Road to an incident on Beverley Road, right opposite the new police station, and from this police station to other areas of the city. Surely it would be better to provide more effective policing to protect the community, if they were dispatched from the nearest point to the incident? The present Chief Constable is relatively new and replaced the one who disgraced himself over the Ian Huntley affair and the killing of a man in the Queen's Garden police HQ. It would appear that resources are not being put to their most effective use. No wonder that the policemen have such low morale and the public have so little confidence.
What puzzles me, is why the control room dispatch police from Queen's Garden HQ in the City Centre and from Hessle Road to an incident on Beverley Road, right opposite the new police station, and from this police station to other areas of the city. Surely it would be better to provide more effective policing to protect the community, if they were dispatched from the nearest point to the incident? The present Chief Constable is relatively new and replaced the one who disgraced himself over the Ian Huntley affair and the killing of a man in the Queen's Garden police HQ. It would appear that resources are not being put to their most effective use. No wonder that the policemen have such low morale and the public have so little confidence.
The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But is it?
Iain Dale's Diary led me to these two pieces, and reproduced for all the conspiracy theorists out there. What ever take you put on them, it's certainly brain food.
Conspiracy on conspiracy
* Mike Rudin
* 22 Feb 07, 12:54 PM
I suppose it had to happen. First we’re accused of being spies. Then we’re told we’re getting our orders from others.
But then came an even more outlandish conspiracy theory suggesting there were two versions of the 9/11 programme which was broadcast last Sunday. Conspiracy piles on conspiracy.
Ian Crane, Chairman of the 9/11 Truth Campaign for the UK and Ireland, claimed last Friday that a source had told him that we were in a “in a quandary over which version of 9/11: The Conspiracy Files will be put out to air”.
He alleged: ”One version is a well-balanced piece of investigative journalism, whereas the alternative version is a hit-piece, intent on portraying 9/11 Truth Campaigners as nothing more than a lunatic fringe group.”
And the story was picked up on the Alex Jones’ website Prison Planet with the headline “BBC Pressured to Air 9/11 Hit Piece?”
Only trouble is there weren’t two versions, no-one bothered to check with us and, what's more, we worked very hard to make sure the programme was fair and balanced.
Behind it all there seems to be a concern that we wouldn’t run a story supporting a conspiracy theory if we found convincing evidence. That couldn’t be further from the truth.
First, there was no editorial interference in the programme whatsoever. Second, if we had found convincing evidence of a conspiracy before 9/11 no one could have held us back from broadcasting such an important story.
We didn’t find anything conclusive proving the conspiracy theories. Instead we found a lot of evidence which supported the official version and contradicted the various conspiracy theories.
Where there was some evidence of a conspiracy after the event to cover-up intelligence failures, we included that in the programme, together with an interview with Senator Bob Graham, who co-chaired a Congressional Inquiry into 9/11.
I know the 9/11 Truth Campaign in the UK and Prison Planet in the USA, among others, are encouraging their supporters to write in. And it’s great to see so many comments on the blog. They make fascinating reading and contain a lot of interesting information.
However, our opinion poll carried out by GfK NOP did not find much support for the underlying conspiracy theory. In a telephone poll of a 1000 adults we asked:
“Attacks were made on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on September 11th 2001, commonly known as 9/11. It is generally accepted that these attacks were carried out by ’Al Qaeda’, however some people have suggested there was a wider conspiracy that included the American Government. Do you, yourself, believe that there was a wider conspiracy, or not?”
16% people believed the American Government was involved in a wider conspiracy as against 64% of those questioned who did not believe that. The rest said they did not know.
In fact our opinion poll found much more widespread doubts of the official accounts of the deaths of Princess Diana and the British Government scientist Dr David Kelly. Almost one in three (31%) people questioned believed the car crash that killed Princess Diana was not an accident, 43% agreed it was an accident, and the rest did not know. Almost one in four (23%) people questioned believed the government scientist Dr Kelly did not commit suicide as against 39% who believed he did commit suicide, with the rest unsure.
And this Sunday, The Conspiracy Files series will examine the many questions that surround the death of Dr David Kelly and reveals new material that challenges the official account of his death.
Mike Rudin is series producer, The Conspiracy Files
Kelly death not suicide, says MP
David Kelly
Sunday 25 February
9pm on BBC Two
Timeline: David Kelly
Programme preview
An MP investigating the death of Dr David Kelly says he is convinced the weapons scientist did not kill himself.
Norman Baker tells BBC Two's The Conspiracy Files he has reached the conclusion Dr Kelly's life was "deliberately taken by others".
Mr Baker has also obtained letters suggesting the coroner had doubts about the 2003 Hutton inquiry's ability to establish the cause of death.
Hutton reached a verdict of suicide but a public inquest was never completed.
Dr Kelly, whose body was found in July 2003, had been under intense pressure after being named as the suspected source of a BBC report claiming the government "sexed up" a dossier on the threat posed by Iraq.
Distress
Coroner Nicholas Gardiner opened an inquest into his death in Oxford just a few days after his body was found on Harrowdown Hill.
As you will know, a coroner has power to compel the attendance of witnesses. There are no such powers attached to a Public inquiry
Nicholas Gardiner, writing to Lord Falconer in August 2003
Q&A: David Kelly
But he was ordered to adjourn it by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, as the Hutton inquiry would take over, and it was not resumed.
Lord Falconer said he wanted to minimise the distress caused to the Kelly family.
The official account given by the Hutton inquiry was that Dr Kelly committed suicide by cutting his left wrist, and taking an overdose of the painkiller Co-Proxamol.
In his report, Lord Hutton said: "There was no involvement by a third person in Dr Kelly's death."
Assassinated
Mr Baker, who has spent a year investigating the case, believes there is enough evidence to suggest that the scientist did not kill himself.
The Liberal Democrat MP said toxicology reports suggested there was not enough painkiller in Dr Kelly's system to kill him, and the method he had apparently chosen to commit suicide was not a recognised or effective one.
"I'm satisfied it was not suicide. And after that you're left with the conclusion that his life was deliberately taken by others," he tells The Conspiracy Files.
He tells the programme it has been suggested to him that the weapons scientist was assassinated.
Speaking last week on BBC Radio 5 Live, Mr Baker said he was not ready to reveal all the evidence he has unearthed, but would consider passing a file to the police in due course.
Witnesses
Mr Baker has obtained letters between Mr Gardiner and the Lord Chancellor's office from 2003, suggesting the coroner was not happy with the Hutton inquiry's ability to establish the cause of death.
The letters were given to the MP by Constitutional Affairs minister Harriet Harman and have not been revealed publicly before.
I believe that David was probably a victim of Iraqi Intelligence Service
Richard Spertzel, former colleague of Dr Kelly
On 6 August 2003 Mr Gardiner wrote to the Lord Chancellor expressing concern about Hutton's lack of legal powers compared with an inquest.
"As you will know, a coroner has power to compel the attendance of witnesses. There are no such powers attached to a public inquiry," Mr Gardiner wrote.
The Oxfordshire coroner also asked to be allowed to continue with the inquest because "the preliminary cause of death given at the opening of the inquest no longer represents the final view of the pathologist, and evidence from him would need to be given to correct and update the evidence already received".
Mr Gardiner met officials from the Department of Constitutional Affairs on 11 August 2003 "to discuss the mechanics of admitting evidence from the pathologist and analyst".
Death certificate
The Lord Chancellor then accepted the coroner's need to have one further hearing.
Lord Hutton
Lord Hutton was given the job of establishing how Dr Kelly died
In a letter to Mr Gardiner, dated 12 August 2003, Sarah Albon, private secretary to the Lord Chancellor, said that "the cause of death of Dr David Kelly is likely to be adequately investigated by the judicial inquiry conducted by Lord Hutton".
It said Lord Falconer accepted Mr Gardiner may want to take fresh evidence from the pathologist and analyst.
But he was "most anxious to avoid any unnecessary distress to the family, and has asked that you keep the proceedings as short as possible and, so far as the Coroner's Rules allow, take the evidence in writing".
The coroner did just that in a hearing on 14 August 2003.
On 18 August 2003 a death certificate was registered setting out the causes of death.
'Hit list'
Yet the Hutton inquiry had only just started taking evidence and its report was published a full five months later.
In March 2004, a final hearing was held in Oxford at which Mr Gardiner said he was satisfied there were "no exceptional reasons," including concerns about the Hutton inquiry's powers, for the inquest to be resumed.
The Conspiracy Files explores a number of alternatives as to how Dr Kelly might have met his end.
A former colleague of the weapons inspector, former UN weapons inspector Richard Spertzel, tells the programme he believes the scientist was murdered by the Iraqis.
Mr Spertzel, who was America's most senior biological weapons inspector and who worked alongside Dr Kelly for many years in Iraq, believes the Iraqi regime may have pursued a vendetta against Dr Kelly.
"I believe that David was probably a victim of Iraqi Intelligence Service because of long standing enmity of Iraq towards David," he says.
"A number of us were on an Iraqi hit list. I was number three, and my understanding, David was only a couple behind that.
"And none of the people on that hit list were welcome in Iraq. Immediately after David's death, a number of the other inspectors and I exchanged emails saying, 'Be careful.' "
The Conspiracy Files is on Sunday, 25 February, at 2100 GMT on BBC Two.
Conspiracy on conspiracy
* Mike Rudin
* 22 Feb 07, 12:54 PM
I suppose it had to happen. First we’re accused of being spies. Then we’re told we’re getting our orders from others.
But then came an even more outlandish conspiracy theory suggesting there were two versions of the 9/11 programme which was broadcast last Sunday. Conspiracy piles on conspiracy.
Ian Crane, Chairman of the 9/11 Truth Campaign for the UK and Ireland, claimed last Friday that a source had told him that we were in a “in a quandary over which version of 9/11: The Conspiracy Files will be put out to air”.
He alleged: ”One version is a well-balanced piece of investigative journalism, whereas the alternative version is a hit-piece, intent on portraying 9/11 Truth Campaigners as nothing more than a lunatic fringe group.”
And the story was picked up on the Alex Jones’ website Prison Planet with the headline “BBC Pressured to Air 9/11 Hit Piece?”
Only trouble is there weren’t two versions, no-one bothered to check with us and, what's more, we worked very hard to make sure the programme was fair and balanced.
Behind it all there seems to be a concern that we wouldn’t run a story supporting a conspiracy theory if we found convincing evidence. That couldn’t be further from the truth.
First, there was no editorial interference in the programme whatsoever. Second, if we had found convincing evidence of a conspiracy before 9/11 no one could have held us back from broadcasting such an important story.
We didn’t find anything conclusive proving the conspiracy theories. Instead we found a lot of evidence which supported the official version and contradicted the various conspiracy theories.
Where there was some evidence of a conspiracy after the event to cover-up intelligence failures, we included that in the programme, together with an interview with Senator Bob Graham, who co-chaired a Congressional Inquiry into 9/11.
I know the 9/11 Truth Campaign in the UK and Prison Planet in the USA, among others, are encouraging their supporters to write in. And it’s great to see so many comments on the blog. They make fascinating reading and contain a lot of interesting information.
However, our opinion poll carried out by GfK NOP did not find much support for the underlying conspiracy theory. In a telephone poll of a 1000 adults we asked:
“Attacks were made on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on September 11th 2001, commonly known as 9/11. It is generally accepted that these attacks were carried out by ’Al Qaeda’, however some people have suggested there was a wider conspiracy that included the American Government. Do you, yourself, believe that there was a wider conspiracy, or not?”
16% people believed the American Government was involved in a wider conspiracy as against 64% of those questioned who did not believe that. The rest said they did not know.
In fact our opinion poll found much more widespread doubts of the official accounts of the deaths of Princess Diana and the British Government scientist Dr David Kelly. Almost one in three (31%) people questioned believed the car crash that killed Princess Diana was not an accident, 43% agreed it was an accident, and the rest did not know. Almost one in four (23%) people questioned believed the government scientist Dr Kelly did not commit suicide as against 39% who believed he did commit suicide, with the rest unsure.
And this Sunday, The Conspiracy Files series will examine the many questions that surround the death of Dr David Kelly and reveals new material that challenges the official account of his death.
Mike Rudin is series producer, The Conspiracy Files
Kelly death not suicide, says MP
David Kelly
Sunday 25 February
9pm on BBC Two
Timeline: David Kelly
Programme preview
An MP investigating the death of Dr David Kelly says he is convinced the weapons scientist did not kill himself.
Norman Baker tells BBC Two's The Conspiracy Files he has reached the conclusion Dr Kelly's life was "deliberately taken by others".
Mr Baker has also obtained letters suggesting the coroner had doubts about the 2003 Hutton inquiry's ability to establish the cause of death.
Hutton reached a verdict of suicide but a public inquest was never completed.
Dr Kelly, whose body was found in July 2003, had been under intense pressure after being named as the suspected source of a BBC report claiming the government "sexed up" a dossier on the threat posed by Iraq.
Distress
Coroner Nicholas Gardiner opened an inquest into his death in Oxford just a few days after his body was found on Harrowdown Hill.
As you will know, a coroner has power to compel the attendance of witnesses. There are no such powers attached to a Public inquiry
Nicholas Gardiner, writing to Lord Falconer in August 2003
Q&A: David Kelly
But he was ordered to adjourn it by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, as the Hutton inquiry would take over, and it was not resumed.
Lord Falconer said he wanted to minimise the distress caused to the Kelly family.
The official account given by the Hutton inquiry was that Dr Kelly committed suicide by cutting his left wrist, and taking an overdose of the painkiller Co-Proxamol.
In his report, Lord Hutton said: "There was no involvement by a third person in Dr Kelly's death."
Assassinated
Mr Baker, who has spent a year investigating the case, believes there is enough evidence to suggest that the scientist did not kill himself.
The Liberal Democrat MP said toxicology reports suggested there was not enough painkiller in Dr Kelly's system to kill him, and the method he had apparently chosen to commit suicide was not a recognised or effective one.
"I'm satisfied it was not suicide. And after that you're left with the conclusion that his life was deliberately taken by others," he tells The Conspiracy Files.
He tells the programme it has been suggested to him that the weapons scientist was assassinated.
Speaking last week on BBC Radio 5 Live, Mr Baker said he was not ready to reveal all the evidence he has unearthed, but would consider passing a file to the police in due course.
Witnesses
Mr Baker has obtained letters between Mr Gardiner and the Lord Chancellor's office from 2003, suggesting the coroner was not happy with the Hutton inquiry's ability to establish the cause of death.
The letters were given to the MP by Constitutional Affairs minister Harriet Harman and have not been revealed publicly before.
I believe that David was probably a victim of Iraqi Intelligence Service
Richard Spertzel, former colleague of Dr Kelly
On 6 August 2003 Mr Gardiner wrote to the Lord Chancellor expressing concern about Hutton's lack of legal powers compared with an inquest.
"As you will know, a coroner has power to compel the attendance of witnesses. There are no such powers attached to a public inquiry," Mr Gardiner wrote.
The Oxfordshire coroner also asked to be allowed to continue with the inquest because "the preliminary cause of death given at the opening of the inquest no longer represents the final view of the pathologist, and evidence from him would need to be given to correct and update the evidence already received".
Mr Gardiner met officials from the Department of Constitutional Affairs on 11 August 2003 "to discuss the mechanics of admitting evidence from the pathologist and analyst".
Death certificate
The Lord Chancellor then accepted the coroner's need to have one further hearing.
Lord Hutton
Lord Hutton was given the job of establishing how Dr Kelly died
In a letter to Mr Gardiner, dated 12 August 2003, Sarah Albon, private secretary to the Lord Chancellor, said that "the cause of death of Dr David Kelly is likely to be adequately investigated by the judicial inquiry conducted by Lord Hutton".
It said Lord Falconer accepted Mr Gardiner may want to take fresh evidence from the pathologist and analyst.
But he was "most anxious to avoid any unnecessary distress to the family, and has asked that you keep the proceedings as short as possible and, so far as the Coroner's Rules allow, take the evidence in writing".
The coroner did just that in a hearing on 14 August 2003.
On 18 August 2003 a death certificate was registered setting out the causes of death.
'Hit list'
Yet the Hutton inquiry had only just started taking evidence and its report was published a full five months later.
In March 2004, a final hearing was held in Oxford at which Mr Gardiner said he was satisfied there were "no exceptional reasons," including concerns about the Hutton inquiry's powers, for the inquest to be resumed.
The Conspiracy Files explores a number of alternatives as to how Dr Kelly might have met his end.
A former colleague of the weapons inspector, former UN weapons inspector Richard Spertzel, tells the programme he believes the scientist was murdered by the Iraqis.
Mr Spertzel, who was America's most senior biological weapons inspector and who worked alongside Dr Kelly for many years in Iraq, believes the Iraqi regime may have pursued a vendetta against Dr Kelly.
"I believe that David was probably a victim of Iraqi Intelligence Service because of long standing enmity of Iraq towards David," he says.
"A number of us were on an Iraqi hit list. I was number three, and my understanding, David was only a couple behind that.
"And none of the people on that hit list were welcome in Iraq. Immediately after David's death, a number of the other inspectors and I exchanged emails saying, 'Be careful.' "
The Conspiracy Files is on Sunday, 25 February, at 2100 GMT on BBC Two.
Dame Eliza Dolittle-Mainwaring-Bullshitter
Secret report: Terror threat worst since 9/11
By Sean Rayment, Security Correspondent, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:30am GMT 25/02/2007
The terrorist threat facing Britain from home-grown al-Qaeda agents is higher than at any time since the September 11 attacks in 2001, secret intelligence documents reveal.
Eliza Manningham-Buller of MI5 on terror plots
Eliza Manningham-Buller warned there are over 1,600 'identified individuals' engaged in terror plots
The number of British-based Islamic terrorists plotting suicide attacks against "soft" targets in this country is far greater than the Security Services had previously believed, the government paperwork discloses. It is thought the plotters could number more than 2,000.
Under the heading "International Terrorism in the UK", the document - seen by The Sunday Telegraph - states: "The scale of al-Qaeda's ambitions towards attacking the UK and the number of UK extremists prepared to participate in attacks are even greater than we had previously judged."
It warns that terrorist "attack planning" against Britain will increase in 2007, and adds: "We still believe that AQ [al-Qaeda] will continue to seek opportunities for mass casualty attacks against soft targets and key infrastructure. These attacks are likely to involve the use of suicide operatives."
The document, which has been circulated across Whitehall to MI5, Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorist Command, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Defence, also reveals that al-Qaeda has grown into a world-wide organisation with a foothold in virtually every Muslim country in North Africa, the Middle East and central Asia.
advertisement
Eliza Manningham-Buller, the director general of MI5, warned recently that there were more than 1,600 "identified individuals" actively engaged in plotting terrorist attacks. There were 200 known networks involved in at least 30 terrorist plots. It is thought that the number of British citizens involved in plots could be well in excess of 2,000.
MI5 believes that soft targets, such as the transport system and economic targets such as the City of London and Canary Wharf, are most at risk.
A senior political source said the picture painted by the document was "particularly bleak and unlikely to improve for several years".
He said: "The Security Services have constantly warned that the task of countering Islamist terrorism is a daunting one. There will be more attacks in Britain."
Patrick Mercer, the Tory spokesman for homeland security, said: "This document absolutely underlines the threat and makes me wonder why the Government still has a counter-terrorist strategy that has been officially declared obsolete. It does make the Government's response look hugely complacent."
Police at Liverpool Street London Underground station
The transport system and City of London are thought to be most at risk
Entitled Extremist Threat Assessment, the document, which was drawn up this month, also discloses that Afghanistan, where more than 7,000 British troops will be based by the end of May, is expected to supersede Iraq as the location for terrorists planning Jihad against the West.
It says that al-Qaeda's influence extends from North Africa, including Egypt, through to Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan, and into Somalia and Sudan. Al-Qaeda is "resilient and effective" in Iraq, its "operating environment and financial position" in Pakistan has improved and a new group had emerged in Yemen.
"With violence in Afghanistan intensifying, and therefore receiving greater media attention, the country may well become more attractive as a venue for foreigners wishing to fulfil their Jihad ambitions", the document states.
Two years ago, western intelligence said that al-Qaeda was virtually a spent force, disrupted by counter-terrorist operations around the world.
In July 2005 the Pentagon obtained a letter written by Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's deputy leader, stating that the organisation had lost many of its leaders and that it had virtually resigned itself to defeat in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda's lines of communication, funding and structure had been severely damaged.
Dr Jonathan Eyal, the director of international security at the Royal United Services Institute, said that the al-Qaeda revival was down to the West's inability to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and that wars in Afghanistan and Iraq made matters worse.
"This document clearly demonstrates a marked shift from the mood of western government only a year or two ago," he said. "It is a clear admission that the organisation is re-emerging and the reasons are that none of al-Qaeda's top leaders have been killed or captured."
By Sean Rayment, Security Correspondent, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:30am GMT 25/02/2007
The terrorist threat facing Britain from home-grown al-Qaeda agents is higher than at any time since the September 11 attacks in 2001, secret intelligence documents reveal.
Eliza Manningham-Buller of MI5 on terror plots
Eliza Manningham-Buller warned there are over 1,600 'identified individuals' engaged in terror plots
The number of British-based Islamic terrorists plotting suicide attacks against "soft" targets in this country is far greater than the Security Services had previously believed, the government paperwork discloses. It is thought the plotters could number more than 2,000.
Under the heading "International Terrorism in the UK", the document - seen by The Sunday Telegraph - states: "The scale of al-Qaeda's ambitions towards attacking the UK and the number of UK extremists prepared to participate in attacks are even greater than we had previously judged."
It warns that terrorist "attack planning" against Britain will increase in 2007, and adds: "We still believe that AQ [al-Qaeda] will continue to seek opportunities for mass casualty attacks against soft targets and key infrastructure. These attacks are likely to involve the use of suicide operatives."
The document, which has been circulated across Whitehall to MI5, Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorist Command, the Home Office, the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Defence, also reveals that al-Qaeda has grown into a world-wide organisation with a foothold in virtually every Muslim country in North Africa, the Middle East and central Asia.
advertisement
Eliza Manningham-Buller, the director general of MI5, warned recently that there were more than 1,600 "identified individuals" actively engaged in plotting terrorist attacks. There were 200 known networks involved in at least 30 terrorist plots. It is thought that the number of British citizens involved in plots could be well in excess of 2,000.
MI5 believes that soft targets, such as the transport system and economic targets such as the City of London and Canary Wharf, are most at risk.
A senior political source said the picture painted by the document was "particularly bleak and unlikely to improve for several years".
He said: "The Security Services have constantly warned that the task of countering Islamist terrorism is a daunting one. There will be more attacks in Britain."
Patrick Mercer, the Tory spokesman for homeland security, said: "This document absolutely underlines the threat and makes me wonder why the Government still has a counter-terrorist strategy that has been officially declared obsolete. It does make the Government's response look hugely complacent."
Police at Liverpool Street London Underground station
The transport system and City of London are thought to be most at risk
Entitled Extremist Threat Assessment, the document, which was drawn up this month, also discloses that Afghanistan, where more than 7,000 British troops will be based by the end of May, is expected to supersede Iraq as the location for terrorists planning Jihad against the West.
It says that al-Qaeda's influence extends from North Africa, including Egypt, through to Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan, and into Somalia and Sudan. Al-Qaeda is "resilient and effective" in Iraq, its "operating environment and financial position" in Pakistan has improved and a new group had emerged in Yemen.
"With violence in Afghanistan intensifying, and therefore receiving greater media attention, the country may well become more attractive as a venue for foreigners wishing to fulfil their Jihad ambitions", the document states.
Two years ago, western intelligence said that al-Qaeda was virtually a spent force, disrupted by counter-terrorist operations around the world.
In July 2005 the Pentagon obtained a letter written by Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's deputy leader, stating that the organisation had lost many of its leaders and that it had virtually resigned itself to defeat in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda's lines of communication, funding and structure had been severely damaged.
Dr Jonathan Eyal, the director of international security at the Royal United Services Institute, said that the al-Qaeda revival was down to the West's inability to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and that wars in Afghanistan and Iraq made matters worse.
"This document clearly demonstrates a marked shift from the mood of western government only a year or two ago," he said. "It is a clear admission that the organisation is re-emerging and the reasons are that none of al-Qaeda's top leaders have been killed or captured."
Generals warn Bush enough is enough
From The Sunday Times
February 25, 2007
US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack
Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, Washington
SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.
Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.
“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”
A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.
“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”
A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.
The threat of a wave of resignations coincided with a warning by Vice-President Dick Cheney that all options, including military action, remained on the table. He was responding to a comment by Tony Blair that it would not “be right to take military action against Iran”.
Iran ignored a United Nations deadline to suspend its uranium enrichment programme last week. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that his country “will not withdraw from its nuclear stances even one single step”.
The International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iran could soon produce enough enriched uranium for two nuclear bombs a year, although Tehran claims its programme is purely for civilian energy purposes.
Nicholas Burns, the top US negotiator, is to meet British, French, German, Chinese and Russian officials in London tomorrow to discuss additional penalties against Iran. But UN diplomats cautioned that further measures would take weeks to agree and would be mild at best.
A second US navy aircraft carrier strike group led by the USS John C Stennis arrived in the Gulf last week, doubling the US presence there. Vice Admiral Patrick Walsh, the commander of the US Fifth Fleet, warned: “The US will take military action if ships are attacked or if countries in the region are targeted or US troops come under direct attack.”
But General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said recently there was “zero chance” of a war with Iran. He played down claims by US intelligence that the Iranian government was responsible for supplying insurgents in Iraq with sophisticated roadside bombs, forcing Bush on the defensive over some of the allegations.
Pace’s view was backed up by British intelligence officials who said the extent of the Iranian government’s involvement in activities inside Iraq by a small number of Revolutionary Guards was “far from clear”.
Hillary Mann, the National Security Council’s main Iran expert until 2004, said Pace’s repudiation of the administration’s claims was a sign of grave discontent at the top.
“He is a very serious and a very loyal soldier,” she said. “It is extraordinary for him to have made these comments publicly, and it suggests there are serious problems between the White House, the National Security Council and the Pentagon.”
Mann fears the administration is seeking to provoke Iran into a reaction that could be used as an excuse for an attack. A British official said the US navy was well aware of the risks of confrontation and was being “seriously careful” in the Gulf.
The US air force is regarded as being more willing to attack Iran. General Michael Moseley, the head of the air force, cited Iran as the main likely target for American aircraft at a military conference earlier this month.
A senior defence source said the air force “could do a lot of damage to the country if there were no other considerations”. But army chiefs fear an attack on Iran would backfire on American troops in Iraq and lead to more terrorist attacks, a rise in oil prices and the threat of a regional war.
Britain is concerned that its own troops in Iraq might also be drawn into any American conflict with Iran, regardless of whether the government takes part in the attack.
Bush is still pursuing a diplomatic agreement with Iran — urged on by secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.
One retired general who participated in the “generals’ revolt” against Donald Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq war said he hoped his former colleagues would resign in the event of an order to attack. “We don’t want to take another initiative unless we’ve really thought through the consequences of our strategy,” he warned.
February 25, 2007
US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack
Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, Washington
SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.
Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learnt that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.
“There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran,” a source with close ties to British intelligence said. “There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible.”
A British defence source confirmed that there were deep misgivings inside the Pentagon about a military strike. “All the generals are perfectly clear that they don’t have the military capacity to take Iran on in any meaningful fashion. Nobody wants to do it and it would be a matter of conscience for them.
“There are enough people who feel this would be an error of judgment too far for there to be resignations.”
A generals’ revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. “American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired,” said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defence secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.
The threat of a wave of resignations coincided with a warning by Vice-President Dick Cheney that all options, including military action, remained on the table. He was responding to a comment by Tony Blair that it would not “be right to take military action against Iran”.
Iran ignored a United Nations deadline to suspend its uranium enrichment programme last week. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that his country “will not withdraw from its nuclear stances even one single step”.
The International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iran could soon produce enough enriched uranium for two nuclear bombs a year, although Tehran claims its programme is purely for civilian energy purposes.
Nicholas Burns, the top US negotiator, is to meet British, French, German, Chinese and Russian officials in London tomorrow to discuss additional penalties against Iran. But UN diplomats cautioned that further measures would take weeks to agree and would be mild at best.
A second US navy aircraft carrier strike group led by the USS John C Stennis arrived in the Gulf last week, doubling the US presence there. Vice Admiral Patrick Walsh, the commander of the US Fifth Fleet, warned: “The US will take military action if ships are attacked or if countries in the region are targeted or US troops come under direct attack.”
But General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said recently there was “zero chance” of a war with Iran. He played down claims by US intelligence that the Iranian government was responsible for supplying insurgents in Iraq with sophisticated roadside bombs, forcing Bush on the defensive over some of the allegations.
Pace’s view was backed up by British intelligence officials who said the extent of the Iranian government’s involvement in activities inside Iraq by a small number of Revolutionary Guards was “far from clear”.
Hillary Mann, the National Security Council’s main Iran expert until 2004, said Pace’s repudiation of the administration’s claims was a sign of grave discontent at the top.
“He is a very serious and a very loyal soldier,” she said. “It is extraordinary for him to have made these comments publicly, and it suggests there are serious problems between the White House, the National Security Council and the Pentagon.”
Mann fears the administration is seeking to provoke Iran into a reaction that could be used as an excuse for an attack. A British official said the US navy was well aware of the risks of confrontation and was being “seriously careful” in the Gulf.
The US air force is regarded as being more willing to attack Iran. General Michael Moseley, the head of the air force, cited Iran as the main likely target for American aircraft at a military conference earlier this month.
A senior defence source said the air force “could do a lot of damage to the country if there were no other considerations”. But army chiefs fear an attack on Iran would backfire on American troops in Iraq and lead to more terrorist attacks, a rise in oil prices and the threat of a regional war.
Britain is concerned that its own troops in Iraq might also be drawn into any American conflict with Iran, regardless of whether the government takes part in the attack.
Bush is still pursuing a diplomatic agreement with Iran — urged on by secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.
One retired general who participated in the “generals’ revolt” against Donald Rumsfeld’s handling of the Iraq war said he hoped his former colleagues would resign in the event of an order to attack. “We don’t want to take another initiative unless we’ve really thought through the consequences of our strategy,” he warned.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
The hate crime and stalking of a blogger called The Hitch
Scene of the crimes photo, hat-tip to The Hitch.
There is this sick individual who for a long time cyber-stalked a journalist called Peter Hitchens. He has now turned his attention to stalking me on the internet. I do not know why he has this personal axe to grind, but I am not intimidated by him. He is a sad individual who is just clamouring for attention like a spoiled brat. I think he has hung himself with his own petard. If he was shitting himself when a journalist came to call, what will he be like when an Inspector calls?
Upadte: According to The Hitch's blog, he claims to have reported me to both the police and the probation service, for allegedly stalking him. This is rather like Peter and the wolf. I know that I am getting quite a bit of traffic from Kingston Upon Hull, but I do not know whether those hits are from ordinary members of the public or whether they are from the police and the probation service. If the police and probation service are looking for a crime on my blog, you are wasting taxpayers money. I suggest that you charge this reprobate who calls himself The Hitch with wasting police time. It comes to something when the stalker goes to the authorities and claims that he is being stalked!
There is this sick individual who for a long time cyber-stalked a journalist called Peter Hitchens. He has now turned his attention to stalking me on the internet. I do not know why he has this personal axe to grind, but I am not intimidated by him. He is a sad individual who is just clamouring for attention like a spoiled brat. I think he has hung himself with his own petard. If he was shitting himself when a journalist came to call, what will he be like when an Inspector calls?
Upadte: According to The Hitch's blog, he claims to have reported me to both the police and the probation service, for allegedly stalking him. This is rather like Peter and the wolf. I know that I am getting quite a bit of traffic from Kingston Upon Hull, but I do not know whether those hits are from ordinary members of the public or whether they are from the police and the probation service. If the police and probation service are looking for a crime on my blog, you are wasting taxpayers money. I suggest that you charge this reprobate who calls himself The Hitch with wasting police time. It comes to something when the stalker goes to the authorities and claims that he is being stalked!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)