local issues on 'radio psy'

interviewed by bbc radio in brighton the other day _
ostensibly to talk about my local railway gate campaign
but for some reason the subject of parole came up_
(said to Brat_ who'd predicted similar)
"hotter topic and more national concern"

i was slightly more surprised
when my interviewer
opened me up to questions from listeners!
one man emailed
in reference to prison sentences
"why isn't 'life' life?"

i agreed with him in some respects
suggested that as 'life' in prison terms
is often a misnomer
they should simply stop quoting it _
use it only when that's what they really mean _

since i was mainly talking about rehabilitation
the interviewer asked me
what would i say to anyone who believes
prison is only about punishment

where to begin with that one?
off the cuff_ 'on the air'_ time ticking
to be honest i don't know what i said
that was useful to the public

towards the end of the show
i was given an opportunity to have my own say_
i spoke about long term solutions
and not listening to sound-bytes_
i repeated lord ramsbottom's comment
to tony blair from the day before
"i wish he'd just shut up"
i quoted statistics_
77,000 total
16,000 waiting judgement
6,500 children

i said "overcrowded prisons is a symptom
of what's happening to the 'have-not' half of society
as the 'have-it-all' society gets smaller
and richer
and moves further away"
(if you give me air time
don't expect me not to say it)
i didn't have long_
but i used the moment well >; )

the rest of this blog is a short supplement
to everything i spoke about the other morning_


Tolstoy said
"You can judge a society
by the state of its prisons." _

Whether or not prison should be
about punishment or rehabilitation?

Sometimes it's neither_
in some cases prison is just about confinement_
keeping people behind closed doors
limiting them from doing society any harm
or of doing any more harm to themselves_

don't misunderstand me
all of those in 'confinement'
have been charged for a crime
which they may or not have been guilty of
(and quite often they are guilty of that crime
in the same way a four year old is guilty
when they drop a jug of water)

the statement on our society
is that their 'conditions' were often discovered
only because they committed the crime
and sometimes not even then _
quite often their conditions were diagnosed
after their confinement began_ sometimes long after

prison staff explained to me
the cost of keeping them in the prison regime
is a small fraction of the cost of keeping them
under similar conditions of confinement
but in circumstances that could help them

the prison i was in had nine wings
one was exclusively for 'vulnerable prisoners'
i'm not saying it was full
because the wing also had cells for inmates
who the prison system had assessed
would not prey upon the vulnerable

so it wasn't full of 'vulnerables'_
but then the other 8 wings
weren't full of unvulnerable 'normal' people either_
(please don't think that)

if you're looking for an explanation
you could say that the system
had some kind of balance/imbalance going on _
just like 'outside' in many ways
(except 'inside'
people are being confined in this country
sometimes for many years
under conditions completely unsuited to their obvious needs _)

in the twenty months i spent on the vulnerable wing
i met many people who were seriously in need of real help
often confined under sedative prescriptions _
for a time i was banged up with a young man
who tried to cut himself open constantly
who bought vast quantities of stuff on his canteen
(presumably funded by his family?)
and who_ at his first opportunity_
disposed of the new contents from all these 'goodies'
down the toilet
he would continuously flush it for over an hour _
an 'extreme case' maybe?
he is an example_
and he was without any shadow of doubt
definitely in a similar condition
prior to committing a crime _

interested at all?
then find out how many prisoners
have cut wounds on their arms_
don't just look at prisoner suicides statistics
find out how many times prison staff
prevent a 'successful' outcome to a suicide attempt
if you're interested then find out_
because it must concern you
how many human beings are being slowly destroyed
not by their personal 'circumstances'
but by being confined in this way_

surely it concerns you
(surely indeed)
point is the underlying truth it points at_
behind the actual conditions of our society's prisons
AND IT'S PRISONERS!
is our nation's collective social attitude
which helps to create/condone the social policies
that confine people in this way _
(in other words
we are all to blame _)

try this at home_
report to your local a&e with a mental problem _
and you'll be seen within a couple of hours_
but if you truly succeed in committing yourself
even with a 'prior history'
then_ and only then_ can you talk to me
about pleading insanity in a common criminal trial

in no way assume
that what i've blogged is a condemnation
either of the hard-working external prison staff
or of the prison service itself_
but it is the truth _

the system we all live in and under
would defend itself by reminding the angry public...

'angry public_
did i say angry?
are the public angry about this?
no_
the public
fed by the media
who themselves feed from the likes of rupert murdoch_
the public are angry about parole and lenient sentencing

i'm not denying there's some who shouldn't have parole
and some God-awful mistakes have been made recently
by a system that they finally admit is collapsing
'unfit for purpose'_

(the enormity of that concept
'our home office doesn't work'
is dwarfed
by the underlying_ overbearing reason behind it_
our fast moving_ throw away society
wants the home office to work
but isn't really interested how_
when they really really ought to be!

but where was i?
yes ofcourse_ prison is only about punishment...

to anyone who thinks that_
prison is only about punishment
i would advise you to look ahead in your lives for a moment_

if you truly believe that your own future
will never require any evidence
to disprove a charge of 'lack of mercy'
(and where such evidence might 'save' you)
then continue to judge others as you do now _

responding to the 'armed response unit'

if the two brothers arrested in the forest gate 'terror' raid last week
have just been released without charge
then obviously neither of them was in possession of a gun
even though one of them was shot during the arrest
(supposedly by his own brother!)

so it was CO19 (renamed from SO19) who did the shooting
but the statement the police made after the brothers were released
makes no reference to that wounding _
so presumably the public must await yet another ipcc inquiry
(and in the meantime just be thankful that a wounding is all it was!)

is it any wonder the police feel no need to comment?
in the last two days
i've spent about 12 hours trawling the internet
for statistics on the 'Specialist Firearms Command' - CO19
specifically to compare the figures of casualties
between those who were innocent of any wrongdoing
and those who were 'deserving' of a police bullet _
in our 'open democracy' those comparative statistics don't exist

what word would you use to describe
firing seven bullets into a man's head at point blank range
as was done with jean charles de menezes
on an underground train_

killing?
murder?
execution?
somehow none of these words sufficiently describe it _

what would a high court judge say about such horrendous action
prior to handing down a life-sentence to the perpetrator?

after the ipcc handed in a dossier of their findings
on the menezes case (to scotland yard ?!)
the crown prosecution service said that they
"hoped to decide by Easter
whether any officers will face criminal charges"
but Easter has long since passed
and the public has heard nothing _

take the case of harry stanley_
a man recovering from a cancer operation
shot by two police officers whilst carrying a table leg
which they mistook for a sawn-off shotgun _

anyone who knows about these things
(and these officers had 'SO19' training)
is well aware the lack of potent range a 'sawn-off' has
especially against a police semi-automatic _
so what phrase could you use to define stanley's killing

death by misadventure?
unlawful killing?
or an act of cowardice?

in the second inquest into the shooting of harry stanley
a verdict of 'unlawful killing' was pronounced because
"the jury did not believe the officers
when they said they felt under imminent threat"

the point is that these two cases are linked
by more than the victim's unnecessary death _
the police commisioner sir ian blair went on public record
with his description of jean charles as 'a terrorist'
because he was afraid that his armed response unit
would 'down tools' and abandon him
just as they had only eight months earlier
when the officers who shot harry stanley were suspended from duty _
(under these circumstances it might have been better if they had)

and now at forest gate
we are given a story of one man shooting his own brother
and still no explanation for what was obviously not the truth
what is becoming clear from all of this
is that CO19 consider themselves to be 'above the law'
and do their best to avoid prosecution for their actions
by resorting to 'industrial action'
or coercing their senior officers into 'covering up'
with the contrivance of half-truths and blatant lies
and yet our prime minister says they have "101% of his support"

well mr blair_
your record of support for 'armed response' speaks for itself
and during the bloodbath of iraq you would probably be best advised
to say nothing at all on this particular subject _

in the interim a metropolitan police commander goes before the BBC
to ask for continued cooperation and trust from the community_
"What is more likely to develop increasing trust," he asks_
"what's more likely to deliver effective police
and community responses to situations like this?"

the answer to that question is obvious
and probably one his armed response unit doesn't want to hear_
if you want co-operation and trust
then get it the way everyone else has to... EARN IT!

head above the parapet

so bullyboy campbell makes the headlines once again
not for his journalistic abilities
but for his outmoded phillistine attitudes about women
(who incidentally are doing a job that he can't do)

he tells us that his 'comments'
were intended to provoke interest in labour's website_
succinctly demonstrating how desperate
the chinless wonders of new labour must be
and his world cup blog page states
that "offensive or abusive responses will be deleted"

i left a blog there reminding him of his indirect role
in the death of dr kelly_
ending with the sentence
"get off our front pages and hang your head in shame"

whether it was or wasn't abusive to say that_
dear reader_ you decide...
but i bet you anything you like
you won't see psywarrior's blog response printed there