Our criminal system is a persistent re-offender

By Jenny McCartney

 Have your say      Read comments

The curious uniformity of the mugshots of the three teenagers convicted last week of Garry Newlove's murder said it all: the pallid, hollow faces, the vacant, defiant eyes and the little spikes of hair teased low over the forehead in approved thug fashion. I am sure that each individual cut rather a pathetic figure at the trial, shorn of all drunken bravado and the bogus security of their baying gang. Jordan Cunliffe, 16, and Stephen Sorton, 17, both hung their heads and cried when they were convicted of murder, as though they finally realised the gravity of what they had done to Mr Newlove, and to themselves. Adam Swellings, 19, also known as "Swellhead", didn't cry: when the police first arrived to arrest him on suspicion of Mr Newlove's murder, his reported response was, "Fair enough." Swellings had been released on bail on August 10 last year, just hours before he and his friends beat to death Mr Newlove, a 47-year-old father of three, who had had the temerity to object to them vandalising parked cars. It should, well before then, have been amply clear to any court that bail restrictions meant precisely nothing to Swellings. advertisement In court on August 1 he had admitted repeatedly breaching a harassment order and committing an assault against a young woman. Once bailed, he went on to assault a young man that same day. On August 10, he admitted this fresh assault and to obstructing a police officer while on bail. He was once again granted bail, despite the opposition of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service, on condition that he did not go into Warrington. Can the fact that Swellings went into Warrington that night really have surprised anyone? Mr Newlove's widow Helen has rightly demanded to know why Swellings was bailed yet again. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, has simply observed that such cases highlight the difficult decisions that have to be taken by the judiciary. Such a response is surely more worthy of an Injustice Secretary. We all appreciate that granting bail is a delicate judgment, and that occasionally the wickedness of an offender will surpass a judge's reasonable expectations. That is not the question here. In this instance, the judge did not need a crystal ball to predict Swellings's insouciant attitude to bail conditions: it was clearly evident in the violent history of his behaviour. The real question, surely, is why the magistrates did not give Swellings a custodial sentence, which would have permitted them to deny bail. I suspect, however, that Mr Straw is well aware that our prisons and remand centres are overstuffed, and violent offenders such as Swellings are granted bail or released on probation every day and appallingly monitored thereafter. The judges know it, the police know it, and any former home secretary, such as Mr Straw, will know it too. Every so often the public discovers the gruesome inefficiency of the present system - usually by means of a particularly horrifying murder or rape - and there will be an outcry. Nothing thereby changes. You might remember Richard Whelan, stabbed to death on a north London bus in 2005. His murderer, Anthony Joseph, had been released from prison only 11 hours earlier - by mistake, it turned out, because there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest on another matter. Apparently, the error occurred because Joseph's details had not been uploaded on to a national police computer. Or perhaps you recall the brutal murder of the financier John Monckton during a robbery in 2004: his killer, Damien Hanson, had been released halfway through a 12-year sentence for attempted murder and was supposed to be under the supervision of the probation service. Among other glaring errors, his probation staff had failed to include any assessment of Hanson's risk of re-offending in their report for the Parole Board, despite an earlier assessment that there was a 91 per cent likelihood he would re-offend. Four probation staff were suspended for their mistakes in this case: within two weeks they were all back at work. There is no doubt that neglect and family dysfunction have shaped the characters of Mr Newlove's killers. But a sense of defeatism among our police and judiciary has then allowed them free rein to destroy another family forever. Time and again, an incredulous public asks why persistently violent offenders are so frequently released, unsupervised, back into society. Time and again, we hear that there has been some regrettable error in the system, but that it appears to be no one's fault. Yet it is the fault of individuals - further compounded by a shoddy, creaking system - and we deserve to know exactly who will be held accountable and what will be done to change matters. Otherwise, you can bet that in years to come decent people will still be dying to find out.

 Have your say    

It seems strange that we know exactly how to deal with feral dogs that attack someone out of the blue, yet we don't have a clue when feral youths or girls are involved. How did we learn how to deal with the canine danger? Well, it was either a case of shooting the dog dead, or standing back and watching it rip our loved ones to shreds. We decided the former course of action was more appropriate.
Posted by Mike Mitchell on January 20, 2008 12:20 PM
Report this comment

Ask yourselves why you behave in a compassionate and civilised way,why you don,t mug old ladies and knife the person next you etc etc -it surely is because you have been brought up in a family which abhors behavior like that and instils into its children a respect for others and its own family name -if this were the norm in current british life we would not be discussing penal punishments or the lack of them -for me the blame lies in the change in family life -no control ,no families eating round a table ,no role models to look up to -even their favourite footballers committing so called professional fouls , spitting , roasting etc etc -who do these kids look up to ? bullies and smart alecs!! until we find a way to give a better upbringing to youngsters we will continue to suffer as we are doing now -I was brought up by a loving family of hard working people where i was taught to give respect to all others and all religions,to give my bus seat up to ladies and to be charitable ,and by the way not by force -i think i know what would put a stop to these hooligans and no doubt you will laugh -but humiliation in front of their peers would be a huge deterrent to them -put them in the stocks in a very public place behind glass to protect them and i would like to bet they wouldnt offend too often -we wouldnt need to jail them ,birch them etc we may even encourage them to lead a more useful life -i,m sure we cant do this because of their human rights (not ours )but maybe this suggestion will encourage our politicians to think of a better way ,then maybe we could walk on our streets and once again pass the time of day with one another .I grew up in the time of teddy boys and even they had a code of conduct ,boys were tough and liked to fight but they didnt kill passers by,we had a nation proud of itself and one willing to give the immigrants a chance to develop into good citizens ,what on earth has happened to us ?
Posted by phil on January 20, 2008 12:11 PM
Report this comment

I think that the whole subject/case/article can be condensed to one line.
That of Paul (1) @ 9.20a.m.:Take a life,lose yours.

Posted by P.Corney on January 20, 2008 12:04 PM
Report this comment

Naples: you can't get cancer that quickly. If the Neapolitans have more tumours than others, then it is a long-standing problem, not just a result of their present disgusting squalor.

War on terror: if it's a war, soldiers have to wear uniforms. Otherwise, they are spies and can be shot. Some IRA/Sinn Fein types were lucky not to be caught by this convention.
Posted by Clothilde Simon on January 20, 2008 11:46 AM
Report this comment

If the parents are to blame, then let the parents be punished.
Was it not once the case that parents were held responsible for the offences committed by their offspring until the offspring reached the age of criminal responsibility?
If it wasn't the case then it should have been and the law needs to be introduced immediately; and if it was, when did it get changed?
Posted by D Strathmore on January 20, 2008 11:43 AM
Report this comment

One of the things which has given credence to terrorists is the way in which media reports their acts; you always report that such-and-such a group "claimed responsibility". The scum love that!
They may not be so pleased with themselves if you reported that the group "confessed to this cowardly act."

Posted by C J Allen on January 20, 2008 11:41 AM
Report this comment

If harsh penalties like birching and hanging were reintroduced, reoffence rates would drop, and there would be less work for magistrates and judges. Heaven help us, it could lead to redundancies.
Posted by Eric Worrall on January 20, 2008 11:37 AM
Report this comment

We note that the "Home Secretary" no less is reported to be frightened of the "street culture". Her spokesman/woman says "she went for a kebab in Peckham". Wow we are reassured. Time to require that all politicians inhabit the streets without "police protection".
Posted by Conkeyron on January 20, 2008 11:28 AM
Report this comment

Very simplistic view. Swellings would have been out on the street again at some point, even if convicted. The real problem is why they are like that: there have always been difficult boys, but now our society has given 'tolerance' to vast numbers of children to be brought up in ways that are completely contrary to all known developmental norms. A constant primary care-giver; unconditional love; firm boundaries created by discipline tempered by caring; plenty to keep them occupied in a meaningful way; firm, caring, moral male/female role models. I wonder how many of these things Swellings experienced? If we accept that the only way to deal with all the anti-social children is to lock them up and throw away the key, then we really have, as a community, just given up on them, as well as ignoring our own part in accepting the unacceptable aspects of liberal tolerance of everything, however damaging.
Posted by Angela on January 20, 2008 11:07 AM
Report this comment

These filth should have been birched and then jailed for life as an example to others. (The politicians who brought this state about I mean). Human "rights" (there are no inherent rights as these are both given and removed by the State) legislation and
political correctness (a planned war on the west by the communist Gramsci and the Frankfort School) have destroyed our once decent society. These plus a supine worldly national Church, terrified of warning of the necessary justice of God and long refusing to preach the full gospel, have damaged the nation beyond repair. Unless there is national repentance and an understanding that families, self discipline, justice and honor are more important than greed, money and power, the country will descend further into a hell of its own making.
Posted by P OHalleran on January 20, 2008 10:36 AM
Report this comment

Britons seem to have chosen not to do anything about the state of the nation so what`s the point in writing to newspapers? If anybody had the guts of Enoch Powell or Nicholas Ridley he would be forced to stand down so do you really think readers`comments can change anything?
Posted by peter ex pat on January 20, 2008 10:31 AM
Report this comment

Why are you lumping the police in with the rest? The police arrest hundreds of bail breachers a day and place then back in front of a court to be bailed time and time again. No wonder they view the wholw process with cynicism! Don't make the mistake of thinking that the police are in favour of this patheticly lenient system. There are a huge number of measures that need to be taken to turn around our wounded society. The first is the reinstatement of severe penalties, penalties actually feared by the criminals, for trangressing.
Posted by Toadvine on January 20, 2008 10:08 AM
Report this comment

The incompetent minister for Work & Pensions has 'previous' for taking direct action to force his views about apartheid upon others.

More recently, he admits a criminal offence by 'overlooking' declaring over £100k of donations deviously routed via a dubious 'think tank' to his failed 'campaign' to be deputy leader of New Labour.

So, let's crucify Sarah Green. She obviously deserves it.
Posted by April Toomey on January 20, 2008 10:08 AM
Report this comment

The first duty of government is the safety of its citizens. Fat chance. Not in bananadom. That Straw can be so dismissive of the events leading to a vicious murder demonstrates once again that we do not have government in Westminster. We have place-men of small intellect. Why is there no substantive method in our apology for democracy that would enable the citizenry to get rid of unpopular and incompetent government? Are we doomed to bananadom for ever?!
Posted by john problem on January 20, 2008 10:01 AM
Report this comment

But what authority would Miss Green have henceforth over the boys?
Posted by John Holland on January 20, 2008 9:59 AM
Report this comment

".......shorn of all drunken bravado and the bogus security of their baying gang."

If public dinking was banned, Gary Newlove might be alive today. The leader, and oldest, Swellhead, might not have been deterred from drinking in public, but perhaps the other two would have been.
Posted by Robbed by a Sub - Prime minister on January 20, 2008 9:53 AM
Report this comment

Well said Jenny McCartney: All these views seem perfectly normal to me, this is what life today is all about? You haved dotted every 'i' and crossed every 't.' Pity I can't mention the Syriah law implementation -in present company- except perhaps to say that it would affect all our politicians immediately?
Posted by Edward Ashley-Smith on January 20, 2008 9:50 AM
Report this comment

There is something wrong when a supposedly reputable newspaper leaves out important facts when telling the news. Whilst I am no apologist for the young man concerned it has been reported that the reason he was bailed[prior to the murder] was that the offence he was charged with was one that would not result in a jail sentence even if he were to be found guilty. This is a crucial point. If people want the law to be changed thats OK by me but please lets not pretend that all people we dont like should be refused bail regardless of the charge! Or because of hindsight.
My main point is this. When will we stop blaming everyone else for the failure of parents? When will we criticise the parents who cannot [or do not want to ] control their children through ignorance or because they have been led to believe that their children are the responsibility of the Home Secretary and the teaching profession?
Posted by PRW Richardson on January 20, 2008 9:43 AM
Report this comment

Nothing will change in our "justice" system because it would mean that public employees would have to be sacked. Even if any were sacked they would be found another state job within weeks.
Posted by Keith on January 20, 2008 9:36 AM
Report this comment

The main duty of the courts is to protect the public. Simple as that.
This is clearly not happening.

The fault also clearly lies with the magistrates and judges who are favouring criminals instead of victims.
The current bunch of befuddled dodderers need to be replaced with people who will address the issue by sentencing criminals with proper punishments irrespective of a plea of having had a "deprived childhood".
There are no deterrents and this needs to be rectified.
More remands in custody. Build more prisons. We are going to need them with the scum that is entering our country in hordes. More repatriations.
GET A GRIP.
Posted by Dek Crossingham on January 20, 2008 9:34 AM
Report this comment

Superbly reasoned article but we all know that nothing will change. In the main where any sense of morality does not exist only fear of the Law keeps most of us on the straight and narrow. Most criminals know the punishment does not fit the crime and so do the politicians and the Judiciary but the majority don't care.
Posted by Brian on January 20, 2008 9:26 AM
Report this comment

Britain is unsafe for ordinary people and made more so by the refusal to impose appropriate penalties to miscreants.

This is at least partly due to socialist influences within our civil administration. The legal profession (and the judiciary) like many others is stiff with New Labour supporters, direct beneficiaries of the corrupted status quo.

They are apparently driven by what I would call an ersatz moral compassion, the need to be fair, to make allowances for the disadvantaged etc., etc.

The reality is that such an approach to life is both condescending and potentially lethal as events prove on a daily basis.

The innocent always suffer whilst the detritus of the latter day welfare state bludgeon and maraud through life destroying and despoiling everything they come into contact with.

Excuses can always be made but the fact is that over time many have endured dysfunctional family life and worse without ever deliberately harming anybody.

The answer to this ongoing situation is simple and complete. Get rid of these people and by doing so save more innocent lives.

It would also send out an unmistakeable message to any future or would be murderers.

Take a life, lose your own.
Posted by Paul (1) on January 20, 2008 9:20 AM
Report this comment

It is about time that those members of the Judiciary were held responsible for their actions when releasing violent individuals who immediately commit further crimes. They are just as guilty as the motorist who drives carelessly and causes an injury or death and should be charged accordingly.
Posted by D Coventry on January 20, 2008 9:13 AM
Report this comment

After having witnessed but not suffered from the negilgence and probable corruption, not to mention, mendacity surrounding the children's courts system and it destruction of families, I am not surprised to find these levels transposed over into the criminal justice system. The logical conclusion of most reasonable people with ordinary expectations of justice and common sense is that the last place you can expect to find such principles is in the courts and amongst the judiciary. All the courts are interested in is law and very expensive law at that!
We have too much law and disorder because the legal profession lacks a basic understanding of justice and common sense.
Posted by Bevan Hulse on January 20, 2008 9:03 AM
Report this comment

It is WAY overdue to make a clear and strong legal separation between crimes of violence and other crime. Anyone who commits or is suspected of a violent act belongs in prison. That is quite simple the first job of prison - to get violence off the streets and out of our homes.

Prisions are far too full of all kinds of other crimes. Not paying a TV licence - would you rather a houysewife went to prison for this, and the likes of violent Adam Swellings gets let out on bail just because there is no room? Of course not.
Anything to do with small debts, money or paperwork, or perhaps use of drugs as opposed to selling them; these all need to be made a much lower priority for prison. If someone hasn't HURT anyone else, and is unlikely to - then what on EARTH are they being shut up for?

Prison is firstly for protecting us. From violence first, from major fraud and drug dealing second. There ARE enough prison places for that.
The rest can be dealt with by fines and community orders, injunctions, tagging - there ARE alternatives.

A huge number of offences are alcohol or drug related, but without direct violence. Many of these people need hospital and outreach prohrammes - much of which would be far cheaper than a prison place.

But FIRST protect us from violence.


Posted by Shan Morgain on January 20, 2008 8:58 AM
Report this comment

New Labour were never very good at joined up government despite an almost messianic zeal in knowing what's best for us. So, despite living in an increasingly authoritarian state based on class war and thought crime, the human rights legislation is set up to protect the law breaker and the Criminal Justice System does exactly what it says and provides Justice for Criminals.
Posted by Richard Martin on January 20, 2008 8:55 AM
Report this comment

Why don't we bring back capital punishment? We keep being told that the prisons are over-flowing. Capital punishment would reduce the numbers. I don't see why all our law-abiding taxpayers should have to support all the criminal layabouts such as these three. They should swing and that's the end of them and the costs.
Posted by David on January 20, 2008 8:54 AM
Report this comment

Anyone who supports the "rights" of those thugs is as guilty of their sickening behaviour as they are.


Posted by Harry Penrose on January 20, 2008 8:25 AM
Report this comment

When Magistrates are told that the prisons are FULL, what are Magistrates supposed to do? Just how long has this situation been going on? Five Years? Ten? Twenty? or is it more like Thirty?

It seems, according to what we read in the papers at least, that crime is getting worse, particularly violent crime. WHY?

Education is getting better, far more youngsters are passing exams and have certificates or diplomas to prove it and far more of our young people are better educated than in the days of long ago when 14 was the time leave school, to get a job and contribute to the household in which they lived. This is what Governments tell us at least. Some people, of course, even in those bad old days did go on to go to University and on to better things.

There was no 'uman rites in those days of course, Human Rights that seems to allow those that take the lives of others, MORE Human Rights that those it should protect.

Who is "selling" the beer or drink that these 'offenders' get so 'stoned' on they hardly know what they are doing? Alcohol used to have to be separated from all the rest in a Store. It used to be a Wine Shop , a "Shop within a Store" Once it was allowed to be placed in open isles in the rest of the Store, it was open to thieving or its usual name of "Shop-lifting" as anything else in the Store. It is not always "sold" to anyone under-age, it is "modern society' trend because more and more people like to drink wine with their meal and have a drink as they watch the "telly" that places drink where it can just be taken off the shelves by anyone. Youngsters know they cannot buy drink underage, particulary when Staff these days are trained to see proof of age.

A good article, but the problem remains.


Posted by Anne on January 20, 2008 7:59 AM
Report this comment

Vigilantism has historically always risen in states
where the justice or "injustice" system strongly
favours the accused rather than the victims.
Allowing recidivist criminals to persecute the
majority is just as great a breach of the civil liberties
of all those citizens who uphold the law - a great
majority - as it would be to allow the majority to
persecute individuals.
Posted by Lissa from Malaga on January 20, 2008 7:45 AM
Report this comment

A superb and timely by McCartney's thoughts on "a shoddy, creaking system”.

If we want law and order and some sanity in the judicial system, we should not tolerate any longer the shabby and outdated judicial systems.

Nations like the US, UK and more have 20th century judicial systems and nations like India have 19th century judicial systems trying to solve the problems of citizens in 21st century.

The cases like that of Adam Swellings are quite common and these habitual and remorseless offenders/criminals should not be given bails under any circumstances. If required put in correctional places, mental hospitals or some where! Here the comments by Jack Straw, Justice Secretary, is most insensitive and, to be polite, is just nonsense. People like him are unfit to hold positions such as Justice Secretary.

The current judicial system is mostly lawyer/attorney and merely faceless paperwork driven with not much relevance. Many manning them do not have much idea of the society, technological advances, psychological problems and so on.

In the US, O. J. Simpson case highlighted the weakness of the system.

Just to take one example of India. There was a fire in a cinema hall and many lost their lives in New Delhi due to the reckless arrangements of the theater owners and personnel. The judge spends 10 years on the case, diligently completes all the so-called garbage formalities in a judicial trial, delivers 50000 pages judgment giving lightest punishment to the main culprits. Of course, they get bails after delivering the judgment! So if judicial system and its personnel become a laughing stock with no credibility, can you blame the citizens?

This ridiculous state of affairs should be immediately addressed in UK, US, India and other nations to restore credibility of the judicial officers, the attorneys and above all the judicial system itself! Start punishing the guilty right away or else these people will be carrying their papers with stiff busybody walks without anybody caring for them or their system!
Regards,
Posted by Krishna R. Kumar on January 20, 2008 7:25 AM
Report this comment

My dear McCartney

"Our criminal system is a persistent re-offender".

What a load of fanciful codswobble with all my due respect!! The persistent re-offender(s) are the parents.

Did anybody ever tell you that education begins at home??
Posted by Henry Pilkington-Smythe on January 20, 2008 7:19 AM
Report this comment

The system is overburned due to a failed drugs prohibition policy that increases violent crime as gangs enforce street contracts; and fills the prisons with persons who are economic criminals. Then the focus on *real* victem crime is obscured and the system breaks down.

When drugs prisoners are released, they have difficulty getting jobs and are driven in to the black economy by the justice system that destroyed their potential futures by its bankrupt laws. And as well, youths who do do drugs, get unregulated unknown amounts up and down the nation by the inability of government to regulate substance quality killing a generation by the justice system.

Is it all that much a mystery why its broken; end prohibition and put the police and the courts back on the job of real crime. Less is more; where are all the true conservatives?
Posted by David on January 20, 2008 7:16 AM
Report this comment

Hi,
Violence among young people is not just a British problem it seems to be endemic. This subject is a central theme in the fourth coming regional election in Hessen Germany The right wing candidate Mr. Koch proposes a solution similar to the Hitler youth project. Sociologically the under lying reason is our inner cities have become a cage a form of human zoo. Animals in a zoo behave differently to those in the wild. Properly military subscription on the basis of the Swiss model would be the best solution where an initial recruiting school is made for around eight months and then ever year a few weeks military duty is made, a sort of dad’s army.
Regards Dr. Terence Hale Zandvoort

Posted by Terence Hale on January 20, 2008 7:00 AM
Report this comment

Bring back capital punishment. This is the only deterrent to these evil people. You should not be giving them privileges such as being able to study for a degree at the tax-payer's expense. They are worse than garbage and should be treated as such
Posted by Diane Green on January 20, 2008 6:30 AM
Report this comment

I also read in your paper today an article relating that youth crime is increasing. No wonder when there are no deterents except those the goverment has established to discourage traditional family units.
This also makes very apposite the columnn on the move by the muslim council to establish Sharia and how, in its extreme non western form it acts as a strong deterrent.

From afar (and I am glad it is fropm a great distance) it seems that over the past 30 years British society and its governments have made a series of disasterous, misguided decisions that have negatively affected it society.

Posted by abritincanada on January 20, 2008 5:42 AM
Report this comment

New Zealand is getting like Britain or is it the other way around
Posted by M Willoughby on January 20, 2008 5:27 AM
Report this comment

Simple Amswer: When there is a consequence for these kids actions...the crime will decrease and/or stop.

"'That every man be armed.'" Works quite well here. When are you going to wake up?




Posted by wil wheaton on January 20, 2008 4:11 AM
Report this comment

Looking at the photographs of these youths'faces, I am inclined to give credit to the Victorian "science" of phrenology, by which it was claimed that there are certain character types who can be identified by their features. Anyone possessed of any sense at all would know immediately that these faces are those of violent criminals. We know this in the same way that we know when someone is smiling or frowning; sad, angry or happy. These features ought to have been put behind bars at at early stage in their lives, and never let out again.
Posted by Robert Dewar on January 20, 2008 4:00 AM
Report this comment

I had a problem son, around 15 years ago. Drug dealing (but absolutely no violence). I fired him off to cousins in Australia. Now a wonderful, caring person. You can beat it if you try, by whatever means. I was lucky; but some parents don't try.
Posted by Jude on January 20, 2008 3:59 AM
Report this comment

"and we deserve to know exactly who will be held accountable" is absolutely correct. It's this lack of accountability that worries me. People are murdered by evil minded juvenile thugs and............no-one is really to blame. Not the dull-eyed killers, for "society" and "upbringing" are the anonymous or nebulous causes; not the Police because they're overstreched and largely made powerless or cramped by the many constraints and limitations placed on them; not the courts because decisions are frequently "difficult"; not the prisons or other custodial institutions because Government policy has led to overcrowding and there are no cells; not the Government because of ...........well, anything Ministers can think of on the spot: EU legislation, "advice", continuing (but inconclusive) consultations, initiatives in the offing for which we must be a little more patient, crime statistics.........and so on. But never "accountability". Never "I am responsible for this."
However, another dead parent or one more wounded one is in the mortuary or operating theatre. Among the unaccountable, he or she has lost out and a blood price has been extorted from an innocent bystander or public spirited house-holder. And so, listed among those who look for accountability most earnestly, are their departing souls and the sorrowing relatives they leave behind.
A quite disgraceful state of affairs!
Posted by sebastian on January 20, 2008 3:48 AM
Report this comment

Our criminal system is a persistent re-offender - and how! Jenny refers to "Swellings's insouciant attitude ....." - a good word that - it also fits like a glove the so-called Justice Sec, Straw, and indeed the whole system. It's typical of the PC brigade, Nanny State and Labourites the world over. Of course the crim's are blithely unconcerned by bail conditions - they reflect the nonchalant attitude of the berks that impose the conditions on them. We in NZ have precisely the same problems with bully boys barely bailed before bashing some innocent victim into oblivion. Back in court (if we're lucky - having been bailed to appear yet again) what do they get? Bail!
Posted by Auntie Podes on January 20, 2008 3:27 AM
Report this comment

Clearly this is describing a few exceptional cases and not the norm for the youth of Britain. So often these articles blame parents but the simple fact is the state has reduced the role of parents to such a degree they have no control. History has taught us, while records were kept young people have remained a thorn in the side of society. The widespread introduction of football was due to religious groups in the Victorian period encouraging wayward youths to be distracted away from street crime. We have various claims by the state that society would fall apart due to delinquent crime e.g. Teddy Boys, Mods and Rockers, Skinheads etc. The real issue lies with the simple fact the youth in society has always been let down and now no work for them. The immigrants compete directly for their traditional jobs, the government in desperation is extending education with useless courses that are worthless. 50% are not working or in education and don't receive any kind of benefit. They are criminalised by the Police as easy targets, this may be the real reason we see their crime rate is rising. You give them a criminal record for minor offences in their youth and make them unemployable for their future, just more fodder for the unemployment mountain. So they are left with wandering the streets stealing because they have no money, with such a miserable life they turn to drink, drugs and gangs. Who can blame them, the government has written them off, most can't read or add up through rubbish schools. They can't use even council run sports facilities etc, it costs money the one thing they cannot get. Riots, murder, crime are ripe across many European states, Britain still remains a relatively safe place. We have to ignore these sad one off stories, and look for real answers to engage with our youth,, this has eluded and failed by all British society throughout history.
Posted by R.J.McKinney on January 20, 2008 2:58 AM
Report this comment

Jenny McCartney writes "Time and again, we hear that there has been some regrettable error in the system, but that it appears to be no one's fault. Yet it is the fault of individuals - further compounded by a shoddy, creaking system - and we deserve to know exactly who will be held accountable and what will be done to change matters."

The problem is, Jenny, that no-one is held accountable. Listen to the wriggling, embarrassing statements from politicians, police spokespeople, courts, justice ministry people and probation service hacks. No-one wants to blame anybody, but the root of the problem seems to be the "It's not my responsibility" syndrome. When will we get it through the heads of all these people and services that accountability starts with the acceptance that yes, something is their responsibility, and when will the culture of responsibility start to take root in all these public servants?

The same lacks lie behind the loss of computer disks and records and the misuse of private data by other government departments. Live with it, guys - it IS your responsibility, and the sooner you "get" it, the better.
Posted by Nigel Blumenthal on January 20, 2008 2:54 AM
Report this comment

Violent, predatory criminals should be killed; ideally, by those they are attempting to harm.
Posted by ScottQ on January 20, 2008 2:51 AM
Report this comment

The same thing is happening in the United States that is happening in England when it comes to violent criminals being released on bail or even being released from prison. In the paper every Monday, there is a photograph of someone, either male or female, who is wanted by the police for one or more crimes. And, most of the time they are violent crimes. In addition, one thing I have noticed is that most of the wanted individuals are young in age.

I do not know what the solution to the problem of youth offenders is but something needs to be done to keep them from offending in the first place. From what I have observed in the newspaper and on the television is that most of the youth offenders have a very unstable home life with an absent father. Plus there is the problem of drugs in the streets and homes that come into the picture. The youth and youth in gangs appear to feel that they can make a lot of money fast by selling drugs. But, they are also using the same drugs they are selling so turn to crime as a means of getting more money for their habit.

I do not know what the solution to the problem of youth crime is but I do know that it is something that needs more work instead of just patching.
Posted by Claire, Florence, SC, USA on January 20, 2008 1:30 AM
Report this comment

we have a legal system. If we had a justice system we would have justice. We must not confuse the two.
Posted by John Wordsworth on January 20, 2008 1:15 AM
Report this comment

I notice that the judge who gave bail to Swellings did not give a post-verdict news conference. I bet he lives insulated from the killer thugs who roam parts of our towns and cities.

Posted by John Gibson on January 20, 2008 12:42 AM
Report this comment

On of the miscreants responsible for the murder
of Mr Newlove had only just been released on
bail hours earlier. The magistrate responsible for
the granting of bail should and must be charged
with culpible homicide.
Only when the judiciary is held accountable for
gross incompetence will we see any real justice
in this country.

Another contributory factor is alcohol. The
solution to this is to make the consumption of
alcohol in public, and being intoxicated in public
a criminal offence. Laws affecting motorists are
made and enforced at the drop of a hat - use of
phones while driving for example. Such alcohol
laws would be a great deal of initial resistance,
but youths would soon sober up, once they
realize a one thousand spot fine and immediate
incarceration was inevitable.

Posted by peterj on January 20, 2008 12:31 AM
Report this comment

Please remember that the submission of any material to telegraph.co.uk is governed by our Terms and Conditions (clause 5 in particular) and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Your name: *

Your email address: * (We won't publish this.)

Your site's URL: (If you have one.)

Please click the post button only once - your comment will not be published immediately.

* = Required information

BUSINESS Market turmoil Follow the world's worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

TRAVEL Sign language Another selection of strange signs and absurd English.

FASHION No winter blues Brighten up the dark days by wearing vibrant colours.

HEALTH Lifeclass Lesley Garner helps a mother with a sexless marriage.