eBulletin, 3 February 2023
Our latest eBulletin, sent out to those on our mailing list on Friday, 2 February. Sign-up for our free eBulletins here.
One of my formative experiences, early on in my time working on criminal justice reform, came in the green room of a TV studio, shortly before taking part in a live debate on paedophiles.
It was the summer of 2000, and the then largest circulation Sunday newspaper, the News of the World, was in the middle of a high-profile ‘name and shame’ campaign against alleged paedophiles.
Over successive weekends, the newspaper published row after row of pictures of men convicted of child sexual abuse offences. If parents were aware of the paedophiles in their midst, the paper reasoned, they would be better able to protect their children.
The prompt for the News of the World’s campaign was the awful abduction and murder of a young girl, Sarah Payne, from a country lane in West Sussex. It later came out that Sarah Payne’s murderer, Roy Whiting, had a previous conviction for the abduction and assault of a child.
The newspaper’s campaign was highly controversial in criminal justice circles. It appeared to lead to what some, including me (more on this in a moment) dubbed ‘mob’ justice.
In one case, a paediatrician in south Wales fled her home, after she was targeted by locals who misunderstood her job title. In another case, a man was confronted by his neighbours, who mistakenly believed he was one of the individuals featured on the front page of that weekend’s newspaper.
I helped to establish a coalition of police, probation and child protection specialists, which successfully persuaded the News of the World to end its campaign.
But during those febrile weeks over the summer of 2000, I found myself going in and out of TV and radio studios, arguing why the News of the World’s campaign was irresponsible, and that there were better ways to protect children from those who would harm them than ‘mob rule’.
As a result, some campaigners, broadly supportive of the newspaper’s campaign, took to describing me as a paedophile apologist.
Back to that moment in the green room. I was debating the issue with a representative of a campaign group composed largely of concerned mothers, which was supportive of what the newspaper was trying to do, if not entirely comfortable with their approach.
While waiting to go on air, I took my chance. “I’d really appreciate it”, I said to her, “if you and your fellow campaigners would stop calling me a paedophile apologist. I’m not. I want to protect children as much as anyone else”.
“OK Richard”, she said. “I’ll stop calling you a paedophile apologist if you stop calling us a mob. We’re not a mob. We’re concerned mothers who want to protect our children”.
I stopped, right then, calling her and those she worked with a mob. And she stopped calling me a paedophile apologist.
It was an important learning moment for me; one that I have thought about a lot over the years.
Campaigning and advocacy work is often sustained by a belief in the essential rightness of our own positions, and the essential wrongness of those standing for things we oppose. It is then a small step to conclude that those offering opposing viewpoints are merely ignorant and foolish, or acting out of bad faith, or all of these things and more.
The language we use, about ourselves and about those we oppose, often tends to reflect this binary mindset: often simplistic, sometimes downright abusive.
Yet achieving meaningful change, more often than not, relies on building bridges and fostering solidarity, not laying down trenches and emphasising what are often relatively superficial divisions.
And this means listening as much as telling, and being open to learning from those we seek to influence, rather than assuming we have the monopoly of wisdom.
Richard Garside
Director
In parliament
Our research on joint enterprise convictions was cited by Kate Osamor MP in parliament last month. Her intervention followed our report, The Usual Suspects, published last year, which found that half of all those convicted of homicide in cases involving four or more defendants were from black and minority ethnic communities.
You can watch the exchange here.
We have also been keeping an eye on parliamentary developments on the awful Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence. Last month, the House of Commons Library published this useful briefing on the IPP sentence. Our friends at the Justice Unions Parliamentary Group (JUPG) have also been keeping an eye on parliamentary exchanges.
- Here is Labour MP Paula Barker, challenging the Justice Secretary Dominic Raab on when the government will respond to the Justice Committee report into the sentence.
- And here is Conservative MP James Daly, highlighting the toll on the mental health of prisoners subject to IPP.
Last October, we called for the release of prisoners on IPP sentences who have served time beyond the tariff set by the court. The call came in our report on the psychological impact of the IPP on prisoners. You can read it here.
On our website
For some years we have been running an occasional series of comment pieces on the fraught topic of transgender prisoners, focusing in particular on the housing of male prisoners, who identify as women, in women's prisons. The issue has attracted fresh controversy in recent weeks, following the housing of a male prisoner with rape convictions in Cornton Vale women’s prison in Scotland.
In the latest piece on our website about this issue, the international law scholar Dr Alessandra Asteriti writes on some of the legal issues raised by current policies. You can access all the articles in our ‘debating transgender prisons policy’ series here.
For those whose troubled lives, and lack of support, end up going in and out of prison, their experience is akin to serving a life sentence on an instalment plan, observes Mike Guilfoyle, in his latest article on his time as a probation officer.
“Sir Robert Mark, Commissioner of the Met in the 1970s, remarked that ‘a good police force is one that catches more crooks than it employs’, which, when you think about it, sets a pretty low bar”.
Read Richard Garside’s short piece on the investigation of misogyny and racism in London’s Metropolitan police.
If you would like to propose an article for our comment pages, you can find the contributor guidelines here.
Coming up
We are currently finalising our work programme for the next few years, following the completion of our new strategy last year. Among our plans are a new programmes on youth violence, and on the impact of indeterminate imprisonment. We will also be relaunching a new and improved ‘Last month in criminal justice webinar series’.
You'll hear all about these plans, and more, via this bulletin.
Support our work
In the last 12 months, around one pound in every ten we received in income came from individual donations. We are so appreciative of the vital support we receive from our donors and supporters.
If you like what we do, and can afford to make a donation to support our important work, we would be very grateful.
You can also spread the word about our work by forwarding on this bulletin to others and encouraging them to sign up.
