A sad outcome
Reading Val McDermid's chillingly grisly but compulsive book on the forensic history of crime, poignantly reminded me of working with Marco (not his real name) when he was sentenced to a period of probation supervision.
I was notified via a probation colleague in the local magistrates’ court that Marco had consented to be placed on his order (strictly speaking this was something of Hobson’s choice once consent was deemed otiose) via the Crime Sentences Act 1997 - a residual ritual which was vigorously contested at the time - but deemed important enough for me to aim to seek his clear understanding of its consequences.
Although English was not his first language, he was sufficiently conversant that we were able to engage purposefully and meaningfully in seeking to address the motivating factors in his commission of low level offences of dishonesty and persistent drug usage. What was striking at the time - mental health and drug/alcohol requirements did require consent - was that the level of drug consumption appeared to fall below the threshold that might have meant that such a requirement was warranted.
The pre-sentence report had been prepared by another colleague. At the outset, I had outlined that I would like to undertake a home visit to see Marco. This was, I assessed, an important aspect of a working alliance which underpinned the order. But he demurred and rather than press for this, I opted to try to enlist his support over the currency of supervision so that a more balanced understanding of his domestic situation was open to joint working.
Marco did avail himself of support from a well-regarded community-led project run by a charismatic pastor. This was a welcome adjunct to the supervisory input that I believed best suited his specific needs and aspirations. At the same time as Marco's order, I attended a Crown Court hearing to revoke a separate order on another probationer on my caseload. The facts and personal circumstances of this case appeared in many ways to overlap with Marco's. The sentencing Crown Court judge in this case was noted as being particularly diligent in seeking regular reviews of supervisory progress (written reports in most cases), and was a prominent advocate for such judicial oversight ( strengthened but poorly implemented by Section 178 Criminal Justice Act 2003).
In this case the order was revoked for good progress and the sentencing judges’ approbation of the achievements of the probationer, and my efforts to secure compliance and progress resulted in my offering such an outcome to Marco if compliance and progress remained, as seemed at the time, steady and achievable. But in the interim more measured steps seemed to be merited in view of his halting engagement. I was satisfied that the community resources (which included a pipeline to casual employment) offered the needed ingredients to ensure the likelihood of reoffending could be curtailed and addressed.
It did appear at other times that our supervisory sessions remained terse and uncomfortable as Marco would close down on discussion with very little headway being made. I appreciated that his variable usage of Class A drug - with a methadone prescription monitored via an outreach worker - would colour his mood and the present circumstances, and that he expressed at one meeting (his reporting remained uniformly good), a raw emotional exposure surfacing in our meetings centred on the untimely death of his father in his country of origin.
We reviewed progress at the half way point in the order as was good practice, and identified areas of strength and positive engagement, together with the various strategies adopted to date to enable Marco to desist from drug taking and intermittent offending. He was, I sensed, going through the motions and although I endeavoured to try to better understand the emotional pain that was now a more perceptible part of our meetings, I felt that I was struggling to make more than a superficial impact. Our meetings evinced more of a perfunctory and wearisome exchange and I recognised that I was becoming too easily swayed by these mood changes into accepting what I viewed as a near inevitable relapse.
I canvassed his support workers who appeared to reinforce my perception into this deterioration in his mood and appearance, and they could only offer some broad brush suggestions, as Marco was resolute enough to block offers of support that he sensed might shift him from his enmeshed situation. I spoke at length to his pastor who acknowledged my concerns but his extensive network of contacts was at times compromised by stretched resources and Marco's disengagement was something of a ' when I have time' I will deal with it approach. Nonetheless, he continued to report and I recognised that he was fulfilling his obligations under his order, even though the content of supervision appeared, at least to me, unsatisfactory, and I acknowledged this much to Marco - he remained ' emotionally out of reach' but I looked at the pending timeframe for the balance of his order and viewed the expiry date with something of anticipatory relief!
The penultimate reporting session had been due to take place at the probation office (all efforts to secure his agreement to a home visit had been declined). I was not unduly surprised when he did not report. It was not that unusual for final appointments to be missed - this you can ascribe to a number of well-rehearsed reasons - the absence of a judicial ritual to demarcate such an ending, admirably captured by criminologist Shadd Maruna.
I sent a letter to Marco - breach enforcement action with a week or so before expiry would have been unduly harsh! And the final appointment passed without his appearance. I kept his case file open as I remained confident that at some point he would 'call' into the office to explain his final non-attendance but also his having 'made good' by his order would be something positive to discuss!
About a month later, I was tempted to visit his home address unannounced but opted not to do so. I had a chilling call from a police officer - Marco’s lifeless body had been found at his address - cause of death currently unknown. Due to the physical state of his body when discovered, the initial estimates suggested that he might well have been dead at the time of our last appointment. In spite of my subsequent attempts - aside from a speculative drug overdose - I was never fully appraised as to the exact cause of death from the Coroner’s Court. I remember one of the sparse utterances he would make in Italian when we met – ‘Sto bene’ (I 'm fine).
Did I ever really know the real Marco?