Irelands Prison System

bget

I dont know if any of read recently that a prisoner in portlaoise who is in jail for a serious crime has managed to impregnant his partner during prison visiting time.
This sparked a discusion amoung a few of us and several things came up and just wondering what people think about them!!

*that sentances are too lenient, particularly for sexual related crimes
*that multiple sentances being served concurently is a disgrace
*that rather than improving jails to the high standard of portlaoise that more prisons should be built to bare essential standard like mount joy
*that life should mean life!!!!!
*And basically that all the 'extra cirricular' activities should be minimised and that prisoners should spend more time alone.. how can we expect to rehabilitate prisoners if they are too busy in jail to actually thing about what they have done and the consequences of it.

Your thought's please!!!

Fremen

And basically that all the 'extra cirricular' activities should be minimised and that prisoners should spend more time alone.. how can we expect to rehabilitate prisoners if they are too busy in jail to actually thing about what they have done and the consequences of it.

Isolating prisoners runs the risk of being very destructive. It's for good reason that solitary confinement is among the most severe punishments handed out in prison.

I think providing prisoners with constructive activities could actually be quite helpful. Having a young offender learn a trade while he's inside might turn his life around.

The alternative is for him to sit in his cell, staring at the wall and using drugs, with no-one to notice that he's using. Because he will have access to drugs, that's a certainty.

karen3212

Hi,
I don't know if you saw the recent article in the Telegraph about scientists talking about where in our brains the faults might lie, when we become amoral.
Of course we've known for a long time that a child in a bad environment may also end up despising people, with all sorts of problems. If you had been abused and beaten as a child, do you think society should continue to inflict punishment on you as an adult, or should we do our best to prove that not everyone is as cruel as your parents were. I think we should do our best to improve the lives of people in prisons, so that when they come out they can contribute to society. They only get one life too.

Zambia

I think all prisons should have Exercise bikes linked to a generator...for 8 hours a day the prisoners would cycle these bikes. Providing power for the prison then given a few hours TV and off to bed.... after they are given an hour clkeaning the prison.

Shorter tougher sentences etc

FTA69

The fact you are insinuating that prisons are like holiday camps indicates to me you have never spent time in one, or have no experience of those who did. In short it seems to me you don't know what you're talking about. Prisons are horrible places for the majority of those inside them, you are faced with a depressing, monotonous boredom for months on end, occasionally speckled with drugs and violence. Sounds like a right laugh doesn't it? Especially when you consider the forms of weapons used, razor blades melted into toothbrush handles, rechargeable batteries in socks and iron bars extracted from prison furniture. I guarantee you if you were in a cell with someone continually sticking a blunt needle into their groin you wouldn't find it such a breeze at all.

*that rather than improving jails to the high standard of portlaoise that more prisons should be built to bare essential standard like mount joy

Mountjoy is massively overcrowded with the majority of the inmates being chronic heroin addicts. Sticking people into such conditions (having to sh*t in buckets etc) doesn't rehabilitate them at all, it brutalises them and practically gurantees they'll be back in prison within a short space of time. Is that how you expect society to benefit?

And basically that all the 'extra cirricular' activities should be minimised and that prisoners should spend more time alone.. how can we expect to rehabilitate prisoners if they are too busy in jail to actually thing about what they have done and the consequences of it.

Are you on a wind up? The way you rehabilitate someone is by getting them off the gear, training them in some sort of a skill and trying to restore some semblance of self-confidence to them so they won't end committing crime again. Banging them into solitary will just drive them insane, encourage them to take more drugs and will result in them doing the same when they are outside again.

This sort of attitude annoys me to death, middle-class people whinging about crime and anti-social behaviour despite most of them living in areas where the above are almost non-existant.

seamus

As FTA points out, brutalising criminals isn't necessarily the best course of action. I always feel that people who think that prisoners should be locked up 24/7 on their own and left to rot, are the same people who'd like to see them beaten or executed, except that it's not legal here.

Think about it this way - someone goes to prison and spends however many months treated like an animal and with little human contact. This person was not educated, logical or overly rational when they went in. Do you think they're going to emerge repentant, or harbouring major grudges and hatred for the society that put them in there?

Most criminals are aware that what they are doing is considered wrong, but they don't consider it to be wrong. So when they're locked up, they don't feel, "Ah well, I was an idiot". They feel, "Those ****ers, locking me up for doing nothing. I'll show them".

Now, I'm definitely not in favour of the kind of crap that's gone on recently - prisoners having mobiles, and going mad because their TVs were taken. They can **** off. However, education is the key I think. A more military-style approach to the prison system, rather than focussing on the incarceration would prove more effective IMO.

I will admit however to having very little experience of what goes on in prisons.

hullaballoo

One of the primary problems in prisons is that they are still effectively Universities of Vice. Prisoners learn how not to get caught next time. This is especially true of places such as Arbour Hill.

In Mountjoy, the prison is in such a state that it's killing prisoners - they're literally festering in the rot of the prison. They readily have access to drugs, and most who might go in without a drug problem will leave with one. It's a control tactic used by those prisoners who have the greatest means to achieve it.

What's needed is a complete reform of the prison system, something akin to what seamus suggested. There should be an emphasis on rehabillitation and education - to teach people why their acts are considered wrong in society. They should have access to libraries and the opportunity to attend lectures.

The other aspect is that there should be a transitionary period before release into society so that they aren't simply unleashed one day, back into freedom.

Not every criminal deserves to be locked up and have the key thrown away. Such an attitude undermines the justice system: if the punishment for robbery is to be locked up for life/beaten etc., then the robber might as well shoot the victim - that way (i) he'll have a better chance of getting away with it if there's no one to identify him and (ii) he will suffer the same fate if he is caught (save for the infliction of the death penalty - but it is unlikely that will ever be reintroduced in Ireland).

bget

FTA69 wrote:

Are you on a wind up? The way you rehabilitate someone is by getting them off the gear, training them in some sort of a skill and trying to restore some semblance of self-confidence to them so they won't end committing crime again. Banging them into solitary will just drive them insane, encourage them to take more drugs and will result in them doing the same when they are outside again.

Are you forget that this are criminals.. What kind of justice is it to send them to jail and have the walk free after a ridiculously short sentance with more qualifications than before they went it. And i dont buy the agruement that these qualifications will give them something to do other than crime when they get out because there wil ALWAYS be someone to drag them right back into it.

FTA69 wrote:

This sort of attitude annoys me to death, middle-class people whinging about crime and anti-social behaviour despite most of them living in areas where the above are almost non-existant.

Excuse me i resent this personal remark. I grew up surrounded by crime seeing everyone i cared about being pulled into it. Constantly fighting to steer clear of it.
I see first hand people who come out of our prison system and I can assure you not one of them has been even slightly reformed.

robinph

bget wrote:

Are you forget that this are criminals.. What kind of justice is it to send them to jail and have the walk free after a ridiculously short sentance with more qualifications than before they went it. And i dont buy the agruement that these qualifications will give them something to do other than crime when they get out because there wil ALWAYS be someone to drag them right back into it.

It depends on if you view the prison system as somewhere that society can exact revenge on it's inhabitants for any wrongdoings, or somewhere to encourage them to become useful members of society on their release.

Clearly you are for the revenge model.

mountainyman

Is prison the punishment or a place where punishment is facilitated?

The situation in portlaoise is the result of the abdication of our well paid prison guards.

The guards should ALL be sacked and allowed to reapply for their jobs at 50% of the salary.
Bring in Poles and Ukrainians to do the work.
All you need to be a screw is:
[1] to be a scumbag
[2] to be able to win a fight when there are 10guards and one prisoner.

bget get you gone You'd fit in better in the thunderdome.

MM

bget

robinph wrote:

It depends on if you view the prison system as somewhere that society can exact revenge on it's inhabitants for any wrongdoings, or somewhere to encourage them to become useful members of society on their release.

Clearly you are for the revenge model.

Not necessarily.. Can you honestly tell me you think its just that criminals in jail get qalifications they otherwise wouldn't have when their victims can't.

A friend of mind was telling me of a 17 year old girl who was murdered by her boyfriend in her area 20 years ago.. The girl and her family were and are close to my friends family.. This girl had just finished her leaving cert and wanted to study business, her boyfriend was older and unemployed. He is now free and on top of that he has a business degree... how just is that?

seamus

bget wrote:

He is now free and on top of that he has a business degree... how just is that?

Perhaps you feel that he should have been jailed for the rest of his life?

How does jailing someone for the rest of their life facilitate their rehabilitation?

bget

I didn't say anything about the rest of his live but infairness he was convicted 20 years ago. he's been out for two.. Thats 18 years for murder... The guy is in his early 40's stil loads of time for him to get married have have a family and everything..if he doesn't end up back inside. It's not right

mountainyman

Yeah it is 18 years for murder.
We need to get away from the victim centred model that is so in vogue at the moment.
If you would like sentences in excess of that why not bring in the death penalty.

MM

seamus

bget wrote:

I didn't say anything about the rest of his live but infairness he was convicted 20 years ago. he's been out for two.. Thats 18 years for murder... The guy is in his early 40's stil loads of time for him to get married have have a family and everything..if he doesn't end up back inside. It's not right

Well to be fair, either you decide that he spends his life inside, or you accept that he's done his time and is now free to get on with his life, presumably having repented for his crime.

oscarBravo

mountainyman banned for trolling.

extragon

The purpose of prison should be to protect society - not to pander to the emotions of victims or moralists.

Society is not protected, except in the rare case of a life sentence. IMO sentences should be MUCH longer, or even indefinite, but should mainly consist of supervision in the community, of varying strictness, with spells in prison as part of a carrot and stick approach. But the trouble with any attempt to educate convicts away from a life of crime is that some will do very well! Then we'll have moralists complaining they haven't been punished.

FTA69

bget wrote:

Are you forget that this are criminals.. What kind of justice is it to send them to jail and have the walk free after a ridiculously short sentance with more qualifications than before they went it.

So then what's the point of prisons? Surely they are there to protect society from those who would do it harm? And if that's the case then society will be better served by having less criminals rather than simply detaining them until they commit crime again. Harsh sentencing isn't a deterrent, you only have to look at the USA to see that.

And i dont buy the agruement that these qualifications will give them something to do other than crime when they get out because there wil ALWAYS be someone to drag them right back into it.

You can only be dragged back in if you choose to let that happen, if you are qualified to make something of yourself you are less likely to do so. Prisoners are immensely proud of certs they get in jail, especially considering most of them never achieved anything in their lives. If they have some sense of self-confidence and the ability to work and do better they won't get involved in crime. You are also ignoring the fact most commit crime because they are addicted to hard drugs, that issue must also be addressed.

Excuse me i resent this personal remark. I grew up surrounded by crime seeing everyone i cared about being pulled into it. Constantly fighting to steer clear of it.

Good for you, I'm 19 and have seen people I grew up with murdered (stabbing) as well as dying because of joyriding and drug addiction/alcoholism, so apparently we're in the same boat. Surely then you would seek a model which is superior to the conveyer belt- lock 'em up one that we have at the moment?

I see first hand people who come out of our prison system and I can assure you not one of them has been even slightly reformed.

My point exactly, and why do you think that is? Do you think keeping them inside longer will make a difference, or f*ck them up even more, and you can guarantee its the latter which will happen.

robinph

bget wrote:

Not necessarily.. Can you honestly tell me you think its just that criminals in jail get qalifications they otherwise wouldn't have when their victims can't.

Yes.

bget wrote:

A friend of mind was telling me of a 17 year old girl who was murdered by her boyfriend in her area 20 years ago.. The girl and her family were and are close to my friends family.. This girl had just finished her leaving cert and wanted to study business, her boyfriend was older and unemployed. He is now free and on top of that he has a business degree... how just is that?

That sounds like the system worked perfectly to me and that there is now someone released back into society that is unlikely to have cause to commit crime again. The only problem that I can see is if you only want the prison system to provide revenge for the victims as it's only purpose.

Rev Hellfire

Surely the purpose of prison is to provide a deterrent to crime and remove from society those which may cause it harm.

I'm of the opinion that to much use is made of it, certainly for minor crimes it is not appropriate when some other punitive punishment can be exacted (ie. community service).

One thing I would like to see is offenders forced to reimburse their victims for the damage they cause, wages/dole garnished or assets sold etc.

bget

FTA69 wrote:

You can only be dragged back in if you choose to let that happen, if you are qualified to make something of yourself you are less likely to do so. Prisoners are immensely proud of certs they get in jail, especially considering most of them never achieved anything in their lives. If they have some sense of self-confidence and the ability to work and do better they won't get involved in crime.

I know that and i see your point. But convicted criminals can find it very hard to find work once they are released. The frustration of this coupled with having people trying to get you back into crime does enevitably result in many returning to crime. Good intentions only go so far before reality kicks in..

FTA69

Exactly, so surely then you'd agree that if a criminal was trained to do something else and was helped to beat their addiction they would be less likely to commit crime when they are released?

bonkey

bget wrote:

I know that and i see your point. But convicted criminals can find it very hard to find work once they are released. The frustration of this coupled with having people trying to get you back into crime does enevitably result in many returning to crime. Good intentions only go so far before reality kicks in..

You seem to be mistaking the argument that "punishment is not the right solution" to mean "the current system is the right solution".

Its not a binary decision. I don't think there's anyone who would argue that the system cannot and should not be improved.

johnnyskeleton

bget wrote:

I dont know if any of read recently that a prisoner in portlaoise who is in jail for a serious crime has managed to impregnant his partner during prison visiting time.

I would advise against extrapolating theories on the criminal justice system based on one particular instance, especially one as reported in our often biased media.

*that sentances are too lenient, particularly for sexual related crimes

Some sentences are too lenient, others are too harsh.In addition, I don't think there is anything extraordinary about sentences for sexual offences

*that multiple sentances being served concurently is a disgrace

What you might not appreciate is that sometimes several minor offences are taken into account in the sentence for the main offence

*that rather than improving jails to the high standard of portlaoise that more prisons should be built to bare essential standard like mount joy

I think this has been well canvassed above, but mountjoy really is a horrible place.

*that life should mean life!!!!!

A life sentence lasts for a person's natural life. The executive (i.e. the Minister for Justice through the parole board) can give temporary release, but if the person reoffends they can go straight back into jail.

*And basically that all the 'extra cirricular' activities should be minimised and that prisoners should spend more time alone.. how can we expect to rehabilitate prisoners if they are too busy in jail to actually thing about what they have done and the consequences of it.

Extra cirricular activities are not that great - it is more like reading the odd book than being on holidays (which might come as quite a shock to evening herald readers).

Your thought's please!!!

There are many considerations in the criminal justice system, but the ultimate goal is to protect society. It might seem distasteful to hold your hand out to someone you may consider to be a criminal, but it is worse to tar all people in prison with the same brush. Some will be unrepentant gangland murderers but others will be once off offenders who are extremenly unlikely to offend again, and it is better to make something productive out of them than to turn them into worse criminals.

Gobán Saor

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Some sentences are too lenient, others are too harsh.

What sentences do you think are too harsh. I have to say, none particularly spring to mind.

SeanW

robinph wrote:

Yes.


That sounds like the system worked perfectly to me and that there is now someone released back into society that is unlikely to have cause to commit crime again. The only problem that I can see is if you only want the prison system to provide revenge for the victims as it's only purpose.

And the murderer was not sentenced to life because?

people who commit murder, or commit a crime involving a serious level of malice, in my view should be put away for life. Then it doesn't matter what their conditions because they're not getting back in to society.

It's a waste of time to try to rehabilitate some people and where the perp involved is just plain evil (like medium to high figures in organised crime), its an even bigger waste of time.

On the other hand, first time offenders and those guilty of smaller crimes, or have genuine extenuating circumstances, should be treated very well and have plenty of rehabilitation opportunities.

seamus

SeanW wrote:

It's a waste of time to try to rehabilitate some people and where the perp involved is just plain evil (like medium to high figures in organised crime), its an even bigger waste of time.

But who decides then who gets rehabilitated, and who doesn't?

Perhaps it's certain crimes you're thinking of? Although no matter what the crime, you can probably find *someone* for whom rehabilitation worked.

So why not attempt to rehabilitate everyone who requires it? The big problem is that there's little will to rehabilitate. Most of western society seems to have taken to just locking them up and calling it punishment. There are only a few pockets on the planet where genuine attempts to understand criminal behaviour have yielded positive results and relatively decent rehabilitation programmes.

FTA69

Gob&#225 wrote: »

What sentences do you think are too harsh. I have to say, none particularly spring to mind.

Considering mandatory sentances aren't in effect most of the time, sentences can range from harsh to leniant depending on the judge, even for the same crime.

For instance I know a fella who was 18, no record, was caught with 8oz of hash and was sentenced to a year in prison. Such a sentence for €600 worth of cannabis is ridiculously harsh.

Gobán Saor

FTA69 wrote:

For instance I know a fella who was 18, no record, was caught with 8oz of hash and was sentenced to a year in prison. Such a sentence for €600 worth of cannabis is ridiculously harsh.

Hmmm, isn't 8 oz is a wee bit more than "personal" use - how many joints does that translate into?

FTA69

It's one ounce off a bar, which would be about the area of 1/3 of a mouse mat. (Best example I can give). You'd get around 15 joints off a quarter ounce.

It wasn't for personal use but its still a relatively small amount of product, and certainly not worth destroying the life of an 18year old over.

seamus

FTA69 wrote:

For instance I know a fella who was 18, no record, was caught with 8oz of hash and was sentenced to a year in prison. Such a sentence for €600 worth of cannabis is ridiculously harsh.

Well that depends on your own point of view. As Gobán Saor points out, some people may view 8oz of resin as more than personal use. I would be one of these people. But then of course other people may definitely consider it personal use, particularly for heavy users.

It's the same token as a person going buying a crate of cans to drink. One person may say, "Ah he must be having a party", whereas someone else may consider that a normal weekend's drinking.

The law unfortunately can't really differentiate on these matters. Otherwise everyone can claim to have a massive habit, and say that 4 bars of dope is just "stocking up for the month".

I'd have to disagree that a year in prison (with probably a release after six months) is "destroying" someone's life, particularly someone so young. There is a massive stigma about, "OMG, you're going to have a record", but it's largely not that much of a big deal in normal life. I can count on two hands the number of times I've had to fill in a form that says "Do you have any criminal convictions?".

robinph

SeanW wrote:

And the murderer was not sentenced to life because?

people who commit murder, or commit a crime involving a serious level of malice, in my view should be put away for life. Then it doesn't matter what their conditions because they're not getting back in to society.

But the in the case given it sounds as if that murderer has successfully been rehabilitated, got an education, and can now return to society and perform a useful function (depending on how useful you think a business degree actually is of course). What is to be gained from leaving them locked up in a prison for the rest of their natural life at great cost to the state, other than making the victims family feel that revenge has been served?

FTA69

[QUOTE=seamus

Well that depends on your own point of view. As Gobán Saor points out, some people may view 8oz of resin as more than personal use. I would be one of these people. But then of course other people may definitely consider it personal use, particularly for heavy users.

People used to buy bars for personal use but that was before all the high-quality weed and pollen was about. Your man a know was selling a small bit of it.

It's the same token as a person going buying a crate of cans to drink. One person may say, "Ah he must be having a party", whereas someone else may consider that a normal weekend's drinking.

F*ckin telling me!

I'd have to disagree that a year in prison (with probably a release after six months) is "destroying" someone's life, particularly someone so young.

A middle-class hippie with long hair in Mountjoy for six months? He wouldn't last it, and you can be sure the effect it would have on his future life would be far from beneficial. I'm not for a second saying that class or background should have a bearing on sentence, I just don't think a year in prison is warranted for a small amount of gear.

johnnyskeleton

Gob&#225 wrote: »

What sentences do you think are too harsh. I have to say, none particularly spring to mind.

My first point would be that tough sentences are usually printed in a small paragraph in the paper, while lenient sentences get a half page.

But generally, over 5 years for a first offence in the circuit court would be harsh in my view, imposing a custodial sentence for a non-violent/violating first offence would be a bit harsh.

A sentence for rape over 10 years, without any extreme aggravating factors, would be harsh, and I think generally, juries will tend to opt for manslaughter over murder in many cases - not necessarily because they have followed their charge, but more because they think a life sentence would be harsh

philologos

bget wrote:

Not necessarily.. Can you honestly tell me you think its just that criminals in jail get qalifications they otherwise wouldn't have when their victims can't.

A friend of mind was telling me of a 17 year old girl who was murdered by her boyfriend in her area 20 years ago.. The girl and her family were and are close to my friends family.. This girl had just finished her leaving cert and wanted to study business, her boyfriend was older and unemployed. He is now free and on top of that he has a business degree... how just is that?

If the prisoner has genuinely changed his behaviour for the better, I don't see a problem in him having a degree. As terrible as the crime is, we should forgive those who have changed in jail, and made a new life for themselves when they got back on the outside.

karen3212

bget wrote:

I know that and i see your point. But convicted criminals can find it very hard to find work once they are released. The frustration of this coupled with having people trying to get you back into crime does enevitably result in many returning to crime. Good intentions only go so far before reality kicks in..

That is a good point really, I think parts of our system definately need changing. Though as I've said before I'm for improving it humanely, via education and training whilst people are in prison. And getting them into jobs when they get out, obviously some people still need counselling or other help to adjust back into society.

I've read recently though, that if society helped parents and kids who might be disadvantaged in various way, before their kids got to pre-school, then it would cost us less money-wise overall. I know money isn't everything, but it talks to certain sections of society. Perhaps we will continue on the road to crime prevention, and have far less crime in future. Hopeful

Jotter

johnnyskeleton wrote:

I
Some will be unrepentant gangland murderers but others will be once off offenders who are extremenly unlikely to offend again, and it is better to make something productive out of them than to turn them into worse criminals.

I would agree with this. I knew a guy who was in prison for 2 years for actual bodily harm. He served the whole 2 years and came out a better person for it imo. He served it in mountjoy, i visited him twice and it was an awful place. His room was overcrowded, he slept on a mattress on the floor, his head was shaved bec the place was infested with lice and he said there were rats everywhere.

This imo is how prison should be. A horrible place that you dont ever want to go back to. A punishment.

He came out and got a job as a gardener in a hotel, this guy had never done a days work in all the time I knew him, he was lazy as sin and sat around smoking hash all day. Prison worked on him but he was a once off offender.
Prison doesnt work for people who are hardened criminals. I do think education is a good way to go, that way no offender can pull the 'poor me' card bec they have something to build their new lives upon. I think prison should be hard but productive.

I also think prison should be reserved for criminals who are rapists, peadophiles, drug lords, murderers and people who seriously assault others. I do not think it should be used for shoplifters, non payment of taxes or fines, minor drug offences etc.

I think those people would be far better off serving the community, particularly tax evaders and the like as they would be utterly ashamed being seen cleaning up rubbish or getting graffitti off shutters by their peers.

This bloke I knew also said drugs were everywhere in prison, this needs to stop and i can understand the prison officers turning a blind eye as it makes their life easier in one respect but imo drugs are the root of all evil, imagine how much less crime there would be in a world without drugs. Unfortunately the drug crisis is so bad that I can never see that happening in our lifetime.

Someone also mentioned tougher sentencing for sexual offenders. i dont believe these people can ever be rehabilitated and I think peodphiles in particular should get life for abusing a child, mandatory sentence. This business of letting them out after 2 years and then here they are again for assaulting another child a few years later has to stop.

I saw in the paper a few years ago a man getting 2 yrs for shoplifing cds and on the same page another guy gets 18 mths for sexually assaulting a six yr old - that is just so wrong I cant put it into words.