Bucks Bites RSS Feed


The perfect wife and mother, Rebecca runs a home, a village magazine and is working on her novel. She does not visit the gym or jog but is in amazingly good shape. She enjoys photography, playing the piano and arguing with the TV. She lives in Amersham with her husband and youngest child (aged nine). Her eldest, now 26, lives and works in Buckinghamshire.

Community Payback and you

By Rebecca »

My first thought was: ‘Please don’t make me have to think of ways to punish noisy neighbours or burglars.’ My second thought was, ‘Oh, hell. What are other people going to suggest for offenders?’

It’s not as bad as it seems. We’re talking about crimes in the neighbourhood, as far as I can tall. Of course some might have graffiti creators locked up. Other might want to have car thieves whipped. I sense there’s a swathe of British society which would still recommend capital punishment for some offences.

And then more than this. How can we, the humble public decide? We can barely discipline our own children. We apparently need to be told what to eat, when and how to exercise, when not to take our car out (i.e. in the snow) and how to avoid debt. All very basic stuff.

It’s been a struggle finding any detailed information about this initiative. All we’re told by the slightly Northern, female prison-warden type voice on the ad is, ‘Justice seen, justice done’.

Are we deemed able enough to decide how offenders’ free hard labour puts back into the community but not responsible enough to know what crimes are punished this way?

Offenders are to wear bright orange jackets marked 'Community Payback' while they're working. ‘The jackets mean you can see that they're paying back for their crimes.’ Ways an offender can pay back include:
• removing graffiti

• picking up litter

• repairing and decorating community centres

• clearing undergrowth from paths and other public areas

• working on environmental projects

We’re told that the safety of the public comes first and there are very strict criteria the offenders have to fulfil before they’re let loose in the community. Like what?

There are still two things which aren’t clear to me. What criteria are used to ensure the safety of the public? And what crimes will be punished by the community payback scheme? Why so little information?

Are we deemed able enough to decide how offenders’ free hard labour puts back into the community but not responsible enough to know what crimes are punished this way? I’m sceptical about the whole endeavour. We are also allowed to know that the public’s safety is paramount but not how this will be enforced.

By the way, has anyone asked ex- offenders what sort of punishment would work? I have a feeling they might enlighten us all.

Would a resident causing noise every night without a second thought for their neighbours feel punished by clearing litter, renovating a community centre or clearing thick undergrowth? I don’t know. So how would I select a punitive activity for one?

The sketchy information the public is being offered makes me dubious. I think we’re being made to think we have powers and a say in things. Delve any deeper into the initiative and the information dries up.

Frankly I resent this. It’s artificial. Someone has decided that if they make us, the public, think we have some say in matters, we will be assuaged and forget the monumental issues facing society and the country.

As I’ve stated before, when a citizen breaks the law or social code, surely they are aware of this at the time. Since I’m in honest mode, I’ll raise my hand and say I‘ve previously taken an item from a hotel room. Theft. I’m a criminal too. So, on goes the hi-vis jacket and armband and down to paint the community centre.

Prison doesn’t work, I’m not sure community payback will be any more successful though I agree with the thinking behind it.

There’s a great scene in To Catch a Thief where Cary Grant is defining the problems of being a former cat burglar. Talking to the insurance chap he states that whenever some jewellery goes missing, the whole town shouts, ‘John Robie – The Cat!’ When the insurance chap fiddles his expenses or nicks a towel from a hotel room, he has no such problem. Invisible crimes get invisible punishments.

Again, it’s the obvious culprits (poorer, more deprived individuals who haven’t used the education system to the full and don’t know their Latin conjugations) who will be serving their sentence in full view of society.

Those lovely suited chaps and gals who manipulate figures on their tax returns will still remain anonymous. Even a jail sentence is unseen – no public humiliation for them. Yet their crimes are much more far-reaching than noisy youths hanging around.

There’s no getting away from the fact that punishment falls broadly into two categories: deprivation of physical hardship. I think punishment is just a sticking plaster anyway. It doesn’t tackle the deep and sometimes incomprehensible reasons for why some people err and others don’t.

And I’m not prepared to even consider the idea that ‘Some people are just bad’. That’s a get out, a lazy way of saying there’s nothing we can do. Too easy, too convenient and meaningless.

Prison doesn’t work, I’m not sure community payback will be any more successful though I agree with the thinking behind it.

If it does work, I want to hear about it. Though now I’m thinking that if free hard work is a punishment for crime in the neighbourhood (will it just be anti-social behaviour-type misdemeanors?) then my own free hard work is even more baffling.

Although perhaps not. Just desserts for my hotel shower caps and soaps and oh, that time in M&S when I bought a two-pack of two vests and there were actually three inside and I said nothing. Or those times I’ve been given too much change. The list is endless and so is my punishment I fear.

Amersham can’t hope to benefit much from this service: we have a fairly low crime rate and generally well-behaved citizens. So will it be that places with higher anti-social crime rates will begin looking rather smarter and more attractive while bonnie Bucks gets increasingly dilapidated?

Perhaps then we can borrow offenders from other areas whose towns and surrounding areas have been greatly improved? Would there be an exchange of labour from one borough to another? Some might have a surplus while others have a shortage.

Meanwhile I want information about this scheme to be accessible. We’re been offered tidbits and I want the whole story to chew over and consider. Then maybe I can make an informed decision.


Comments(11)

tom.marlow says...
6:26pm Wed 17 Feb 10

I think most of the objective studies that have been made show that crime rates tend to correlate with the ambient social and economic conditions far more than punishment or deterrent.
.
Places and times when there is low unemployment, good education, pleasant living environment have significantly lower crime rates.
.
The death penalty in those parts of the US that still have it doesn't seem to have much effect on the murder rate. Being realistic, if it really was a deterrent, you'd only have to hang one person to prove that you were serious about it and there would be no more murders.
.
In the old days in this country people were reputedly hung for stealing sheep and other theft. It didnt stop them from doing it, they were just desperately hungry and took the risk.

aspen g says...
12:46pm Thu 18 Feb 10

Good blog!

Personally I don't think that Community Punishment is addressing the issues really, especially with youth offending.

Ideally we need to get young people to see the consequences of their behaviour. Being young and reckless, most young people don't think on a long term basis, until after a crime has been committed by which time it is too late.

One thing I definitely agree with Rebecca is that sentencing in the criminal justice system is disproportionate.

For example the government spending X amount on advertising for prosecuting benefits fiddlers, yet allows massive tax loopholes to non doms, corporations etc and MPs to fiddle expenses?!

No wonder people lose respect for the law. The law is only beneficial to protect the rich.

Rebecca Leon says...
5:30pm Thu 18 Feb 10

Both these comments agree with my thoughts. But what on earth do we do?
:
I'm interested in Tom's comments i.e. about social conditions being the deciding factor.
:
I'm also wondering how different crimes arise from different conditions. We don't all murder people who annoy us or steal things we want (maybe because it's too difficult and we're too busy!)
:
Are we willing to spend money on making society better for everyone then I wonder?
:
I still intend to get answers about the controlled information the public is being given about this Community Payback scheme.
:
I even think people in luminous jackets will be indistinguishable from pothole fillers, streetlight maintenance chaps or the AA man. Unless we get really close.

Melanie1 says...
6:06pm Thu 18 Feb 10

I heard something on the radio this morning about schemes like this and apparently there was some form of public consultation about the forms of punishment that should be introduced to help 'reform' young offenders. I definitely heard mention of the stocks, a desert island and leaving them to fight it out in a room until only one was left alive and he would then be imprisoned for life!
.
What's the answer? I don't know but the present system doesn't appear to be working!

Blueberry says...
1:35pm Fri 19 Feb 10

It's the likelihood of getting caught or not that has the most effect on crime rates, not the severity of the penalty, which makes sense when you think about it.

tom.marlow says...
3:57pm Fri 19 Feb 10

Do you really think that "the likely hood being caught" is what stops people committing crimes?
.
Thats a very sad and depressing view of humanity, that fortunately I dont think is true.
.
Most people are fundamentally honest. They don't commit crimes simply because they have no inclination or need to do so. I might steal some food if I was starving or attack someone if threatened in some way, but in neither case does the likelyhood of getting caught come into it.

Blueberry says...
1:58pm Mon 22 Feb 10

Tom I didn't mean to imply that it's the likelihood of being caught that stops most people committing crimes.
.
But, for those of a criminal mindset, the likelihood of getting caught is a bigger deterrent than the severity of punishment and so that is what has most effect on crime rates.

Rosa Klebb says...
10:01am Tue 23 Feb 10

Tom - wholeheartedly agreed.
:
Blueberry - I'm not even convinced there is a criminal 'mindset'. That's a bit too convenient too. As though crimials are another race. Are people born criminals? Or do they develop into them?
:
How does that account for my hotel crimes?
:
And when new legislation comes in, new crimes are created aren't they?
:
And take into account context. It's a crime to kill. But it's not a crime if you're a soldier with orders to kill. Bizarre.
:
So do soldiers have 'criminal mindsets'? Or are they just in the right job where they can murder legitimately? Where the whole country (overall) supports their crime too?
:
I don't have any answers. I think crime is fascinating...

J B Blackett says...
5:55pm Thu 25 Feb 10

Rosa Klebb wrote:
Tom - wholeheartedly agreed.
:
Blueberry - I'm not even convinced there is a criminal 'mindset'. That's a bit too convenient too. As though crimials are another race. Are people born criminals? Or do they develop into them?
:
How does that account for my hotel crimes?
:
And when new legislation comes in, new crimes are created aren't they?
:
And take into account context. It's a crime to kill. But it's not a crime if you're a soldier with orders to kill. Bizarre.
:
So do soldiers have 'criminal mindsets'? Or are they just in the right job where they can murder legitimately? Where the whole country (overall) supports their crime too?
:
I don't have any answers. I think crime is fascinating...
It also intrigues me.
.
Science is on the verge of declaring there is such a thing as a 'criminal' gene. It seems some are hankering to prove everything is down to Nature and not as much to Nuture as used to be thought. This could mean all the crime is predestined to be carried out by pre-programmed perpetrators.
.
Common sense however still seems to point to things being a mixture of Nature and Nuture. People are part of the physical world but their behaviour is not as predicable as science would have us believe. There are as yet elements of human behaviour that are not understood or even recognized. It is as complex as Life and Universe combined.
.
If everything about human behaviour was eventually understood, that time may signal the end of the humankind as we know it. And that encompasses the time that criminology is a 'completed' and fully understood science.
.
But that's another topic.
.
Regards
PS There are all sorts of degree and shades of criminality so there is not a clear dividing line between 'normal law-abiding' folk and the others. The 'mindset' definition could be misleading.

Rebecca Leon says...
5:57pm Fri 5 Mar 10

We might even go back to the Victorian era when criminals were thought to possess shared physical attributes...
:
Stocky builds, near-set eyes...

wisegirl says...
4:13pm Fri 12 Mar 10

Another great article Rebecca.
I think this another one of those initiatives to try and fool us into thinking we actually have any say in anything.
Although I watched an interesting programme on a programme that is being tested whereby offenders need to hear the feelings of those they offended. For example, someone who sprays graffiti over a lovely white wall will hear from their victim, how distressed, angry they were. Like Rebecca, I am wary about this, epsecially, i feel we are being hoodwinked into thinking we are free and in control when ( see your brilliant article 'nowhere to run...) it's just to lull us into a false sense of empowerment, when it's being taken, bit by bit from under our noses.


RSS