The cost of bail.

There was a song by UB40 from the 1980’s titled “I am a one in ten” good song haunting lyrics and melody and essentially about the problems of living in a society run by an uncaring authority. Fast forward 30 years and things haven’t changed too much, we still are dealing with an uncaring authority who have their own agendas which are seemingly opposed to the desires and wishes of ordinary people. Most ordinary people want violent criminals locked up and held until trial, sadly we don’t get that at all, our prisons are overflowing and the government response is to release on bail as many as they can to relieve the pressure instead of building more prisons or using prison ships.

Express.

AT LEAST a murder a week could be prevented if criminals convicted of other offences were jailed rather than released on bail. This is the shock finding of new figures released last night under the Freedom of Information Act.
They show more than one in 11 of murders – 238 out of 2,107 were committed by “bail bandits” since 2006.
They also committed 125 man-slaughters out of a total 1, 305 and 446 rapes. Yet ministers are planning to increase the number of suspects given bail in a bid to cut costs.
Javed Khan, chief executive of Victim Support, said: “It’s traumatic enough being a victim of serious crime. It adds insults to injury when a victim finds out that the offender was out on bail at the time. These figures are cause for concern and could further undermine confidence in the criminal justice system.
“Victims want an effective criminal justice system that cuts crime and stops reoffending.”

It’s always the same that when it comes to cutting costs, ministers and other public servants immediately home in on the few areas that people do not want to see cut. Same with the NHS, they’ll cut ambulance crews, doctors and nurses but not administration, same with any other service, they’ll immediately go for the frontline stuff rather than the people pushing the paperwork around, possibly because they leave the decisions on cuts to those who push the paperwork around. After all, who is going to sack themselves?

So, here we go again, statistics tell us that 1 in 10 of all violent crimes involving a death of a victim are committed by those already out on bail so what is the government planning on doing? Releasing more people on bail, though whether or not this will bump the statistics is unknown at this time, it just sends the wrong message out that the government just don’t give a damn about us so long as costs are kept down.

Then again, if you’re arrested over certain crimes against the states pets you probably will have a struggle to get bail, just ask Emma West, somehow I doubt she’d be any danger to society, she just said what a lot of people were thinking on camera. Didn’t stop her from being held on remand without bail until just before Christmas though, despite the fact there was no violence on her part.
Not that I’m suggesting that bail should be denied to everyone, but if you are arrested for a violent crime then you should not get bail, if it’s shoplifting, then unless you are one of Fagin’s habitual criminals then keeping you locked away is not a good option. It’s all down to circumstances and should never be down to costs.

I was never one for conspiracy theories, but I am starting to wonder if this is just some sort of softening up process to allow an extreme authoritarian government enforcing draconian laws in a “V for Vendetta” style state. Wouldn’t surprise me at all if that were the case now, after all, winding the public up seems to have developed into an art form by the powers that be.

 

7 comments for “The cost of bail.

  1. January 7, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    “after all, winding the public up seems to have developed into an art form by the powers that be.”

    I agree. It’s a conclusion I don’t much like (I prefer stupidity) yet these things just keep happening.

  2. john in cheshire
    January 7, 2012 at 8:19 pm

    I have, over the years, pondered a possible solution to over-crowding of our prisons. And my solution is quite simple. We provide a finite number of prison places; say 80,000. Once they are filled, the next person who commits a crime is executed. And so it goes until there is a place in prison; all prisoners serve full term and those who are fortunate enough to have been jailed for murder, serve life. This solution has two purposes; it ensures that the cost of punishment is contained and it also makes wrong-doers think twice about committing a crime.

  3. john malpas
    January 8, 2012 at 4:20 am

    Open a prison in Sudan run by their locals. Cheap , jobs for the sudanese , effective.

  4. January 8, 2012 at 5:58 am

    “It’s all down to circumstances and should never be down to costs.”

    Spot on! And if there were real consequences for the people taking these decisions, we could cut that statistic down to something much less than one in ten.

  5. January 8, 2012 at 9:29 am

    It’s always the same that when it comes to cutting costs, ministers and other public servants immediately home in on the few areas that people do not want to see cut.

    That’s it in one – it’s designed to be so.

    [By the way, QM, should you read this, it’s impossible to comment at your place because you have the embedded below type of comment where we choose a profile. When we comment, it goes blank and the comment does not come up. Only on this type. With the Blogger pop-up type, it’s fine. It’s not that I’ve been ignoring you. Ironies is like this too.]

    • January 8, 2012 at 3:32 pm

      I’ll look into that James.

      Ok, now it’s now set to pop-up. 🙂

  6. Able
    January 9, 2012 at 1:36 am

    Hmm, 1 in 11 murders committed by someone out on bail. So how many are committed by those who either were caught and given ‘community service’ or those who had already had convictions (probably multiple) for violent crime but were released after some derisory sentence?

    I live in a city of about 125,000 people. The local police I speak to express the opinion that the vast majority of all the crimes committed in the city are committed by a small (less than 100) people. All these people have multiple previous convictions and yet get either minimal sentences, community punishment or cautions when caught committing yet another crime.

    I suspect if we exclude non-violent crime, non-repeat offenders and expel all foreign criminals that we would have both excess prison places available, and most crime would simply cease. But hey, the rights of these scrotes to ruin everybody elses life is more important than punishing them isn’t it FFS

Comments are closed.