Long-term prisoner release process: consultation

I do not find this acceptable. People’s safety comes first and for those who have been assaulted or attacked or raped, like myself, they, we, I am at risk of danger, repeat attacks, repeat rapes.

The people convicted and sentenced to more than 4 years imprisonment are there because a judge ruled that they were a danger and required that length of time. They are there for a reason.

Allowing them to be released to the public because of population control is awful decision making and a terrible compromise. If you need to release people early, do it with lower offenders, shorter sentences, those with longer ones are in there for a longer time for a reason.

Do not allow these people to be released before their parole, you will see a drastic increase in crime and likely repeat crimes, which will only result in more sentencing. You will also lose the respect of majority of the public, including myself who’s rapist is in prison currently. Releasing him would almost 100% guarantee I will be attacked again. It is worth considering not only the physical harm that this can and will cause on people but also the extreme emotional distress caused to many victims and victims families.

The fixed point was put into place to prevent and avoid this exact circumstance from occurring.

Risk to Public Safety: Allowing prisoners to be released before the fixed point or recommended release time poses a risk. High-risk, dangerous individuals may reoffend once back in the community. Statistically this is actually significantly higher than I would assume most of the public are aware.

Historical Evidence: Even those released on parole at the appropriate fixed point have reoffended. The 2020-21 reconviction rate of 27.9% in Scotland highlights this concern.

Sentence Length: Longer sentences reflect the severity of the crime and the danger posed by the offender. A 9-year sentence indicates significant risk to public safety.

Purpose of Fixed Parole Dates: These dates exist to protect the public. Overcrowding shouldn’t compromise safety; adhering to fixed points is crucial.

There are numerous debates to this proposal, whilst it is understood that not all prisoners are the same and some may actually improve, it is not realistic or safe to say that they all will.

Public Safety Concerns: Releasing long-term prisoners earlier could pose risks to public safety. By allowing them back into the community sooner, there’s a chance they might re-offend or harm others. The focus should be on protecting society, especially when dealing with serious offenses.
Individual Circumstances: Not all prisoners are the same. Some may have committed heinous crimes, while others might have shown genuine remorse and rehabilitation progress. A fixed two-thirds release point doesn’t consider individual circumstances or progress made during incarceration.

Deterrent Effect: Longer sentences serve as a deterrent for potential offenders. If prisoners know they’ll serve at least a certain portion of their sentence, it discourages criminal behaviour. Changing this could weaken the deterrent effect and impact overall crime rates? Likely.

Victim’s Perspective: Victims and their families often seek justice through the legal system. Releasing prisoners earlier might be perceived as minimizing the severity of their suffering. It’s essential to balance rehabilitation with acknowledging the harm caused to victims.

Overcrowding and Resources: While easing prison overcrowding is important, it shouldn’t compromise safety. Instead of early release, efforts should focus on improving prison conditions, providing effective rehabilitation programs, and addressing systemic issues.