Outrage over report into open jail rapist

#1
apologies if posted elswhere.

HERE
The Scotsman said:
19 March 2008
Outrage over report into open jail rapist
By Tanya Thompson Social Affairs Correspondent

A PRISONER who raped a schoolgirl while on the run was a suitable candidate for an open prison despite a previous conviction for attempted murder and his high risk of reoffending, a report said yesterday.

The case sparked a furious response from politicians, after the Scottish Prison Service review found there was "always a possibility" that Robert Foye would flee from Castle Huntly Open Prison, near Dundee.

Foye was halfway through a ten-year sentence for running over Detective Constable John Lafferty – during an attempt to escape from the police in a stolen vehicle – when he absconded from Castle Huntly, after being released to attend an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting.

The 28-year-old had been allowed out of the open prison and had been on the run for almost a week when he carried out the vicious attack on the teenager in Cumbernauld. There was widespread concern that a man jailed for ten years for attempting to murder a police officer was given the opportunity to commit such a crime.

Last night, Bill Aitken, the Tories' justice spokesman, called for the justice secretary, Kenny MacAskill, to make an emergency statement to Parliament. He described the findings of the review as "utterly outrageous" and said "anyone with half a brain" could see Foye was a danger to the public.

"If Robert Foye was assessed as a 'high risk of reoffending' who was likely to abscond, how did he 'meet the criteria' for the open estate?

"Given that he was serving a sentence for attempted murder, how on earth could the assessment conclude that when he did reoffend it would merely be property-related?"

Pauline McNeill, Labour's justice spokeswoman, said it was "beyond explanation" that the prison authorities could claim an open prison was a suitable place for Foye, especially as it was the second time he had absconded from Castle Huntly – the first occasion being in 2005.

It earlier emerged that Foye had a five-page list of convictions for car thefts , along with a string of driving offences and convictions for carrying weapons and assault. But prison bosses insisted they could not have predicted he would commit rape because he had no history of sexual offences.

Clive Fairweather, a former chief inspector of prisons, said the "shocking" case raised serious questions about the risk-assessment procedures in Scotland's jails.

He added: "They are not spending enough on risk assessment. The thing at issue is public safety and does this man have a track record of violence?"

"He should not be going to an open prison."

The case prompted calls for an urgent review of Scotland's open prisons after it emerged that the pr
isoner had savagely raped the 16-year-old girl in August last year. Foye admitted the rape at the High Court in Glasgow and is to be sentenced in May.

The SPS review, ordered by Mr MacAskill, recommended a number of changes in the system of transfer to open prisons, including greater training for prison staff on risk assessment.

The review found that Foye fitted the criteria for transfer to an open prison, but conceded "an abscond was always a possibility", given the prisoner's background. It also said: "Robert Foye was assessed as 'high-risk of reoffending', so a further offence was always a possibility."

The SPS vowed to implement the recommendations as quickly as possible, but did not blame any individual.

Mr MacAskill said, although it was never possible to "completely eliminate risk", it was vital lessons should be learned to minimise any repeat incident.



The full article contains 595 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.Last Updated: 18 March 2008 11:19 PM
 
#3
Mr MacAskill said, although it was never possible to "completely eliminate risk",


WRONG!!!!!

Make him serve the full sentence in a maximum security facility. Risk averted.
 
#4
Dog-faced-soldier said:
Mr MacAskill said, although it was never possible to "completely eliminate risk",


WRONG!!!!!

Make him serve the full sentence in a maximum security facility. Risk averted.
No Dog, he might escape........ 9mm to the back/side of the head = No risk what-so-ever! :roll:
 
#5
I always thought the Scots were harder on their crims than England.
 
#6
right-grumpy said:
Dog-faced-soldier said:
Mr MacAskill said, although it was never possible to "completely eliminate risk",


WRONG!!!!!

Make him serve the full sentence in a maximum security facility. Risk averted.
No Dog, he might escape........ 9mm to the back/side of the head = No risk what-so-ever! :roll:
But it may not kill him and leave him a mindless vegetable



Oh, wait a minute, thats still a positive result.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top