Move to send prisoners back to their home country
Friday 24th July 2009, 2:56PM BST.
Solicitor General Tim Le Cocq
FOREIGN criminals in Jersey’s prison could be sent home to serve their sentences, in an unprecedented move for the Island.
Solicitor General Tim Le Cocq has advised Home Affairs to introduce a new law which could see Jersey signing prisoner-transfer agreements with foreign countries in an effort to send inmates home.
About 30 per cent of prisoners at La Moye are foreign, the majority coming from Portugal and Poland. It costs around £51,000 a year per prisoner at La Moye.
Jersey does not have any treaties with those countries but it has been revealed that discussions to change this are under way. The UK has a Repatriation of Prisoners Act whereby they have agreements with certain countries, but this has never been extended to Jersey.
Senator Ben Shenton, the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, questioned the chief officer of Home Affairs about the matter during a Scrutiny hearing this week.
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
About blxxdy time!!!!!!
Report abuse
I am sure that when a inmate transfers from jersey,then jersey is responsible for the cost of the upkeep of that inmate for the duration of his/her sentence.and as a result of a tranfer,the inmate at present cannot be given parole at the half way mark.they have to serve the 2/3rd.thus costing the island even more money,so do not see this as saving,it will infact cost more to send inmates off the island,then to keep them here.
Report abuse
£51000 per year is a huge amount which makes this law an excellent idea. I guess the prisoners would be happier back home as well.
Does 30% of prisoners being foreign mean 30% of islanders are foreign? or do we need some kind of checks on who is coming in to the island or is Jersey in fact full and needs no more people coming to the island?
Report abuse
Paulo… and there isn’t any beans doing drugs or anything the shouldn’t being doing just bare in mind they are also rubbish…..choose your words carefully…..the locals are worse
Report abuse
“…costs around £51,000 a year per prisoner…”
This is just crazy…
Report abuse
£51,000 a year? Open your eyes Jersey why are we paying for all the foreign drug users and criminals..???
Report abuse
Oh yes ,bring it on, why should we fork out more than a States members yearly wage to keep these types here,either that or deliver corporal punishment followed by deportation. simpler ,cheaper, a real deterrent against bringing in drugs etc………good riddance.
Report abuse
I totally agree, repatriate them back to the country of origin and ban them from returning after their release.
Report abuse
Brilliant idea, maybe then we can afford to provide some health care for the locals before the states waste it.
Report abuse
I would be extremely interested to see the break-down of costs to support this statement “It costs around £51,000 a year per prisoner at La Moye”. What a waste of money. I am sure that could be reduced drastically and save a lot of money. However if you can save money by repatriation that is a small start in the right direction.
Report abuse
This is one area that the States spending cuts should be made.
Report abuse
How on earth does it cost £51k per inmate???
That could be another nurse or policeman with cash to spare!
Report abuse
I agree. They should never have been allowed to arrived in the island in the first place.
That should include the UK ones too.
Report abuse
30% of inmates are not even local and us taxpayers are paying £51k a year?? Someone please explain why people who pay taxes have no rights over how it is spent???
We are probably paying for their partners and children in benefits and housing aswell?!!!!
If I hear one more foreigner giving it the poor me routine in Jersey I will ask them just how they would manage if they had to go back to where they came from!!!
This island does not have any morals towards its islanders at all… and I am talking about people and families who have lived here since before the war!!!
With all the rights dished out to Tom Dick and Harry there is nothing left to give back to people who are more entitled… by far
Report abuse
Human rights. That is something which, sooner or later, will lead Europe to disaster.
Human rights. That is something which makes all normal honest people to pay higher and higher taxes to feed all bunch of spongers (like prisoners).
Human rights. It should be for humans by choice, not by birth. If you don’t behave like human – you have no human rights.
Conclusion – if you broke the law – you would have to earn for your own accommodation even, or maybe especially, in custody. Even if this means 12hr/day work.
This also would be a good lesson for all criminals, making them to thing twice, triple or more before they commit another crime.
Report abuse
This is a ridiculous figure to spend, burdening the taxpayer even further, on someone who has already proven to be a problem for society.
These criminals should be punished and not pampered. 10 x 10 cells with bar windows, bread and water for meals, hard labour…….perhaps people would then think twice before committing a crime.
…..or will the politicians leave it cushy just in case they get caught out and end up staying at Her Majesty’s Pleasure!
Report abuse
lets not be racist here! as jersey tends to send people to prison for very minor offences which you would not see in other countries.
Report abuse
Very interesting it seemslikeaverage costs in the US are only a little over $20k/year.
Could save a lot here I think
Report abuse
What is completely ignored in the article, as well as in the responses posted so far, is that Jersey has a sentencing policy that is among the toughest in western Europe, and indeed the world, the consequence of which is that there is a higher number of convictions resulting in a custodial sentence in Jersey than in most other countries.
Perhaps there needs to be a re-examination of sentencing policy in Jersey, especially given that most developed societies have learned that custodial sentencing serves little purpose.
For the full figures and more details refer to King’s College London International Centre for Prison Studies.
Report abuse
How about stopping them coming here in the first place.
Totally agree about human right – it has been a total disaster in the UK – murders and rapists unable to be deported to their country of origin because of their human rights.
The states of jersey have betrayed the locals over their free for all immigration policy and we are now paying the price
Report abuse
20…perhaps a custodial sentence would serve more purpose if the criminals were made to work to earn any small “luxuries” they might want instead of being pampered and treating prison life like a holiday camp!
What do you suggest? Leave them roam the streets? “Rehabilitate” them or “understand” why they committed the crime in the first place by blaming everyone around them and their childhood experiences!
I for one am sick and tired of hearing these excuses. Laws are there for a reason (although many need to be updated and even introduced). If you break a law you deserve to be punished….simple!
I for one think some of the sentencing in Jersey in too lenient…..particularly for minors.
Most of the criminals banged up in La Moye are there for drugs related crimes…..maybe the government should look to see why it is such a big problem in Jersey!
Some simple ways to cut costs (and maybe deter peopel from committing crimes in the first place):
Basic food & drink
Basic living conditions
Inmates work to earn “luxuries” (and maybe bring some income into the prison to help pay for their stay) – paying back their debt to society in a more productive manner.
Relinquish all the other overpaid social workers and psychologists of their jobs.
In my opinion rehabilitation doesn’t work. Far too many offenders continue to re-offend once they are released from prison. These days, some people have better lives inside of prison than they do out of it!
Report abuse
….adding even more insult to injury….if a ‘foreign’ prisoner serves a long enough term he/she is then released with full residential qualifications…he/she can then spend their drugs profits on buying themselves a nice property!!! what about that then??!!!
Report abuse
I see that all of Jersey’s right wingers have descended on this thread.
It may have escaped people’s notice that corporal punishment was abolished many years ago.
However, deportation of convicted (foreign) criminals seems a fair idea to me.
There are quite a few convicted (home grown) criminals I would like to see the back of as well!
Report abuse
As Jersey only has one Prison it has to be designed and run for the highest category of offender. These prisons cost the most and what with our States workers pay scales you can only imagine what the salaries are up there. So if you are sent to La Moye for say fraud you would still cost the same to “look after” as if you had committed murder. In the UK fraudsters are sent to “open” prison that cost only a fraction of higher category prisons to run hence cheaper overall in UK.
Sen Le Marquand has promised to review prison sentences and probation so less serious offenders can be released after 1/3 of their sentence and monitored by probation (as the rest of the world does) if they have behaved – this will mean a reduction of total prisoners and hence reduce the cost of running the prison. Sen Le Marquand is slow but thorough with experience of the penal system over here so I say give him a chance and many things will change (for the better I trust) and he will be able to reduce the cost of dealing effectively with offenders.
Report abuse
23…and they say “crime doesn’t pay”!!
I know, I’ll sign up for income support where they’ll just pay it directly into my bank a/c every week then I’ll go and import some drugs or commit a major financial fraud. If I get caught then I can spend several years in Hotel La Moye and see a nice healthy bank balance when I am released. If I don’t get caught then I will probably have a nice profit from my criminal activity.
Win – win !!
Report abuse
a great idea, but folks, you WILL reap from the harvest! Do you have any handle on those Jersey born offenders currently residing in prisons abroad, or the the offences for which they reside? Well, guess what will happen, they will, globally, be sent home!
Jersey born offenders overseas!
x
Report abuse
Magnolia Man (24)and Nick (27). Well said!!
Report abuse
Why on earth does it cost 51k? To pay for their colour tv, Playstations, quality meals etc. All those benefits which have earned the prison the nickname of La Moye Hilton.
Perhaps the luxuries should be cut, the foreign rubbish sent back home and not allowed to return for at least 5 years, and we should start screening immigrants before glibly allowing them to enter Jersey. The ones that are still left in prison should be made to work, thus giving them a proper punishment.
Or better still, bring back corporal punishment, save the taxpayer 51k per individual, and – in most cases – nip the problem in the bud. Voila, problem solved.
Report abuse
Again fine, as long as you are happy to take any Jersey inmates back from the UK. You can’t have it one way.
The xenophobic attitude to anyone not from your island is getting worse and worse. Of course any country would love to ship the burden of their prisons to others but I have noticed that any story on this site to do with anything from outside Jersey is met with some intolerant attitudes. You reap what you sow.
Report abuse
It’s not complicated. You have 2 prisons. They can both be at La Moye.
One is for people who have lived in Jersey for more than 5 years and who have committed a first offence or a second/third offence for which they have been sentenced to less than 2 years inside. Bear in mind if you kick a stranger in the head in an unprovoked attack you normally don’t get more than 2 years.
That prison is well funded and focusses on rehabilitation and teaching life skills that stops reoffending.
The second prison can just be a covered yard with a tap that provides drinking water, rations of food delivered weekly, one toilet and full time CCTV. Think Sona in Prison Break series 3. That should cost next to nothing and get a reputation as the toughest prison in Europe in no time. Then watch how the crime rate falls.
Oh, if only the States had the foresight of the foetus.
Report abuse
mad foetus. Have you been taking lessons in “Stalinism”, or are you just being facetious?
Report abuse
Stomach ache – If our sentences (which seem pretty soft in most cases) are amongst the toughest in the world then it’s no wonder that crime is out of control!
Seeing as the local Jersey population is minute in comparison with most other countries, I don’t believe we will be totally inundated with “local” criminals being repatriated over here.
I take it that once we have kicked these foreign criminals out (including the UK ones) that we will be preventing them from returning to the Island as we used to prior to all this EU nonsense? In fact, drunk and disorderly and minor crimes, once heard by the magistrate, we chucked onto the first boat in the morning…..that was a simple, inexpensive process and what we should be going back to.
Report abuse
The uk gvt pay so many millions to jersey health service in case uk citizens take ill! aparantly millions more than needs be!GLASS HOUSES AND ALL THAT!
Report abuse
Jerseybean 3, it wouldn’t cost more because prison in countries like poland and portugal will be a lot cheaper.
Stomach ache, you are right. Jersey courts are too tough in relation to the wrong offences.
They are often very hard when it comes to drug offences, but not the offences that have a direct affect on us like theft and assaults. You see it all too often: one person gets 5 yrs for importing some canabis, wheres a ‘local’ will get community service for giving a kicking to a passer by.
This results in us paying for a lot of prisoners at 51k a head per year, who have literally just stepped off the plane or boat.
Report abuse
Nellie,
You can’t chuck people out of Jersey unless they agree to it because we are in a common travel zone with the UK and the UK is in a common travel zone with the EU. So your proposal, whilst fine in theory, is unworkable in practice.
Let’s just legalise drugs and lock up violent offenders. I’m much more scared of being beaten up by thugs than I am of my next door neighbour going reefer crazy and attacking my stash of pringles.
Report abuse
Parry Gashley # 23 (+74?). Now that’s a thought – obtaining residential qualifications whilst at La Moye.
Stomach Ache # 20. I take it you are referring to the sentencing policy for drugs offences….some may disagree with you on this. The Island needs to deter the importation of drugs and drug dealing in general as drug abuse causes many social and health problems – depending on the type of drugs used. (this will no doubt open up even more debate….I can’t wait). I think in most cases the sentencing policy is about right.
Report abuse
I can understand people being angry at the cost of keeping foreign crimninals locked up in Jersey…and I can understand people wanting to send them back to where they came from…but what I can understand is all this XENOPHOBIA!!! Can someone tell me please who were the first to oppose Hitler? Yep! The Brits AND the Poles!!! So, say thank you to them the next time you open your mouth, because if it hadn’t been for their grandfathers you’d be speaking German now and living under the jackboot…and you wouldn’t be able to complain about anything!!!
Report abuse
Slawek, are you suggesting Human Rights are abolished? You have a Polish sounding name, Human Rights are the product of WW1 and WW2 – millions of people gave their lives for them to exist, you of all peoples should understand this.
We are leaders in the world in terms of Human Rights issues, please do not let us slip backwards by confusing this with a negative view of HR.
Report abuse
Why not just deport them as the punishment, rather than send them to prison at all anywhere just deport them at the time of sentencing. saves us money.
Report abuse
£51K!! Porridge, water and bread would reduce this cost.
Report abuse
In ’86 Malaysia hung two convicted Australian drug traffickers after extensive warnings and publicity Not to bring dope in……drug importation fell overnight.
Report abuse
Annoying Bar Steward 39. I totally agree. If we don’t defend the rights of others (even when they have done wrong) we will lose what so many young men gave their lives for…and with reference to my post 38…I’d like to correct an enormous error (just in case the “bookish” Bob Flemming sees it!). What I wanted to say was I CAN’T understand all this XENOPHOBIA!!!
Report abuse
39 Annoying Bar Steward –
Modern Human Rights began and will end with the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights – read it sometime, they are the leaders in this, because, the EU dictatorship’s Declaration of Human Rights isn’t worth the paper it is written upon – it gives with one and then takes back with the other – yet our sleepy States Members continue to pass laws and Statutes that continue to undermine our inalienable freedoms in order to be seen as conforming to some ridiculous EU directive.
Otherwise Prison, La Moye should be the worst experience of a convict’s life – if you can’t do the time, then don’t do the crime – stop wasting public money on their re-education and useless art classes – instead just make sure they never want to end up there again. Otherwise, La Moye should be ‘PayBack Time’ for all who end up there, with every prisoner being put into an orange jump suit and sent out work cleaning the beaches, vraicing the fields, cutting the grass, cleaning up wherever needed – and deportation for non native offenders should never be taken off the table – the sanctuary path to deportation was, at one time, a part of the Island’s heritage.
Report abuse
Nick,
Why some of you people have to shout claims of xenophobic behaviour at things like this I don’t know. Lots of countries deport prisoners who are not of that particular nationality. A small island like Jersey does not have the room or resources to house all these foreign nationals who, the statistics show, seem to be creating more crime then their alleged population portion would suggest.
I’m quite sick of reading these whinging posts about us being xenophobic. Only recently in the UK news was the case where prisoners were released back in to the UK when they should have been deported. The public were not particularly happy about this. Your post implies the UK is just as xenophobic as Jersey.
Report abuse
Nellie 33. Agree with you but what about the EU??? surely we have every right to deport foreign nationals who are a drain on the economy of Jersey. If I remember correctly Jersey is not in the E.U.So whats the problem??
Can’t deport people out of Jersey unless they agree to it?? I don’t want to pay TAX can I not agree to it ??? Nonscence.
No 38 the way this island is going I would be better under the Jackboot ( not much diffrence now under the present regime )
Report abuse
@39 Annoying Bar Steward
I am suggesting human right are overused. Human rights are used mostly for protecting criminals and spongers living at our expense. We can’t send criminal back because of human rights. We can’t send back benefit defrauders because of human rights. So we all are paying for their comfortable live here. We all are punished (by carrying higher costs, paying higher taxes) for someone’s else criminal behaviour.
I am Polish, and many of people, Brits, Poles, Russians, and others, (including my grandpa) give their lives in WW2. Do you really believe that if human rights were in force before WW2 or WW1 much less people would give their lives ? Just by saying to solder aiming at one’s head – “STOP – I am protected by Human Right!” Don’t be ridiculous. At that time there was some international law in force, regarding conflicts.
Come to Poland, see places called factories of the dead established by Nazi, and you will see how the law was executed. If you can’t I’ll tell you how things happened. Solder with a gun was a man in power, and no law, existing or “human right” would stopped him from killing civils.
Back to topic – human rights should be by choice. And the choice should be clear. Break the law – you will be punished, no human rights protects you. If you’re criminal you will be send back even if prison in your country is below “human rights” standard, even if you can be sentenced to death in our own country. That should be simple consequences of one’s choice, choice to go against the society and the law.
Report abuse
Slawek, I admire your courage however your idea would not work.
Human Rights can never be overused, the situation with the prisoners is unfortunately a product of human rights which we have to live with.
Think about it, lets say you move to Jersey as a young Pole and live here for 5 years, you have a girlfriend here, friends a good job. You get involved with the wrong people, get involved in a silly crime and are found guilty. Under your rule you would be sent back to Poland – surely everyone deserves a second chance?
As for persistant offenders then maybe they should be sent back, but if these criminals have est. lives here then who has the right to send them anywhere?
If your system was in place where would it stop, how could we stop the States sending anyone back for any reason – including you for a parking fine?
Human Rights, as annoying as they are at times, are here to protect every man, woman and child, from abuse and persecution. Yes there will be some people who take advantage but whats the alternative – State rule?
Report abuse
It seems from reading your comments you both are paying the Human Rights of these individuals their dues. Indeed, it is because of the Human Rights Act, or to be more specific the European Convention on Human Rights that EU citizens cannot be deported against their will.
In theory this wouldn’t apply to Jersey, not being a full member, however this has never been tested in court as all those who have said they wished to spend their sentence in the island in the past ten years or so have been allowed to do so.
Interestingly enough I have heard of some local prisoners who have requested to serve their sentence in a Mainland nick presumably to escape persecution from fellow inmates.
If they had such a system here I wonder if this would apply to English born islanders like myself?
As for Slawek’s post (47), while it is true that you do lose some qualified rights when convicted of a crime (the most important being that of liberty!) – this does not annul one’s rights overall, nor should it.
As you pointed out, your own family fought to uphold democratic, liberal values, it would be a travesty to see them lost simply as a cost cutting measure.
There is nothing in all of this however to say that if a foreign national were convicted of a crime that they couldn’t voluntarily choose deportation over a lengthy jail sentence in my opinion.
Report abuse
# 47 Slawek….well said. When it comes to Human Rights people in Jersey don’t realise how good they have it. You need to experience what it is like in other countries around the world (I have seen totalitiarian a regime in the Former East Germany) to make the comparison. We are too soft on many crimes…I have seen serious crimes, where the the Royal Court sentenced offenders to community. This was supervised by a few ‘liberal thinking’ probation officers, who let the offenders get away without fully completing the terms of their sentence. That would have been unlikely to have occurred in many other countries.
Report abuse
Following on from Slawek’s comments….what about convicted terrorists in UK prisons who cannot be deported because they will not be safe returning to their home countries? Ridiculous. The population is not “safe” with them in our country – what about our safety?? Look at the odds. One terrorist feeling unsafe (hypocrite) against a whole nation !
If people are willing to commit a crime then they should be punished accordingly and lose their rights to be a human. What about the victims in all this?
Offenders are a minority so perhaps each government should start looking after the majority for a change!
Annoying Bar Steward. Agreed people do deserve a second chance (maybe even a third) so why not introduce the american “3 strikes and out” policy? After that, immediate deportation (or lengthy spell of hard labour for locals) and a ban from re-entering unless it could be proven they have changed their ways and would be an asset to society.
Of course minor issues such as “parking fines” would be exempt from this policy …. common sense has to be applied!
Report abuse
The problem we have is the fact that people can get into the Island pretty much unchecked most of the time. it was amazing to read how many people had major convictions to their names when the last background checks were done on passengers arriving at the airport. Believe this is only done once or twice a year!!!!!!
Report abuse
Do it the american way…..3 strikes and your out!
Report abuse
‘Why some of you people have to shout claims of xenophobic behaviour at things like this I don’t know. Lots of countries deport prisoners who are not of that particular nationality. A small island like Jersey does not have the room or resources to house all these foreign nationals who, the statistics show, seem to be creating more crime then their alleged population portion would suggest.’
Ummm… did you actually read my post? I was actually suggesting it was a general theme on a lot of JEP articles. As soon as something goes wrong its blame the foreigners time. They seem to be a scapegoat for all ills. Jobs are going to foreigners, foreigners are getting our state benefits ahead of us, flats are going to foreigners, the foreigners in the finance industry (nicknamed j-cats I believe) have destroyed the island and need to be send home (regardless of the fact they may actually be innocent and do a good job), blah blah blah.
The UK is just as bad, but I wish somepeople would look at themselves first before blaming ‘outsiders’ for the islands ills.
Report abuse
It would cost a lot less than £51,000 a year if the La Moye Hilton was turned back into a prison without the sat. tv. games consoles and all other luxurys. Then perhaps these inmates would,nt re offend. They should lose their rights the day they are banged up, but i fear our esteemed politicians havent got the guts to bring in such a law
Report abuse
Stomach Ache, is it just possible that Jersey has a low crime rate (relative to the UK etc) BECAUSE it has tougher sentencing?
It would seem to me that Jersey is getting something right that other countries are getting badly wrong.
Jersey cannot afford to go softer on sentencing until it has other measures in place, people are already being encouraged to commit crimes due to the lack of punishment reported in the media.
Report abuse
Jersey Bull 44 to Annoying Bar Steward
…Modern Human Rights began and will end with the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights – read it sometime…
Now what sort of a cocky comment is that? Insinuating that you have read it and nobody else has!
This is not a “Show-people-how-clever-I am” competition, it’s a threaded discussion!
So, if you have something to say, then say it without pretending you know everything, we can all “Google”!!!
Knowledge should be like the foundations of a house, solid but out of sight…and I don’t agree with your “cure-the-baddie” bread and water tactics either!!!
Report abuse
ok folks, it appears that many of us are in favour of sending criminals back from where they came and accepting that we will have to have our Jersey criminals returned to us. There are lots of very strong feelings on this. Can I suggest that the best way for anything to have a hope of changing would be if we as individuals were to contact our politicians (some of whom just very occasionally listen to our opinions) and express our thoughts to them. We could also request that they put it on the agenda to be considered more fully when the States return after their summer break. (another issue, don’t get me started!)
Report abuse
Jersey lacks the levels of crime found in the UK because it lacks the social deprivation, sink estates and other blights that are found in parts of the UK rather than anything to do with sentencing policy in my opinion.
Jersey really should be compared with one of the outer London boroughs such as Bromley rather than the UK as a whole when it comes to crime, educational attainment etc.
But if we did that the States would have to wave goodbye to the feel good ‘Jersey does x percent better than UK at education, health, etc’ stories.
Report abuse
55 Born Warrior – on the subject of being cocky: “and I don’t agree with your post” follwed by three exclamation marks is pretty arrogant in itself. Just because you disagree doesn’t mean he’s wrong and you’re right.
Personally I think Jersey Bull made a very good post and I agreed with him wholeheartedly – the failure of society to properly punish perpetrators due to political correctness and rewarding the criminals has led to the sorry state we are in now.
Toughen up the punishments in the prisons and it will have a major impact on re-offenders, as well as reducing the ridiculous £51k bill.
Well said Mr Bull
Report abuse
Foreigners (in whatever land they are foreign) may simply cause more problems with the law due to not being accustomed to the land and the way things are done there. Also I wouldn’t be surprised if there is simply less respect for a land which is not your native land (after all, it’s easy to leave if you get in trouble). Then there are those who are in trouble in their home land already and escape it by going elsewhere, however, they are still trouble.
The English certainly seem to save their worst behaviour for when they are out of England so it wouldn’t surpise me if incomers to Jersey pushed the boundaries more than they would back home.
If a foreigner behaves appallingly in Jersey I doubt it’s because they are foreign, more likely just that they are not at ‘home’. That’s not racism or xenophobia, it’s just circumstance. Everyone is a ‘foreigner’ outwith their homeland after all.
Report abuse
#35, certainly in the UK it has long been known that a extremely high level of thefts and assaults are drug-related crimes (with assalts that includes alcohol). The perpetrators may not be convicted of a drug offence but the problem is still caused by drugs.
As long as drugs are addictive and disable people’s normal abilities then people will steal to get the money to buy more. If only the rich were susceptible to addiction and the suffering it brings them then drugs could easily be legalised but I don’t think drugs discriminate like that.
Report abuse
Nick #52 spot on !if we as as island continue to blame the “foreigners” and they up and leave who is going run the hotels ,work the fields etc
not the locals you just have to walk past the welfare and see all the capable locals sponging of the system,
in 2005 i came back from england and had a job in 1day and when i had my interview my then boss was very surprised that i was a local applying for hotel work also out of 20 staff i was the only local but this i believe is due to lazy attitudes of the locals,if an employe can not find local people to fill jobs thenthey have to look elsewhere unfornatley the majority of local unemployed believe they are above manual labour and this is the reason we have so many “foreigners” i myself do see them as “foreigners ” but as fellow humans
local attitudes need to change and quickly
before the racists destroy a already dying island
Report abuse
Of course we could do what Guernsey have been doing for over 20 years – not let anyone in who has a criminal record.
Oh hold on, that would cost nothing and work, back to the drawing board!
Report abuse
I would just like to clear something up as regards comment No. 23…
Time spent in prison does not count towards your time spent in the island for the purposes of housing qualifications. Any time spent in prison is deducted from the time you have spent in Jersey and therefore you have to spend however long you have been in prison EXTRA in order to gain your quals.
Report abuse
Before some of you locals get to carried away. 30% are foreign. Thats a small margin compared to the 70% that must be local. Maybe they should send a few locals to the UK to teach them a thing or two.
Report abuse
Leah Holmes #62 ( 1.24 am – Do you suffer from insomnia or do you work nights?) I agree that acquisitive crime (theft, burglaries and robberies) is linked to substance abuse (drugs and alcohol). I think however that many rich people are just as susceptible to addition as poorer folk, it is just that they can afford their habit without having to steal. Look at the high profile newspaper reports over the years, of pop stars and the aristocracy who have been involved in drug taking
I would never advocate legalisation of drugs as I have read that research shows, that over time many of these cause medical problems, including organ failure, together with psychiatric and psychological problems.
Not that it would be possible now, but I imagine that if alcohol and tobacco were discovered today, the authorities would try and ban or restrict their use. Look at all the problems these cause.
Alcohol is major contributory factor in causing violent crime, as it makes the majority of us lose our inhibitions. Some drugs can also cause psychosis which may lead to violent and irrational behaviour. (All I want to do is fall asleep and nowadays I am almost a teetotaller, as I am fed up with hang overs).
I have read about the theories of nature – v – nurture. Some believe that a person’s genes determine whether or not they become a criminal. Others believe it is the way people are brought up that causes them to commit crime. I think it is a combination of the two.
When the Courts sentence people to imprisonment, it isn’t just to rehabilitate offenders, but also to protect the rest of society from the behaviour of these criminals.
Sentencing them to community service or fining them doesn’t achieve this.
Yes I would like to see criminals be rehabilitated, but sometimes there are those recidivists who will always commit crime and these need to be separated from the rest of society, for the protection of the majority.
The problem with sending foreign prisoners back to their homeland is that they may not serve the full sentence that the Courts had intended, then unless we stop these people from re-entering the Island, they will be back on the streets causing more grief to the local population.
Report abuse
Interesting that 70% of prisoners are Jersey born – whilst the population of Jersey has a far greater ‘foreigner’ proportion than 30%. Looks like the locals are much more likely to be criminals!!! Solve this problem and you will be saving a lot more £51k’s.
Report abuse
I totally agree ZBD, my post was a little tongue-in-cheek (and it’s a ‘yes’ to insomnia).
Jersey’s best way forward would be to take a tougher line on people coming into the island (as regards criminal backgrounds), then it would see how much of the problem was caused by itself and how much of it was simply being imported. As far as our staff go the only ones to end up in jail were foreign, BUT they all turned out to have been involved in criminal activity back in their homeland previously, so they shouldn’t have been here in the first place I don’t feel.
I do only suggest community service for types of crime where it would be a deterrent or teach someone a lesson, otherwise I am all for incarceration (if only it was without all the luxuries!)
Report abuse
@48 Annoying Bar Steward
I do not agree. In my opinion Human Rights are overused.
Human Rights should protect INNOCENT people, not criminals. By committing a crime your’e stating – I’m going against the law. So why any law should protect you in this case ?
As long as you are not convicted you are innocent, and as innocent you should be protected (protected by human or other rights, including protection against abuse and persecution). You should always have the right to **fair trial**. This is something which needs to be guaranteed for all of us. But once you have had a trial, and you got convicted – that’s it – you are not protected anymore, until you serve your sentence.
“Think about it, lets say you move to Jersey as a young Pole and live here for 5 years, you have a girlfriend here, friends a good job. You get involved with the wrong people, get involved in a silly crime and are found guilty. Under your rule you would be sent back to Poland – surely everyone deserves a second chance?”
1. My rule does not say anything about unconditional deportation in all cases.
2. Yes, if I committed crime which is punished by deportation then of course I should be sent back, no matter that I have girlfriend/friend/job, or I could be potentially sentenced to death or killed. It is a part of my choice. Even if I could be sentenced to death in my own country.
I **should** think about consequences of what I’m doing before I committed the crime. If I didn’t – it is my fault, my and not everyone else’s, so no one else should pay for it.
3. “You get involved with the wrong people” – if I get involved then it obviously was MY choice, so it is MY guilty. Any punishment would be a simple consequence of MY choice. The law should not protect MY against myself and my choices, it should protect others.
4. *Fair trial* warrants you to have second chance – if you deserve.
“If your system was in place where would it stop, how could we stop the States sending anyone back for any reason – including you for a parking fine?”
This is ridiculous example. I’m not saying that everyone should be sent back for ANY reason. I’m not saying anything about deportation in fact – this was only example, reference to the article thesis. What I’m saying that you shouldn’t be protected if you commit a crime, and got convicted. Right to fair trial ensures that the sentence will be in proportion to the guilt. And this proportion should not be limited by any law.
There are different penalties. Some of them are excluded (like hard labour, deportation in some cases) because of Human Rights. What I am saying there should be no exclusions. If crime is punished by deportation then person sentenced to deportation should be deported no matter of what.
Prison is not (or maybe should not be) holiday resort, prisoners should pay back for their accommodation and pay back all the harms, even by hard work 12 hr a day if it is in proportion to the harm.
@51 BS Deluxe
I totally agree to “3 strikes and out” policy. Second or third chance is for people willing to change.
Report abuse
Tobias 60
Taking away a man’s freedoom is punishment enough for any crime, so there’s no need to make him a community SLAVE.
People commit crimes and go to prison (some for a very long time), and taxpayers must pay to keep them locked away and out of mischief…not to let them roam the beaches and parks as Jersey Bull suggests. Having said that, there’s still no need to make their lives a misery. Human rights are for us all “good and bad”.
As for me, I make “cocky” comments too but only when I feel someone is trying to undermine others…
Report abuse
Leah (69) Try Nytol to help you sleep…you need your rest. I have just been dealing with a guy today for an environmental crime (in the U.K.) – a major illegal deposit of controlled waste…oil and bits of old cars, engines and scrap metal. A total blight on the visual amneities of the area and causing damage to the flora and fauna. The offender had been causing a major nuisance to his neighbours, burning tyres and shouting abouse at them etc. The Magistrates just gave his a two year conditional discharge….but we were awarded £7,000 in costs. Why don’t they make convicted persons pay for the costs of an investigation an trial in Jersey, that would help pay for criminal justice.
Report abuse
Slawek:
The whole idea of human rights is that everyone is born with these rights – what is your problem with the right to a fair trial and the right not to be tortured, for example? The reason that it appears that criminals use human rights legislation more than other people is because they are the ones in most danger of being mistreated by the system. Did you ever hear about the Belmarsh Detainees in England a few years ago? Indefinitely detained in prison because one man suspected that they might possibly be terrorists – not even told why they were there or charged with a crime, just shoved in prison without a chance for a trial of any kind. Everyone deserves human rights.
Report abuse
66 & 68
The thread simply says 30% are foreign (mostly Poland and Portugal). This DOES NOT say 70% are local….merely not foreign.
Jersey is part of British Isles, as is England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Perhaps the 70% is more likely British tather than Jersey.
Please do not try to distort the facts to have another bash at Jersey folk.
Report abuse
70 Slawek
You make a good argument. I agree that, once convicted, a criminal should not be offered more protection than their victims which is sadly far too often these days.
71 Tobias
Taking away someone’s freedom is not always punishment enough….is it enough for rape or murder? Of course not.
They lose their freedom, but they should not be made overly comfortable and entitled to luxuries such as PS3, movies, games etc (some innocent folk can’t afford these things on the outside and yet pay towards their abusers for the privilege through taxation). If they want to keep busy during their sentnec then they can learn or be productive in something else.
Report abuse
So what are you saying Slawek – bring back capital punishment as an effective means of preventing people from carrying out crime – rubbish.
Human Rights protect every man , woman and child. It protects them when they have broken the law as well, that means that even the worse criminals are protected by human rights – whatever their crime. There is therefore no such thing as overuse of human rights because they are there to protect the human whatever crime he has committed.
What happens to people who are innocent? Statistically up to 5% of people found guilty in a court of law are actually innocent. In the past they were sentenced to death, often polictics was involved i.e. lets find this man guilty so the police look like they know what they are doing. Under your system what is to stop innocent people getting killed?
Your system is flawed, and that major flaw is what led to WW1 and WW2 i.e. Hitler enforcing his views on the human race, rather than the human race being protected by the sanctity of Human Rights which protects humans from being subject to such persecution.
Report abuse
Jerseybean – your “FACT” is highly questionable
Whilst I have not looked into how much it costs to keep inmates locked up in English prisons, I’d happily bet £50 of my own money that it would be considerably cheaper than the La Moye Hilton.
As for having to serve 2/3 of their sentence instead of just half – well by golly that’s a good thing surely!! They should be serving all of it anyway
Born Warrior (71) re your comment that it is punishment enough taking away a persons freedom without making their time harder…. this may be the case for the likes of you and I as we are both educated people with rent / mortgages to pay and jobs and families. In other words, a lot to lose by going to prison. However, for some members of our jolly little island being imprisoned is really no hardship – they can get three cooked meals, have a colour tv and playstation, access to the prison gym and library, be amongst their friends….in other words, far more than they would otherwise have in their bedsit at home. If La Moye followed a philosophy to the army prisons they’d save a fortune and have very very few second-offenders.
Comment 66 – “70% of prisoners are local” – no, not correct – they simply do not class the English as ‘foreign’ for the purposes of this story.
Report abuse
I think it is unfortunate that most of those that comment have no understanding. Did you know;
1. Nearly all cells in La Moye still have a bucket for a toilet.
2. That prisoners are locked up 16 hours a day.
3. That many prisoners do not hvae the sat tv and playstations that are suggested.
4. That families are obliged to pay for all non food items, i.e. hygene items/clothes etc.
5. That many critics of the custody system do not understand it.
Ask a prison officer?
Report abuse
ZBD, unfortunately my insomnia is a side effect of essential medication, but it’s worth it. Thanks for the suggestion though.
I agree about the costs of court cases etc. If the defendent is found guilty then I see no reason that the costs of bringing the trial should not be charged to them. Is there any good reason (in law) why these costs must be met by the taxpayer?
And I agree with BS Deluxe that taking away freedom is not enough. Human nature requires us to have a little bit of restriction anyway, too much freedom can be difficult to handle. Jails, however, currently have such a perfect mix of regime and luxury that it is not uncommon to find that people want to go back there. Anything that people want to go back to is not going to stop crime! A bed and 3 meals a day is fine but during the day they should work 9-5 and treats should be infrequent and thoroughly earned. The rest of us that work for a living, pay for our own food and home AND luxuries are being made mugs!
Report abuse
Apologies to Tobias re my thread 75….I meant Born warrior.
Report abuse
78
I have to say I do not believe all of your “facts”.
Human Rights legislation would not allow for a bucket as a toilet……” Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself “.
Report abuse
@73 The Law:
I know my English if far from perfect but I’ll repeat what I said, do my best to express myself clearly, and please put some attention and try to understand what I’m saying.
I know the idea of Human Rights. I have no problem with the right to a fair trial and in my opinion the right to a fair trial should be warranted for anyone and everyone.
In my opinion once one had the trial and were convicted he/she should not be protected in any way. “Volenti non fit iniuria” . Once one have chosen to go against the law, and it was proved (by conviction in *fair trial* – then the law should not protect him/her. He/she have chosen that the law is not binding him/her – so it also should no protect one.
Simple rule.
The example you gave is irrelevant. It is an example of breaking right to the fair trial.
“The reason that it appears that criminals use human rights legislation more than other people is because they are the ones in most danger of being mistreated by the system”
They are not in danger to be mistreated – they have chosen to be in such a position, it was their own will, their own decision They *wanted* to be in such a position. Sorry but *no protection* is this case.
@ Annoying Bar Steward
The law (all) is not a shield, bunker, anything material. It is just AGREEMENT, rule. It does not protect anyone itself, it works only if people agree to act according to such a rule(s).
The law works because there is system (police) which enforces it. Did anyone stop Hilter and prevent annexation of Czech ? Prevent attacking Poland or occupying Jersey? No, and not because there was no appropriate law. So please stop mixing WW1 and WW2 here, because it is not relevant at all.
The criminals (and please bear in mind that criminal is the one who committed the crime and GOT CONVICTED in a trial) decided to broke the agreement, their wilful criminal activity was proved in a trial, so the law they knowingly and wilfully decided to break should not be applied to protect them.
“What happens to people who are innocent? Statistically up to 5% of people found guilty in a court of law are actually innocent”.
And what happens now? Are they protected from court mistake by Human Rights? NO. Would anything change in that matter if you abolished Human Rights ? NO. So what’s the point with your statistics?
Report abuse
Comment 78 Uninformed “I think it is unfortunate that most of those that comment have no understanding. Did you know;
1. Nearly all cells in La Moye still have a bucket for a toilet.
2. That prisoners are locked up 16 hours a day.
3. That many prisoners do not hvae the sat tv and playstations that are suggested.
4. That families are obliged to pay for all non food items, i.e. hygene items/clothes etc.
5. That many critics of the custody system do not understand it”.
My God that’s terrible, this sounds punitive, you can’t have punishment in prison!
OK lets re house them, sat tv, free bar, room service – how are they supposed to re integrate into society if we don’t treat them like humans?
Report abuse
Tobias 77
…being imprisoned is really no hardship – three cooked meals, colour tv, playstation, access to prison gym and library and being amongst friends…is far more than foreign prisoners would have in their bedsits.
This statement makes me cringe…not at your words, but at the fact there may be some truth in it.
You and I were fortunate enough to be born on the right side of the track which, in my humble opinion, should make us sympathetic towards those who have left their homeland in search of a better life.
Not all foreigners land in Jersey with ciminal intent, sometimes people just “go off the rails”.
Admittedly, the cost of keeping them in prison is outrageous, but that’s down to bad “housekeeping”…especially if Uninformed 78. is speaking the truth.
The real problem though is if foreign criminals should be deported or not, and I think they should be allowed to choose.
Imagine a young couple that come over, both find jobs and a place to stay. Things are fine for a few years, they have children, the children start nursery, school, etc., then suddenly “daddy” goes off the rails (drugs, violence, theft, etc.) and ends up in prison.
What happens if the man is deported? Should the wife and chidren follow and go back to hardship, or stay and struggle through? They are innocent victims and must be considered. Things are never as clear cut as we would like, and that is why we must always respect a man’s rights, that is what our society is all about…respect.
Report abuse
Wroclaw we completely disagree on every level.
You ASSUME that everyone convicted of a criminal offence is guilty when the reality is a small percentage sadly are not.
You say that once someone is convicted they should be treated like an animal and denied any access to human rights – this is an abomination.
WW1 and WW2 are entirely relevant here. The many people who were persecuted by Hitler were denied Human Rights by Hitler and his regime, a process which continues to this day in places such as Africa.
We lead the world on this issue. We say that every man, woman and child WHATEVER THEY HAVE DONE – ARE PROTECTED BY HUMAN RIGHTS. As long as we stick by this then in those countries who comply with Human Rights and whose people enforce it then nobody like Hitler and his regime can enforce their ideas because IT GOES AGAISNT HUMAN RIGHTS. THAT IS WHY THEY WERE CREATED AND WHY THEY EXIST TO STOP PERSECUTION AND ABUSE OF HUMANS. This is why they are sacrimonial and should be protected at all costs.
Money is not and never can be the issue here, what is the issue is protecting man, woman, and child from persecution i.e. people such as yourself who would pass judgement and burn half the people in La Moye if you could because you think they are damaging your pocket.
If you dont like it move to IRAQ or a rogue state in Africa where they still condone death and other forms of punishment such as stoning. Alternatively shut up and realise that you are very very lucky to live in this society under the rules that our fathers and grandfathers fought and lost their lives for.
Report abuse
81
If you do not believe the facts Telephone La Moye and ask for confirmation
Report abuse
Slawek (82):
Some human rights are qualified and others are unconditional. By your standards, the unconditional right not to be subjected to torture would be denied to prisoners (and as Annoying Bar Steward rightly says, some are not even guilty). Yes they are in danger of being mistreated – prison exists for many reasons, only one of them being punitive. Criminals get put in prison to stop them from being a danger to society, to discourage other people from doing things against the law (the idea of getting caught at all is discouraging, never mind getting tortured etc. when you’re in prison!)
Also, there are many studies which show that putting somebody in prison is actually less successful in stopping somebody from re-offending than non-prison sentences such as community service. There is also no difference in the re-offending rate depending on the length of the sentence, for that matter, or what would happen to them in prison.
My reference to the Belmarsh detainees was relevant to the extent that you were saying that human rights should not exist. I can give you more directly relevant examples on demand should you wish.
Report abuse
I do apologise my comment 84 is for Slawek not the entire city of Wroclaw as I have mistakenly referred. It would be hilarious if Slawek was actually from Wroclaw!
Report abuse
The Law
Why don’t we just have a lawless society then and do as we please….how would you like that?
We all (mostly) know right from wrong and if someone abuses the human rights of another then why should they keep theirs when they had no regard for their victims? Please explain.
The reason most people re-offend it because either there is no deterrent or their sentences were cut short….simple.
“Also, there are many studies which show that putting somebody in prison is actually less successful in stopping somebody from re-offending than non-prison sentences such as community service”
In my opinion these “studies” aren’t worth the paper they are written on.
Report abuse
Shortly after Belmarsh prison was built and populated I was fortunate to join a party being shown around.
The governor (not the top one) showing us around told us that the inmates were all in there because they were inherently evil and implied that they would never change.
I felt saddened by the inflexibility of his view.
How can I tell if he was right or wrong?
Report abuse
Uninformed… there are situations where it is fantastic to not be 100% sure of all the facts and this is one of those situations. I could only know exactly how prisoners are treated if I had committed a crime and been jailed for it. Still having had conversations with many people who have been inside I can have a pretty reasonable idea without having to go to such extreme measures.
The Law: the statement that BS Deluxe quoted I also wish to comment on. There may well be such studies but they are usually specific to people from certain backgrounds and pertain to certain crimes. There is hard evidence that people intentionally get themselves put back in jail because life is easier for them there than on the outside. There is also hard evidence that society is currently lacking in deterrents for youth crime. Thankfully even some of the most irritating young people would still be seriously put off crime if a prison sentence was a real possibility. We need to balance all these things.
Personally I feel the most important issue is getting the law and punishment tough enough to deter a new breed of criminals then sorting out the situation for existing criminals.
Slawek, your English is far better than that of many people who have English as their first language.
Report abuse
@ 84 & 87 Annoying Bar Steward
No I’m not from Wroclaw
I agree that we completely disagree
.
It doesn’t matter what I assume. What does matter we (civilization) have created a law system, where the decision guilty/not guilty is made in the discretion of the court. The system is not free from mistakes – too bad, but since it is as it is, and since we agreed to live under its rules, then we should accept this and work on improving it = eliminating or at least significantly decreasing number of mistakes. Not on limiting its capabilities.
The system was created to protect MAJORITY, not few fellows which have chosen easy way at the expense of others, and it should protect MAJORITY.
I’m not very concerned about those “up to 5%” because:
1. Up to 5% might be 0.1% as well.
2. There is MAJOR difference between 5% convicted for speeding while they were not, 5% innocents convicted for robbery, or 5% innocents convicted for rape or murder or terrorism. Your so called statistic is simple worthless because does not say anything about categories. What criminal have done is extremely important here, because human rights are over used in heaviest crimes cases.
Murder cannot be deported or simply eliminated, recidivist rapist cannot be chemically castrated, because they are protected by human rights. They serve loong sentences (hopefully, but this is not always the case unfortunately) at our expense, and of course they cannot hard work to pay for harms they caused or even costs of their accommodation. Why – because it is against human rights. Even thieves or vandals – they SHOULD be sentenced to hard labour to pay for what they steal or destroy. No, because it is against human rights.
And tell me – where are human rights when it comes to victims ? Isn’t it an abomination that victim have actually LESS rights than offenders? It is to me, but not to you obviously.
About treating criminals like an animals – well I don’t know how about you, but in my case “treat someone like an animal” means treat with love and take care of. Definitely criminals do not deserve to be treated like an animals – it is way to gentle.
About Africa – great example that Human Rights is just a delusion in fact. People in Africa – are they protected by Human Rights ? No ? Yes ? So why they suffer ?
…”We lead the world on this issue. We say that every man, woman and child WHATEVER THEY HAVE DONE – are protected by human rights.”
Yes, I agree. We are the leaders in shutting ourselves in feet. By focusing on protecting degenerates (“**WHATEVER THEY HAVE DONE**”) and not their victims, nor the rest of society.
You know – most probably we differ in only one thing – in definition of HUMAN. You believe that human is every homo sapiens. I believe in a bit more restricted definition of human – humanity in my opinion is defined by conscious behaviour and not only by genre. If you consciously don’t act like majority of humans then simply you are not.
@86 The Law
“Criminals get put in prison to stop them from being a danger to society, to discourage other people from doing things against the law (the idea of getting caught at all is discouraging, never mind getting tortured etc. when you’re in prison!)”
1. I never said anything about torturing prisoners – you’ve said that.
2. How about the idea of “compensation of injury” ? Why don’t criminals work to pay off for harms and damage they caused? Why WE are punished in fact by carrying cost of isolation of such a individual from society ?
Don’t you think that it would be much more educational if (even young) vandal or theft for example would have to work hard in prison to pay for damage he/she did ? In my opinion it should be a part of ‘package’. I’ve heard too many stories about hobos breaking shop-windows only to be caught and lock up for few winter months.
Report abuse
How does anyone know that they are not classing the English as foreign in this story?
Always on this site we get the backbiting against the English.
When you made your living from Farming – the English were your biggest market.
When you made your living from tourism – the English were your biggest market.
Now you make your income from finance and once again it is the English who have largely made this possible.
Every day Jersey locals should get down on their knees and thank the English for what they have provided for them.
Because when we go – then your island will be a shell of it’s current self.
Report abuse
@92 simonesays
As you obviously noticed I’m not a Jersey man, so consider my opinion as a side view.
In my opinion what you’re saying is simply unfair.
While it might be true (I don’t know the numbers so ‘might’) that UK is the biggest Jersey market for food, tourism and finance it is not something requiring Jersey thanks on its knees. Simple because it is just a business matter. English people were/are not forced to buy/use Jersey products, Jersey did not grow using English taxpayers money.
Englishman are free to buy any food they like. If they buy Jersey food they buy it just because they like it better than their own, and not to help Jersey. Jerseymen could simply say – Englishmen on your knees to thank us to give you the opportunity to buy our delicious food.
English tourists are free to go anywhere, but they are choosing Jersey for some reasons. So they should be happy that they have nice place not far away, where all are speaking English, to come and have some rest.
Finance comes here just because it is profitable. Because taxes here are low, lower than in UK. So in this case you should thank you on your knees Jersey man for having not so greedy tax system – it saves English finance companies hell amount of money.
Don’t be offended – I’m just trying to show you different point of view.
Regards,
Slawek
Report abuse
Hi Slawek
It is very refreshing to see somebody with a balanced view on these forums…..being able to see an issue from both sides is a highly underrated skill.
Thank you.
Report abuse