QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF STUART BROWNHILL | Claimant | |
-v- | ||
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE | Defendant |
____________________
Wordwave International Limited, A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MISS C. WEIR (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared on behalf of the Defendant.
J U D G M E N T
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
"Stuart BROWNHILL Prison No: N20643 FRANKLAND SECURITY CATEGORY REVIEW - Decision
Your security category review has been completed and the decision is that you are to remain Category A (Standard Escape Risk).
This decision has been reached following careful consideration of all relevant factors, including the circumstances of the present offence, length of sentence, previous convictions and reports prepared by Frankland.
You were provided with copies of your latest security category reports and factual information relevant to the determination of your security category. Representations were submitted by your solicitors AS Law in a letter dated 5 January 2007. Additional presentations detailing the results of your recent parole review have also been submitted under a letter dated 9 February 2007.
Your solicitors noted that the LAP for your last review had noted that you had moved from substantial denial to accepting full responsibility for the index offence. They also noted that you had engaged in the sentence planning process and to-date had engaged successfully in a number of offence related courses, including FOCUS, ETS, Core and Extended SOTP, anger management and drug and alcohol awareness. They stated that when your case was last reviewed by the Director, it was noted that your case should be referred back to him following your completion of the FOCUS course.
They acknowledged that further identified offending behaviour work remained outstanding, specifically the Better Lives Booster programme and the Healthy Sexual Functioning programme. In addition, assessment for suitability for both the CALM and CSCP remained outstanding. They also confirmed your willingness to undertake outstanding programmes identified for you.
They submitted that in light of your successful participation in offence related, your willingness to complete identified work, you no longer warranted Category A conditions. Your solicitors also drew attention to your Parole Board notification dated 08.11.06 in which specific reference was made to your security status.
The Review Team noted that you were an enhanced level inmate, that you were generally quiet and polite in your dealings with staff and that your custodial behaviour was of a good standard and gave no cause for concern so far as the determination of your security category was concerned. However, good custodial behaviour within the controlled environment of a maximum security prison could not, by itself, be conclusive in determining a prisoner's level of dangerousness, other factors had to be taken into account.
The Review Team noted that you now accepted culpability for the present offence and recognised to your credit that you had been prepared to address your offending behaviour and had taken part in relevant offending behaviour work and made some progress through your completion of Core SOTP (April 2001) and the Extended SOTP (March 2003), the ETS course in October 2000 and more recently the FOCUS programme (September 2006).
The Review Team noted that following your completion of the Core and Extended SOTP, a number of courses had been recommended including the Better Lives Booster programme and the Healthy Sexual Functioning programme and that previous psychology reports had noted that you had declined to participate in assessments as you were not ready for any further treatment as you had felt that it was not helping you to progress through your sentence. The Review Team also noted that a further target set in your SARN was that you should be assessed for the CALM programme. The Review Team noted that an initial assessment for the CSCP indicated that you would benefit from undertaking a further assessment.
The Review Team noted that you had recently completed the FOCUS programme and also noted the Director's recommendation outlined in a decision letter dated 22.03.05 that your case should be referred back to him following your participation in the CALM and FOCUS programmes.
The Review Team also noted that your Parole Board notification dated 08.11.06 recorded that careful consideration is given to your security category. Concern was expressed that your present security classification may well be impeding your access to, and from carrying out, necessary risk reduction work and intervention. The Review Team can confirm that it is not within its remit to countenance downgrading in order to access particular offending behaviour programmes within conditions of lower security. The Review Team also noted that in your particular case a number of programmes/courses had been recommended to address outstanding areas of concern in relation to violence and to further address your sexual violence and that these courses were available within the high security estate.
In considering your security category the Review Team also took into account the very serious nature of the present offence in which you murdered a woman, sexually assaulted her, and set fire to her house. The Review Team also noted that you committed the present offences shortly after you had been released from a previous custodial sentence.
The Review Team acknowledged that you had made some progress in addressing your offending behaviour. However, in the interest of public protection the progress you had made to date had to be viewed against the gravity of the present offence and the fact that you had as yet not undertaken any work on anger and violence and that there were outstanding treatment needs in sexual violence. In reaching this conclusion the Review Team was mindful that it was required not only to look at the risk of re-offending on escape but the nature of harm that would result. In your particular case the Review Team concluded that notwithstanding the progress you had made, having balanced the evidence of risk reduction against the very serious nature of the present offence and your offending history there remained a significant (albeit reduced) risk of you re-offending in a similar way if unlawfully at large and that you must therefore at present continue to be regarded as potentially highly dangerous, particularly to women.
Category A Review Team
Directorate of High Security."
"He wanted a break from programmes due to engaging with offending behaviour work for over 6 years". There was a report by his probation officer making recommendations for future offending behaviour work. These recommendations included a CALM programme but it was indicated that he had stated that "he would only pursue these targets if the efforts he had made to date were acknowledged through his recategorisation".
"STUART BROWNHILL (N20643) - FRANKLAND PRISON
Security Category Review - Decision
Your security category review has been completed and the decision is that you are to remain Category A (Standard Escape Risk).
This decision has been reached following careful consideration of all the relevant factors, including the nature and circumstances of the present offence, the length of sentence imposed, your previous offending history and the latest prison reports. You also submitted representations towards your review.
You were provided with copies of your latest security category reports and factual information relevant to the determination of your security category.
The Review Team recognised that you had maintained your good behaviour since your last review. It noted you were fully compliant with the regime and showed good relations with staff and other prisoners. It noted you had received no adjudications for many years.
The Review Team however did not accept that your settled custodial behaviour within your present secure conditions, even if sustained over a long period, could in itself provide clear evidence of a reduction in your risk of reoffending in a similar way if unlawfully at large. It required further convincing evidence to show you had addressed or had achieved substantial insight into the risk factors relating to your serious offending.
The Review Team noted you had taken part in a large number of relevant offending behaviour programmes. It noted these programmes had covered a range of your identified risk factors, including your sexual offending, cognitive skills and abuse of drink and drugs. The Review Team accepted that your completion of this work had provided evidence of some progress on the specific issues addressed.
The Review Team noted however that for some time now several important risk factors relevant to your offending had been highlighted for further treatment, in particular your ability to manage your angry feelings. It noted you had been made a priority for completion of the CALM programme, but remained satisfied that evidence that you had addressed and achieved insight into this core risk factor should be available before an accurate assessment could be made of an appropriate reduction in your risk.
The Review Team also noted that outstanding issues relating to your sexual offending had been identified for further work, and that, while you had taken part in the Focus programme in 2006, you had declined to take part in the post-programme interviews. As a result the extent of your progress on the programme remained unresolved. It noted you had become disillusioned with offending behaviour programmes and had completed no new work since your last review.
The Review Team fully supported the Local Advisory Panel's recommendation that further identified work should be completed to help establish the level of your progress reducing your risk.
The Review Team noted the highly violent nature of your present offence, which you committed shortly after release from custody. It also noted your extensive previous history of offending.
The Review Team considered that your offending indicated a high level of potential dangerousness. While it accepted you had made some limited progress addressing your risk, it considered that a downgrading of your security category could not be justified until there was convincing evidence of a significant reduction in your risk of reoffending in a similar way if unlawfully at large.
The Review Team was satisfied that no such evidence was yet available and that you should remain Category A at this time.
Steve Easton
Category A Review Team
Directorate of High Security."
"If Mr Brownhill is unwilling to go on normal location at Whitemoor Prison to complete the CALM programme he can discuss with psychology staff alternative means of addressing the risk factors covered by the programme".