Category Archives: Bullying in prison
GUYS MARSH INMATES DEMAND END TO GANG VIOLENCE
A group of inmates at a Dorset prison have signed a petition demanding action is taken to stop violence and attacks by fellow prisoners.
The petition signed by inmates at Guys Marsh in Shaftesbury was sent to solicitor Rhonda Hesling, secretary of the Prison Injury Lawyers Association.
She said they claim two wings at the jail are “out of control” and they are “frightened there will be a death”.
The Prison Service said it did not tolerate violence or intimidation.
The document was signed by more than a dozen prisoners and had been smuggled out of the site, Ms Hesling said.
She said it read: “There is no CCTV here at Guys Marsh, staff are never patrolling or around, we could be killed or injured on the wings.
“There is a high level of assaults here by prison gangs who roam without challenge and bullying makes everyone feel unsafe, please help us.”
‘Out of control’
Ms Hesling, also a senior partner with Hesling Henriques solicitors, said the petition was passed to her by a prisoner who had contacted her after being seriously assaulted inside the prison.
She said two wings in particular were “running out of control” and “there’s an absence of prison officers”.
“It’s clearly not something that is just one prisoner’s view,” she said.
“It would seem there’s a systematic failure in the managing of these wings, which is resulting in robbery by other prisoners upon perhaps those who are more weakened and vulnerable.
“There’s an atmosphere of intimidation and fear, and a real fear of physical violence.
“The weak and vulnerable are being beaten up and they are being bullied.”
The Prison Service said in a statement: “Violence or intimidation in prisons is not tolerated in any form and we take the responsibility of keeping staff, prisoners and visitors safe extremely seriously.
“That’s why we have a violence management system in place to deal with incidents quickly and robustly with serious incidents referred to the police immediately.”
Ms Hesling said the Prison Injury Lawyers Association was investigating the claims and was speaking to all parties involved.
COURT REFUSES TO ORDER PRISON ‘BULLY’ TO BE MOVED
A convicted murderer has failed in a High Court bid to force prison bosses to move a “bullying” gang “enforcer” to another jail.
The murderer complained that he was at “risk of serious physical harm” and objected to the presence of the “bully” on human rights grounds.
But a High Court judge refused to order prison boss to transfer the “bully”, who had been convicted of firearms offences.
Mr Justice Haddon-Cave said such action was not “necessary, appropriate or reasonable”.
The judge said he had to balance the rights of both inmates – and quoted from John Donne’s poem No Man Is An Island as he explained his reasoning.
“No man is an island, particularly in the prison community,” said Mr Justice Haddon-Cave, in a written ruling.
“Human rights legislation is not intended to permit a view of the world solely through the prism of ‘self’, without regard to the rights of others.”
The murderer claimed that while in prison he had been assaulted, subjected to a “history of threats and aggression” – and left with a “stress disorder”.
He argued that Ministry of Justice officials had breached his right to protection in prison by unfairly putting the “bully” in the same jail.
Ministry of Justice officials denied wrongdoing by prison bosses.
Lawyers for ministers accepted that the enforcer was violent but said there was no evidence that he posed a “real physical” risk to the murderer. And they said any general risk he posed was being “appropriately managed”.
They said the “bully” was unaware of the action, not legally represented, and told the judge that a transfer in such circumstances would be “manifestly” wrong.
Mr Justice Haddon-Cave today ruled in favour of the Ministry of Justice following a High Court hearing in London in July.
The judge said in the absence of exceptional circumstances, a transfer would interfere with the human rights of the “bully”.
He rejected the murderer’s argument that because the “bully” had “behaved badly” in the past his rights or need should be given “less weight”.
The judge ruled that neither prisoner should be identified.
Lawyers for the murderer said the “bully” was a member of the “notorious Midlands ‘Burger Bar Boys’ criminal gang” and part of a “prison gang which defined itself by reference to Islam”.
They said, in written papers given to the judge, that a prison profile noted how he was “believed to be an enforcer” for the prison gang, was “violent” and “believed to conceal home-made weapons”.
The judge was told that the “bully” had a “serious record for violence”.
He had assaulted prison staff and was rated high risk by jail bosses, said lawyers.
A prison officer had said he used “his Muslim brothers”, who were “basically a gang”, to “bully prisoners”, they added.
Lawyers said a staff note reported how the “enforcer” had tried to “scare and intimidate” the prisoner by saying “his Muslim brothers will get him”.
They said security information referred to the “enforcer” offering the prisoner “safety” by “becoming a Muslim”.
A prison intelligence report noted that the “enforcer” was “bullying people on the wing” and people were “scared to walk around the wing”, lawyers said.
And lawyers quoted from a 2008 report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, which said: “Muslim gangs; if you have a problem with one, you have a problem with them all. If you’re not in a gang you’re in trouble. People are converting to Islam for protection.”
COURT ASKED TO MOVE BULLYING PRISONER
A convicted murderer serving a 25-year term has taken legal action to try to force prison bosses to move a “bullying” gang “enforcer” to another jail.
The prisoner, convicted of murder nine years ago, says while in jail he has been assaulted, subjected to a “history of threats and aggression” – and left with a “stress disorder”.
He claims that Ministry of Justice officials breached his human right to protection in prison by unfairly putting the “bully” in the same jail.
Lawyers for the prisoner today asked a High Court judge to order the Ministry of Justice to transfer the gang boss to another prison.
Ministry of Justice officials deny wrongdoing by prison bosses.
They accept that the “enforcer” is violent but say the risk he poses is being “well-managed” and dispute the need for a transfer.
Mr Justice Haddon-Cave – who has reserved judgment following a High Court hearing in London – made an order saying neither inmate should be identified.
Lawyers for the prisoner said the “bully” was a member of the “notorious ‘Midlands Burger Boys’ criminal gang” and part of a “prison gang which defined itself by reference to Islam”.
They said, in written papers given to the judge, that a prison profile noted that he was “believed to be an enforcer” for the prison gang, was “violent” and “believed to conceal home-made weapons”.
He had assaulted prison staff and was rated “high risk” by jail bosses, said lawyers.
A prison officer had said he used “his Muslim brothers”, who were “basically a gang” to “bully prisoners”, they added.
Lawyers said a staff note reported how the “enforcer” had tried to “scare and intimidate” the prisoner by saying “his Muslim brothers will get him”.
They said “security information” referred to the “enforcer” offering the prisoner “safety” by “becoming a Muslim”.
A prison “intelligence report” noted that the “enforcer” was “bullying people on the wing” and people were “scared to walk around the wing”, lawyers said.
And lawyers quoted from a 2008 report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, which said: “Muslim gangs; if you have a problem with one, you have a problem with them all. If you’re not in a gang you’re in trouble. People are converting to Islam for protection.”
The prisoner was give a life sentence in 2003 – and a judge imposed a minimum term of 25 years, lawyers added.
They did not give detail of the “enforcer’s” sentence.
Lawyers for the Ministry of Justice said the “enforcer” was unaware of the action and not legally represented at the hearing.
They told the judge it would be “manifestly” wrong to move him in such circumstances.
