Accident – death – Obituary News :

Understanding the Plight of Vulnerable Individuals in the Prison System

During my time in prison, I encountered numerous men who adamantly claimed their innocence, providing detailed explanations and pointing out flaws in the prosecution’s evidence. However, the reality was that most of us were serving sentences for crimes we had indeed committed. There were only a handful of individuals who truly did not belong behind bars.

One such person was Mark, my fourth cellmate at HMP Wandsworth. Mark struck me as a quiet lad, always hiding his dark floppy hair and avoiding eye contact. It didn’t take long for me to realize that something was gravely amiss with him. As we watched the news and soaps together, Mark couldn’t distinguish between reality and fiction. To him, everything on TV was factual, and the concept of categories eluded him. He couldn’t comprehend that two people could be actors or share the same first name. It felt as though I were sharing my cell with a young child trapped in a man’s body.

Functioning proved to be a struggle for Mark. He was terrified of leaving the cell and only ventured out to fetch food, avoiding showers, exercise, and any interaction with fellow inmates. Curiosity led me to inquire about the source of his fear. Mark simply replied, “Some people weren’t kind to me.” In an attempt to cook, he used our kettle, inadvertently ruining it. Worried that I would be angry, Mark’s anxiety was palpable. However, instead of anger, I felt nothing but pity for this lost soul trapped within the confines of a prison cell. Together, we found another kettle.

Mark informed me that he had been released halfway through his 18-week sentence, only to be recalled for an additional 14 days. I couldn’t fathom the purpose of this recall. With such a short sentence, there was no room for education, training, or any meaningful rehabilitation. If the original sentence was already inadequate, the 14-day recall seemed nothing short of laughable. What could possibly be achieved in such a brief period?

Even though Mark held onto his court paperwork, he still struggled to comprehend the reason behind his imprisonment. As I perused through the documents, I discovered that Mark had been incarcerated for attempting to break back into his family home, a place where he was no longer welcome. Mark did know his IQ, proudly stating, “I’ve been tested. I got 75. That’s good, isn’t it?”

We shared a cell for six days, and as his release date loomed nearer, Mark grew increasingly anxious about finding a place to live in the outside world. Armed with medical paperwork outlining his vulnerability, he hoped that the council would provide him with housing.

Our justice system is supposed to recognize that individuals lacking capacity should not stand trial. It acknowledges that prosecuting individuals with mental disorders, learning disabilities, brain injuries, or dementia may not be just. Common sense dictates that those who are not in their right mind or lack the mental capacity of an average adult should not be treated as criminals.

Mark had been interviewed by police officers and represented by a duty solicitor in court. Professionals had questioned him. Yet, after spending just half an hour with Mark, I could discern that something was severely amiss. How did these officials fail to see what was so apparent to me? According to the Sentencing Council, an IQ range of 70-80 is considered “borderline,” and individuals falling within this range are deemed “particularly vulnerable” if they enter the criminal justice system. Given Mark’s obvious vulnerability and the minor nature of his crime, I fail to comprehend who truly benefited from his imprisonment.

Recently, I have found myself contemplating Mark’s plight in light of the ongoing inquest into the tragic death of Annelise Sanderson, an 18-year-old girl who was incarcerated at HMP Styal in Cheshire. Annelise had been sentenced to 12 months in prison for assaulting a paramedic after attempting to set herself on fire at a petrol station. She had a complex history of mental illness, self-harm, and suicide attempts, having spent time in local authority care and endured significant trauma.

Shortly after arriving at HMP Styal, Annelise demonstrated her vulnerability by tying a ligature in her cell. As a result, the prison placed her under the ACCT (Assessment, Care in Custody, and Teamwork) process, aimed at minimizing the risk of self-harm or suicide. Astonishingly, just eight days later, her ACCT was closed.

Tragically, Annelise was found dead in her cell shortly before Christmas in 2020. The ongoing inquest into her death is expected to conclude tomorrow. Prisons are meant to hold individuals who have committed wrongdoings and ensure public safety. They should not serve as a means to manage the challenging behaviors of individuals with severe mental illnesses or learning disabilities. Those in need of care and treatment are unlikely to find it within the confines of our jails.

Prison life is grueling and harsh. Placing vulnerable individuals in such an environment only heightens the risk of self-harm and suicide. What we truly need are comprehensive assessments and morally sound charging decisions. Individuals like Mark and Annelise do not belong in prison.

.