Reference..
8. I do not think, therefore, that it is
really fair to say that the Board's deliberations
show no sign of any particular urgency in resolving
the problem (? of Sino British relations). Nor
do I think that the Governor can reasonably be
expected to distort the Prisons Rules still further
by calling upon the Board. to undertake a further
review of long term sentences at this early stage.
According to our records there should, at
9.
the end of March, be 116 confrontation prisoners
remaining in gaol. These are all pretty hard
core types whose offences probably involved violence
or the possession of offensive weapons. The
Board of Review is not at all anxious to recommend
this category of prisoner for acclerated release.
10.
The postion in relation young offenders
is explained by the fact that under Prisons Rule
69A their cases are reviewed every year as a
matter of routine (as opposed to every two years
in the case of adult prisoners). The review
of such cases is therefore more or less a continuous
process and on top of this was the special review
of confrontation prisoners initated by the Governor
in March, 1969 (see Paragraph 5 above)
11.
As regards paragraph 8(c) of Mr. Denson's
recommendations, prison sentences are regularly
If Mr Denson
reviewed under Prisons Rule 694. is really suggesting
that they should be reviewed mere peviewed more
frequently, the Board can only do this if so
instructed by the Governor, in exercise of his discretion to review any prison sentence at any
time. For the reasons given in paragraphs 4 and
7 above, I do not think that this is a starter.
that ured
I am quite sure if any opporunity of releasing
prisoners on reasonable medical of compassionate
grounds were to occur, the Governor would take
daminara) 11.3.70.
it.
(A
Page 90Page 91
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.