Cell phones

Me too. Though I am sure it can be discussed openly if
EllanVannin so wished.

I don't know why either, but I was respecting the fact that EllanVannin had mentioned this case several times but without being explicit about which one it is.

Why are these recent posts in code and secretive? If the case in not current then it is in the public domain so no need for secrecy.
There is absolutely no need for secrecy, the case has been in the public domain for years and there have been books on the matter.

Thanks Jalima

It is an ongoing alleged Miscarriage of Justice case, PECS.
I have only just worked out which one it is, a high profile case from 1985.

Why are these recent posts in code and secretive? If the case in not current then it is in the public domain so no need for secrecy. Or have I not read back far enough ..confused!!

Then there was the matter of the ex-girlfriend of the " accused " who had been manipulated by police to stand as a prosecution witness. A letter in the archives ( withheld ) would state that a guilty verdict would allow her £25,000 ! Which it did when the NOTW coughed up the pre-arranged sum organised by a solicitor for the newspaper. The ex also had a few charges which were against her ( after confession ) dropped so was immune from prosecution herself as long as she stood for prosecution as a witness against her once lover of 3 years.
All because the police had nothing on the man. He was bailed for a year before being arrested.

This ex had previously fallen out with the "accused" because she'd caught him phoning another woman.
What's that about a woman scorned ?

Jalima, sadly the perpetrator's " pedigree " would be a giveaway in todays courtroom in that she was capable of sudden violence----was on drugs and was very very sick according to the consultant psychiatrist who'd been treating her.

Petra, yes it was the local police. Calls that had been made to Witham were patched to Chelmsford because Witham station was unmanned.
Police didn't collect the " accused " he had to make his own way to his parent's house. The police were already nick-named " Dad's Army " by the father of the " accused " who was a magistrate so had had dealings with them through courts etc. Useless in other words.

EllanVannin
As I've said, I lived close to the crime scene.
I've just been reading up on the 'evidence' against 'J'
I can't believe how badly the case was handled
Was it the local police that were called that morning or the county town police?

Jalima, sadly the perpetrator killed herself
Well, as always in cases of alleged MOJ, that is, of course, an unproven allegation that she was the perpetrator.

Jalima, sadly the perpetrator killed herself. Yes, a " her " when, in the mid '80's it was fairly unheard of that a woman would/could carry out any kind of killing so as a consequence because the poor soul suffered from paranoid schizophrenia it was taken as an excuse used by the male of the household------if you get my meaning.

Because the chap who is imprisoned had not much idea of how PS manifested itself he made it his business to read up about it once in his cell.

Regardless of how long he is kept locked up he's never going to plead guilty----because he never was ! Had he have done, he could well have been released years ago.

His aim is to prove to the world that he hadn't murdered anyone.

The issue of whether or not the prisoners should be allowed more but limited access to phones is just tinkering around the edge of all that is wrong with our prisons.
The whole system needs a complete re-think and far more funding.

The chap who's imprisoned has always pleaded his innocence for the past 33 years
and I presume that as long as he keeps protesting his innocence he will be kept in prison.

I remember another fairly high profile case of miscarriage of justice which still makes me feel queasy even now. Sadly, although the actual perpetrator was found and the innocent man released, he died not long afterwards.

There are many people in prisons who should not be there, not just for that reason, but because their 'crimes' do not warrant it. I remember an elderly lady being imprisoned for a short time for non-payment of council tax years ago.

There's no need to be rude.
I will have trouble sleeping at this rate.

Iam64
The comment wasn't directed to you so there is no need to point out what you 'suppose' that she (or anyone else) knows. I'm blind to some comments and posters and the list is getting longer.
Taking issue with my comments won't elicit any response in future so you'll be wasting your time.

Have it your own way...you probably work(ed) there as you seem well acquainted with the place. Who cares? Not me.

They are given free paper and envelopes to write to anyone on an approved list of people they wish to contact. The envelopes must be left unsealed before collection by an officer.
Letters to their legal team can be sealed and incoming mail from their solicitors isn't opened by prison staff.
Landlines would (so they say) mean that prisoners could keep in touch with their children, some too young to write or read letters. They would only be allowed to ring certain numbers and no incoming calls would be accepted on the lines. They would also be recorded and monitored in real time.

GabriellaG54 There you go again. Head first. Wrong.

Why is it necessary to spend all that money on phones? The telephone is not the only means of contact ... they could be provided with the necessary to write to family and friends at a fraction of the cost and this would be much easier to monitor and control. The money made available could then be spent on more staff. Contact is contact why give them the easy option?

GabriellaG54
Yes, I see what you mean. I guess I went off at a tangent for two reasons - one the heading of the thread which is, I believe, how mobile phones are referred to in America. Also, the question just referred to "phones".

I should have read things a bit more carefully. Very sorry.

Landlines - my answer is that they should be used under supervision and not necessarily in cells.

Melanieeastanglia
Mobile phones are not allowed in prison. The ones that are in there are smuggled in by drones or visitors hiding them in their bodies etc.
The subject of the debate is whether prisons should invest in putting landline phones in cells for prisoners to maintain contact with certain approved people, on approved and vetted numbers. No incoming calls would be possible.

In general, I don't think people in prison should have access to mobile phones in their cells.

I suppose there is the argument that there are different types of crimes and some prisoners ought to be allowed to use them under supervision. Maybe there isn't a "one size fits all" answer.

holdingontometeeth
You wouldn't see it from a G4 transport vehicle.

EllaKeat
Gosh! That sounds a terrible dilemma. I can see that you were 'painted into a corner' so to speak and I'm sorry that there wasn't anyone to help you out at that time.
I agree that there are plenty of people who could be and should almost certainly be helped rather than incarcerated, which could result in losing their home and children.
I do feel for you in that situation and I'm pleased that you seem to be managing right now. It used to have the 'moniker' Grisly Risley, by all accounts.
In the past, I've invested in peer to peer lending in the UK and it must difficult for people on the brink to ask for help. They don't want hand-wringing or hugs, just practical solutions to often overwhelming situations. Yours must have been a terrible experience and I thank you for being so refreshingly open about it