1. IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Consultation with Young People &
Practitioners
Held on the 19th May 2016 at the CCRC offices, St Phillips Square, Birmingham
3. 2
1. Context
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) commissioned this consultation, and
subsequent report, to better understand why the proportion of applications from young people to
them is significantly lower than the youth population of the prison estate:
15-17 age group (866) 1%
18-20 age group (6,272) 7%
21-24 age group (12,822) 15%
(June 2013 House of Commons Library)
The CCRC receive only 0.38% of its applications from under 18’s and 3% from the under 25s.
The CCRC is not satisfied with these statistics and wanted to understand how these could be
improved. For the purposes of the consultation a young person was defined as anyone under the
age of 25.
2. Purpose
The over-arching aims of the consultation were to understand the following points through
consultation with practitioners and young people:
To what extent young people are aware of the CCRC and what could be done to improve
their awareness and recognition.
How to improve services and make processes more accessible and user friendly.
To establish if there is enough information and support available to prison officers and
YOT officers that engage with youth offenders to apply to the CCRC.
• To explore when and why young people plead guilty.
• To explore the legal advice, information and support offered to young people about the
CCRC and if this affects decision making regarding applications.
As Black Asian and Minority Ethnic groups are significantly over represented particularly in the
youth CJS (The Young Review estimated 43.7% in 2014) it was essential that Black and
or/Muslim individuals with lived experience were an integral part of the process.
4. 3
3. The Background
Amanda Wood, Director and Founder of Safe Innovation Projects Limited
(www.safeinnovationprojects.com) initially met with the CCRC in the summer of 2015 to
discuss how a consultation may be managed in order to address the disproportionalities that exist
within applications to the service. The aims were extrapolated from this meeting with an initial
proposal from Safe Innovation Projects to deliver events in London, Manchester and
Birmingham. This would have engaged key communities and representatives from across these
areas, using spoken voice artist Akala as a means to engage and encourage the attendance of
young people. Due to resource issues the initial idea put forward by Safe Innovations Project
was scaled back to one event in Birmingham.
In February 2016, Safe Innovation Projects commissioned First Class Legacy; a professional
consultancy service with strong links into the local BAME community, specifically young
people, in order to reach what could be considered a difficult client group to engage. Safe
Innovation Projects also commissioned respected community representatives to act as facilitators
and provide a strong motivation for the client group to engage.
With a considerable disproportionality across the youth Criminal Justice System, the CCRC were
keen to consult with BAME young people and practitioners to find solutions and improve their
service for this client group.
4. The Preparation
4.1 Promoting the Consultation
The event was promoted through Eventbrite via the
existing networks of First Class Legacy given their
event management experience, with supported
distribution from Safe Innovation Projects and the
facilitators. First Class Legacy supplied a designer
to create an attractive and informative flyer that we
felt would strike the right chord with young people
and practitioners alike.
5. 4
4.2 Chair and Facilitators
Chair – Nathan Dennis, Founder and Chief Officer at First Class Legacy
http://www.fclegacy.co.uk
Facilitators
Craig Pinkney – Criminologist & Urban Youth Specialist
(University College Birmingham)
Raymond Douglas – Executive trainer & Youth Violence
Prevention Practitioner (Anti-Youth Violence Network).
http://www.antiyouthviolence.com
Jason Sylvester – Youth Worker and Football Coach
(West Bromwich Albion).
These were carefully selected for their knowledge around the subject area and their ability to
engage constructively with the client group.
4.3 The Consultation Environment
It was decided that the CCRC offices located in the centre of Birmingham, compared to the
alternatives, would be the most ideal location for the consultation as it was a central point and
6. 5
not linked to rival postcodes. Due to the emotive and sensitive subject matter, and the buildings
history as a statutory office, it was considered paramount that those attending the consultation
felt as comfortable as possible. The following steps were taken to achieve an environment in
which everyone felt relaxed and able to engage in the consultation:
Refreshments on arrival.
Music was played when appropriate
The rooms were arranged informally with sweets on the table and bright post-it notes for
people to make comments on at any stage of the discussion.
A spoken word piece was performed by Dan Man Poet called ‘Dear Youngers’ in which
he gives advice to his younger self. His appearance moved people into a reflective
mindset.
A warm welcome was delivered from the chair as well as a brief introduction from the
CCRC. They welcomed questions at that point and made it clear they would be available
to answer questions throughout the event and at the end.
Fun Ice breakers framed part of the introduction.
We created a hashtag specific to the event (#YouthCCRC) so attendees could tweet about
the consultation using an online platform that they were likely to be familiar with and
share the experience with their wider network.
Chatham House Rules were applied and understood by the group.
5. The Consultation
A total of 37 people registered for the event and
23 people attended on the evening, excluding
those involved in its delivery.
Questions were asked of the full group, and an
opportunity given for Q and A with the CCRC,
before the full group was split into 3 workshop
groups. The room was split into three groups of
roughly equal size by allocating each person a
number between 1 and 3. This meant the groups
were not necessarily made up of people who
knew each other or had arrived together and were each big enough to get the range of
opinion/comments we hoped for.
7. 6
5.1 Opening questions to full group:
When asked if they were aware of the CCRC’s role, key responsibilities or service, only 2 people
who attended could answer positively.
When asked where they would go if they were incorrectly sentenced the group responded with:
Solicitor
Police
Citizens Advice Bureau
Google search “Wrong conviction advice”
Go through prison
Give up
Go to their local MP
Don’t know (5 in total)
5.2 Q and A
The perceived injustices in relation to Imprisonment for Public Protection and Joint
Enterprise came out strongly from the open group as a source of stress and confusion for
families. When those affected sought support from community organisations those
organisations were uncertain as to what to do. It was felt there is a culture of conspiracy
and an assumption of guilt before innocence.
Attendees expressed shock and dissatisfaction that before coming to the event they had
never heard of the CCRC and questioned how the service was promoted. The CCRC
responded that they did this through posters and information packs sent to prisons; Inside
Time (in-house prison paper) and the CCRC website. The CCRC were keen to pursue
what links could be made with the YOS and probation.
The CCRC were asked about how they engage with Governors and prisons. The CCRC
make about 12 visits and presentations every year but this is difficult both in terms of
CCRC time and resources and prisons are only advised to provide adequate access to the
CCRC. The CCRC were clear that they had unbridled access to information requests to
all statutory organisations but had limited ability to enforce access to prison.
The CCRC were asked if they had a good relationship with the community, they said this
was limited and they would welcome a better relationship.
8. 7
5.3 Group sessions
Each facilitator was assigned a question along with prompts designed to draw out information
around the aims outlined in section 1 and 2. Prior to the consultation they had also received
three case studies (successful, unsuccessful, and rejected) so they had some context of the
CCRC’s work. These questions and prompts were to act as a guide and if there were other
comments or individual cases people wanted to discuss space should be made for this.
5.3.1 Group 1
Question: What types of things could the CCRC do to raise its profile and make it easier to
communicate with them?
Prompts for facilitator:
- What kind of things / communication (from services / public bodies) do young people
take notice of?
- What would you do to make young people aware of whether / when they should appeal of
apply to the CCRC.
- Why don’t young people a) appeal and b) apply of the CCRC?
Three key themes came out of this group’s discussion:
1. Social Media Platforms
Social Media platforms such as Snap Chat, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and
Periscope were regarded as important in reaching out to young people but they
stressed it was essential that this was approached in a creative way and music,
images and slogans were key in getting the attention of young people.
2. The importance of the direct promotion of the CCRC by other people such as:
Developing young people within the CJS as advocates of the service. This was
considered relevant to reaching ethnic minority group representatives, young
people in prison post-conviction or after completion of their order
Youth Boards
Utilizing those who have already a relationship of trust with young people such as
youth workers, community workers and private agencies
Previous applicants to the CCRC
Engaging with solicitors
A business card which details the work of the CCRC
9. 8
The right engaging images are just as important as logo’s and slogans
3. Social issues
Potential clients feel defeated, limited knowledge of the appeals process
They need more awareness of rights
Anti-system – they just tag it on with other poor experiences
They need to be informed and shown independence
Building trust will be a step by step process
5.3.2 Group 2
Question: Would you know what to do if you were wrongly convicted or sentenced incorrectly?
Prompts for facilitator:
- Why / when do people plead guilty?
- Are the consequences/ benefits of pleading guilty explained? Who by?
- Why don’t young people a) appeal and b) apply of the CCRC?
- What could the CCRC do to connect better with young people about the appeals process?
The group felt the proposed question had already been answered in the full session, therefore
they used the group to session to contribute to the prompts around guilty pleas and sentencing.
In order to give context to the prompts the group felt it necessary to first reference an historical
perspective:
Injustice and incorrect or inappropriate legal representation
Encouragement by duty solicitors to plead guilty and register no comment without a
thorough understanding of the implications around guilt
Institutional racism within sentencing*
Lack of understanding of the CJS
* MOJ statistics support this claim: 20% per cent of Black and Asian defendants were more
likely to be jailed than white defendants for similar offences and the average sentence given to
an African Caribbean defendant is seven times longer than that for an average white defendant.
Then relate this to the Present Day:
10. 9
No fundamental change by the CJS to challenge historical bias
The System is not perceived to be about justice
Disproportionate numbers in specific groups
“We are our own enemy”, meaning that the community don’t always engage and can be
hostile toward the CJS and there is a reluctance to understand the system better
How could the CCRC connect better with young people?
Schools and Assemblies
Online surveys
Drama workshops
Apps
Promotion of case studies using video’s via social media
Citizenship
Building real links with the affected young people
5.3.3. Group 3
Question: What advice and guidance do young people receive about the CCRC?
Prompts for facilitator:
- Do YOT/probation officers offer advice about how to appeal or mention the CCRC?
- Do lawyers offer any advice about how to appeal or mention the CCRC?
- Do prison officers offer any advice about how to appeal or mention the CCRC?
- Do people have trouble finding a solicitor or lawyer to take their case? If so why?
- What could the CCRC do to connect better with other practitioners about their work?
Not known presently but potentially this would be:
Parents
Mentors
Teachers (SEN)
Young People
Youth Workers
Do probation services advise on how to appeal?
The experienced professionals in the room had not heard of the CCRC before the event.
11. 10
Young people are in and out of prison on short sentences these days, it would be those
serving longer sentences who would be more likely to have heard of them.
Why don’t young people know?
No awareness; practitioners not knowing
Practitioners should know
Do lawyers mention them?
No/ never heard of that happening
“Lawyers are money makers”
“Lawyers put you off or tell you it’s going to cost too much money”
Your own awareness of whether your conviction is sound or fair or not
In the end, young people accept what the state say.
Do prison officers ever mention them?
No they [prison system] are a law unto themselves
Do young people have trouble finding a solicitor or a lawyer?
Legal Aid – big barrier – especially for those over 18
“Difficult to find a representative passionate about the case; they just want money”
How do you find a good solicitor?
Recommendation
Word of mouth
What could CCRC do to connect better?
It was felt the CCRC lacked a personal touch, alongside a lack of knowledge within the
community; you wouldn’t know unless you needed to know.
Engagement with schools
Schools should teach this as part of citizenship
Teacher training
Engagement with YOT and Probation
Community Centre’s
Innovative Online presence
12. 11
SBTV – youth media platform and NFTR – political
Stands at community festivals such as Vasaki
Rico – knowledge base for practitioners
WM transport, advertising on public transport
Advertisement that is easy to look at and read
6. Recommendations
Communications
1. Create new literature and communication tools that reflect young people, include images they
can identify with and incorporate individuals of varying ethnicity.
2. In co-production with young people create these new communication tools and ensure there is
clarity on the CCRC’s role and place in the process. This could be in the form of a simple
tick box. Other sources of advice and guidance available from the Criminal Justice System
and its partners should be included on the material.
3. Explore Social Media platforms, with YouTube probably having the most traction, but the
content is key in order to effectively engage young people. First Class Legacy shot a video on
the evening which does have some content the CCRC can consider commissioning.
4. Improve the diversity of the staff team and consider how it uses the apprenticeship and
internship scheme to facilitate this. It is essential that this includes workforce development in
terms of conduct, recruitment, retention and promotion.
Engaging Communities
1. Use Social Media platforms to engage more constructively at a community level, Periscope
could be used for live Q & A sessions, for example around the topic of Joint Enterprise.
2. Explore how it uses previous applicants to promote their work.
3. Utilise newspaper articles, this consultation and the work completed with those with learning
disabilities to build trust and understanding and as part of the step by step process to
demonstrate independence from Government.
CJS Partnerships
1. Engage with external agencies such as the YOT and probation services, and also reflect on
how it makes links with the Transition2Adulthood service (http://www.t2a.org.uk) to manage
the issue around short sentencing for the youth population and develop partnership
approaches across the CJS.
2. Engage with OFSTED, schools and partners working in schools around Citizenship
requirements to promote learning around the CJS a cross-section of young people.
13. 12
3. Make links with JENGbA. Clear confusion came through both before, during and after the
consultation about Joint Enterprise and IPP. With recent developments in relation to Supreme
Court Judgements around Joint Enterprise and reports such as The Centre of Crime and
Justice Studies it is imperative that the CCRC act to support those who have been affected by
these legislative difficulties and therefore subject to wrongful sentences or convictions.
4. Support key partners and where possible provide a level of advice, guidance and training to
lawyers and solicitors, and consider how it utilizes the Society of Black Lawyers, the Society
of Asian Lawyers and young lawyers to achieve this aim.
5. Support Safe Innovation Projects Limited to make strategic links to the related David Lammy
MP Review into disproportionality and be part of the step by step process of creating change,
jointly building positive solutions across disparities the Criminal Justice System.
7. Conclusion
There is much work to be done to address the disparities that exist within the CCRC service and
its engagement of young people. It is not simply a case of engaging young people through
schools and youth offending teams as the issues are too complex and historically embedded. The
CCRC were clear that managing expectations within communities was paramount and
highlighted on more than one occasion that they did not want to give false hope to those that
knew of their service. This is understandable given the statistics around the proportion of
applications which result in cases heard at the Court of Appeal, however they should trust
communities to manage their own expectations and not allow this concern to influence how they
create a more inclusive service.
The CCRC are a small cog in the machine of the CJS and have limited resources, but it is clear
that communities did not know about service, and to add insult to injury, practitioners did not
either. There is clearly an issue about knowledge and understanding around the CJS across the
piece and the CCRC has a key role to play in facilitating change.
