Agenda item

1.            Mr Wood explained to the Select Committee that Standford Hill was an open prison on the Isle of Sheppey, which released its residents back into the community.  He and Mr T and Mr M had been happy to attend to help the Select Committee with its understanding of knife crime as Mr T and Mr M had both committed knife crimes.

2.            Mr M told the committee that he had been in prison since 2008, when he was 16, so had served 11.5 years. He had come from South London and had grown up with gang culture since he was 11, and this was the culture and lifestyle he understood and had been attracted to. Since being in prison, however, he had realised that a better use of his time was to work constructively to help others to understand the dangers of gang culture and avoid them repeating the mistakes he had made.  He had changed and now had a chance to do better in his life.

3.            He then talked about the offence for which he was arrested – a fatal stabbing of a young man by a large number of people. Mr M and his friends had been young and naïve and been drawn into the gang which was carrying out the attack.  Seven young men had been found guilty of murder and been given life sentences, but three, including Mr M, had not been directly involved. When the case came to trial, it had been an eye opener to be found guilty of ‘joint enterprise’ – knowing about a crime being committed but doing nothing to stop it.  As they had run away and not taken a direct part in the attack, they had thought they would not be found guilty. They had seen the incident being reported the next day on the news.  His life had changed from that point.  The whole experience had been a lesson in the need to be aware of who he spent time with.

4.            The Chairman thanked Mr M for sharing this very frank account and acknowledged the remorse he had shown since and the integrity with which he now conducted himself.

5.            Mr M went on to say that he had not consciously ‘joined a gang’; it was just a group of local friends spending time together to get out of the house.  They all came from single-parent homes, had no father figure in their lives, and had mothers who worked at two or three jobs to support their families; the group of friends became their new ‘family’.  They started to do stupid things out of boredom.  Youth clubs were being shut down and there was nowhere to go.  He had started to smoke weed at 11 and he and his friends had thought they looked cool.  They aspired to get what they saw older boys had, and committed themselves to trying to get those same things.  There was no-one to tell them to avoid bad influences.  The police started to arrest them for small offences, and it was the police who called them a gang, so they took on the gang persona, gave themselves a gang name, established an area and started to act like a gang. They would meet up with other groups and have fist fights, with maybe 30 people on each side.  His older cousin had told him to stick to using his fists, but he and his friends had started to carry small hammers, then small knives, then firearms.  At their young age they did not understand how far they were being drawn in, until one day they saw someone with a really big knife, and a friend was beaten up and put into hospital.  They waited until a while later, to avoid the police who had been looking into that incident, and his friends and others went out to avenge the earlier attack. One man had had a large ‘Rambo’ knife with a serrated edge, and everyone had praised him for being well armed. Fear of seeing such a big knife made some run away, but others thought they should get themselves similar weapons.  It was at that point that he realised he was trapped into a lifestyle he could not get out of. Although he had served his punishment in prison, after his release some people would still seek revenge for what he had done. He would be branded by what he had done years ago, and the wish for revenge would be ongoing, unless a person was seen to have left that lifestyle behind them by holding down a good steady job and leading a respectable family life. 

6.            Mr T then told the committee about his experience.  He was serving a life sentence for knife crime and had been in prison since 2002, when he was 23.  His background had been similar to Mr M’s, except he had not been in a gang.  He had seen much domestic violence and was used to living in a violent environment, although he had found this frightening.  He had worked for a while before developing mental health problems and becoming depressed.  He did not know how to manage his depression because, at that time, to admit to having mental health issues was frowned upon, so he kept it to himself and eventually had a breakdown.  He was then living in a hostel for vulnerable adults, which included drug addicts.  He did not take his meds or take any advice from a GP.  One day, while visiting a friend, he had hallucinations that there was someone else in the room, and he picked up a knife and struck out at them, fatally stabbing his friend.  He described himself as a statistic of knife crime.  He had seen much crime using weapons. Firearms were expensive so everyone carried knives as they were cheap and easy to buy in any supermarket. Young people in prison now for knife crime placed no value on life.  The situation would get worse before it got better. Violence was normal in his background, and although people had fist fights, they would not have thought of carrying knives.  When knives were carried it was just to scare people.  His victims were the family and community that his friend had left behind, and the impact for them of what he had done was huge.  By talking to the Select Committee today, and to others elsewhere about knife crime, he was trying to make a difference.  However, this did not take away from what he had done years before.   

7.            The Chairman thanked Mr T for telling his story so candidly and said how grateful the committee was to hear the first-hand accounts from him and Mr M.

8.             Mr Wood also thanked Mr M and Mr T for speaking to the committee and said that he had identified other Standford Hill residents who would be happy to help the committee with its information gathering but did not feel able to attend the meeting today.  Summing up what the committee had heard, he referred to what Mr T had said about the accessibility of knives and the ease with which they could be obtained, wiped off after use and disposed of.  This did not apply to firearms.  If someone was caught going out ‘tooled up’, ie carrying a weapon, the sentence for carrying a knife was less than half what it would be for carrying any other type of weapon.  The impact of a shot from a firearm would almost-certainly mean death, whereas, if someone were stabbed avoiding major organs, they could be badly injured but live on.  A knife scar would be seen as a trophy, which would earn them respect and recognition among their peers as someone who had proven themselves.

9.            Mr Wood, Mr T and Mr M then responded to comments and questions from the select committee, including the following:

a)    asked what they thought were the effects on knife crime of childhood trauma or poverty, Mr M said that most people he knew had grown up without the finer things in life, and the only way they knew of making money was via drugs and crime.  They put much energy into not getting caught, but this energy could be put instead into other things, such as studying, training and building a constructive business.  Mr T said he thought that trauma and deprivation were key factors in the rise of knife crime;

b)    asked about the effects of popular music in encouraging knife crime, Mr M said he believed that some music inferred violence and indirectly endorsed knife crime, and perhaps those publishing and promoting that music did not appreciate the message it was sending. Young people listening to it would pick up the message and respond to it.  Some musicians were making a career out of such music but were exerting a very bad influence on young people;  

c)    asked if long sentences served as a deterrent to people committing knife crime, Mr M said he didn’t think prison worked as a deterrent. Unless and until people were willing and ready to change, they would not learn and change, however many courses they took in prison. More stabbing incidents occurred inside prison than outside; 

d)    Mr Wood, Mr T and Mr M were also asked if they would be willing to respond to the Select Committee’s report, when published, and they offered to respond to other questions the committee wanted to send them, including why they thought people were now carrying larger knives and how they thought people could best be educated about knife crime;

e)      asked how he was preparing for life after release, and how those on shorter sentences managed their time to prepare sufficiently, Mr T said he was a licensed resident of Standford Hill. He worked for five days a week for a charity, through which he was learning skills such as admin, technology and dealing with the public. At this job he has known just as a volunteer; although his manager knew he was a resident of Standford Hill, none of the other volunteers did.  Through doing this job, he had developed the coping mechanisms he would need for life after release. He said that steady integration over a long period was vital to achieve a positive release and avoid re-offending.  To undertake this preparation properly needed time, and those on shorter sentences did not have the time, or often the inclination, to review and change their behaviour. Regardless of how many courses someone attended in preparation for life outside, they had to be ready and willing to learn and change.  Many on short sentences simply bided their time until release and did not engage with any learning or developmental opportunities offered to them;

10.         Mr Wood said that Mr T and Mr M had both served in closed prisons before being moved to Standford Hill to be prepared for release.  Mr T was working in a community placement and Mr M would soon start to prepare for release by attending University of Kent in Canterbury to help criminology students with their case studies.  He advised that, out of the overall prison population at Standford Hill of 464, up to 250 prisoners were released daily into the community, taking on a range of education, training or employment.  Some went back to the sort of work they used to do before they had become involved in crime.

f)     Mr M was asked about the sense of belonging he felt at the age of 10 or 11, how important this had been to him and if anything at that time would have helped his situation. He explained the experience that he and his friends shared, of having no father figure, and how this had drawn them together.  A feeling of great trust had grown up between them and they all looked out for each other.  He emphasised that they were given love and care at home and that their mothers did well in the circumstances in which they found themselves but had to work long hours to support them and so were not at home much. As an adult he now evaluated the influences he had taken and realised that he had let himself be influenced by older peers rather than listening to his mother.  He had not accepted her authority but would obey older gang members, probably due to the fear he had of them;

g)    asked if the ‘gang’ title given to them by the police had brought them any kudos, Mr M said that it had, and people had respected them, although he realised in retrospect that this was not something to be proud of.  By the reaction they gave to the ‘gang’, people around them had actually been supporting them into the gang lifestyle;

h)    Mr T said that, when he was young, many after-school clubs and youth clubs were closing down so he did not have the chance to go to them. He was shy and awkward, and being like this would impact a lot on what a child could do. He referred to Mr M’s comment about the police labelling his friends as a gang and said that, by doing this, they had unwittingly encouraged gang behaviour; and

i)     asked what the County Council could do to help address knife crime, Mr T said they could reach out to the community and ask people what they wanted and needed in terms of services and facilities, eg after-school clubs, and let the community say.  Mr M said they should educate young people on knife crime earlier on, as children could start to become involved earlier than people realised.  He started learning about it in year 5 (aged 11) but this was relatively late.  Older youths could help to educate and influence younger children about the dangers of knife crime.

11.         Mr Wood supported these views and agreed that young people who knew the culture could be useful in helping to educate younger children as they could tell them at first hand about the effects of knife crime and help to change their mindset while there was still time to do so.

12.         The Chairman thanked Mr Wood, Mr T and Mr M for taking to time to attend and help the committee with its information gathering.  He advised them they would be sent a written summary of what was said at their interview for checking and any comments and changes they wished to make.  On behalf of the committee, he hoped that both Mr T and Mr M’s contribution to society would be evident in their lives after release and that they would continue to tell others their story and help them to understand the dangers of knife crime.