I know uou have caroline and i get it i really do. I know you uave corresponded with him so have a much better understanding of his personality than i do, but look at it from my perspective. Your convinced hes a physcopath but have no proof to give me to accept your opinion.
I'm not asking you to accept my opinion - simply stating it. You must follow your own thoughts. Anyway, here is the link to a government document that explains the prisoners annual assessment. It's explained in section 5 - I'll also post the relevant section below.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/offenders/psipso/psi-2011/psi-40-2011-categorisation-adult-males.docSECTION 5: RECATEGORISATION AND ALLOCATION
5.1 The purpose of the recategorisation process is to determine whether, and to what extent, there has been a clear change in the risks a prisoner presented at his last review and to ensure that he continues to be held in the most appropriate conditions of security.
Allocation often follows immediately after recategorisation but is a separate process, the purpose of which is to assign the prisoner to a suitably secure establishment which best meets his needs insofar as pressures on the estate allow.
5.2 Risk levels may increase or decrease depending on individual circumstances and the prisoner’s security category must reflect this. Due account should be taken of any intelligence, held either within the prison or received from a Law Enforcement Agency (LEA), that indicates the prisoner is involved in ongoing serious criminal activity.
5.3 Recategorisation to a lower security category is not an automatic progression or right but must be based on clear evidence of reduction in previously identified risk levels to a level that is manageable in an establishment of the lower category.
In reviewing a prisoner’s security category it is essential to look at the reasons why, at his last review, the prisoner was placed in the current security category. Only then is it possible to determine whether, and to what extent, circumstances may have changed to warrant a change in category. It is also important to consider the particular characteristics of the estate for which the prisoner is being assessed, taking account of physical security, supervision levels and regime availability. This is particularly important when considering whether to recategorise a prisoner to Category D, Because of the particular characteristics of the open estate, recategorisation to Category D must be based on the prisoner’s proven trustworthiness and manageable risks.
5.4 Two years is considered to be the maximum time a prisoner should spend in open
conditions. However, assessment of a prisoner’s individual risks and needs may support
earlier recategorisation to D. Such cases must have the reasons for their categorisation
fully documented and confirmed in writing by the Governing Governor.
5.5 Timing of recategorisation reviews
All prisoners other than those already categorised as Category D, those sentenced to less than 12 months, and ISPs (to whom PSI 36/2010 PSO 4700 Chapter 4 Serving the Indeterminate Sentence applies) must have their security reviewed at regular prescribed intervals.
Prisoners serving indeterminate sentences will be subject to Sentence Planning and Review meetings, which must be held at least every 12 months, and in line with the OM III manual. The ISP’s security category should be considered at each meeting. (See PSO 4700 Chapter 4).
The following have a six monthly review
Prisoners serving a determinate sentence of 12 months or more but less than 4 years
Extended Sentence for Public Protection (EPP) prisoners with a custodial term of less than four years
Prisoners in the last 24 months of their sentence
The following have an annual review
Determinate sentence prisoners with a sentence of 4 years or more
EPP prisoners with a custodial term of four years or more
5.6 Recalled prisoners must be reviewed within 4 working days of the Parole Board or Justice Secretary making a decision in their case.
5.7 Prisoners in the open estate, and Category D prisoners held in the closed estate, will be reviewed only if there is a change in their circumstances; their behaviour gives cause for concern or when new information or intelligence suggests an increase in risk levels. For ISPs, see PSI 36/2010 PSO 4700 Chapter 4, Serving the Indeterminate Sentence.
5.8 A prisoner’s recategorisation review must not be withheld or delayed to await the outcome of a parole hearing. To do so could be construed as unfairly jeopardising the prisoner’s chances of parole success. The review should take place at the normal time although it will normally be inappropriate to transfer the prisoner until the parole dossier is completed unless there is an urgent need to transfer the prisoner to conditions of higher security.
5.9 In addition to the prescribed timetable of reviews, prisoners may have their security category reviewed whenever there has been a significant change in their circumstances or behaviour which impacts on the level of security required. Changes might include those listed below, although other circumstances might also arise:
there is a change in circumstances or behaviour which indicates an urgent threat to prison security or the good order of the establishment
intelligence indicating involvement in ongoing serious criminality
further charges of a serious nature indicate that the prisoner requires a higher level of security
a notice of deportation is served
a Confiscation Order is enforced
a Serious Crime Prevention Order (SCPO) is imposed
new or additional information comes to light. For example, during completion or updating the OASys assessment which highlights additional risk factors
there is cause for concern that the current categorisation decision is unsound. (There must be corroborative evidence to support that concern)
the prisoner has completed a successful ROTL
serious ROTL failure
a sentence/tariff is reduced on appeal
a key piece of offending behaviour work is completed, or there has been a successful detoxification or opiate substitute maintenance regime
a prisoner is recalled to custody
a prisoner is returned to prison custody from a Special Hospital.
