Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: Of all the reforms to parole in England and Wales that were introduced after the furore surrounding the 2017 decision to direct the release of the so‐called ‘Black cab rapist’, John Worboys, perhaps the most important was the creation in 2019 of a reconsideration mechanism which obliges the Parole Board (on application) to take a second look at provisional parole decisions after they have been made. In 2022, a second scheme was introduced which permits final parole decisions to be set aside. This article – the first of its kind – considers the fruits of the author's analysis of every reconsideration and set aside decision that was published as of the end of December 2024: more than 1,300 cases in all. It offers a window not just onto how the two schemes are working but onto parole decision‐making generally. The article considers the structure and scope of the schemes; how applications are assessed; the success rates; the grounds presented; and the relationship with judicial review. It asks whether these new mechanisms have achieved what was wanted from them and concludes that, although incremental improvements are warranted, they serve an important function and ought to be allowed to continue to mature.
Source: Modern Law Review
Author: Stephen Shute
Institutions: University of Sussex, Modern Law Review
Language: English
Topic: Criminal Law and Policy
Subfield: Sociology and Political Science
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,400
Funder: University of Pennsylvania
OpenAlex ID: W4412518910