“Bail Houses” Upset the Neighbours
Sending alleged criminals to live in “bail houses” in residential areas in England has led to an outcry among many people who live near them.
To those charged with keeping a lid on Britain’s growing prison population, they are a common-sense method of coping with defendants going through the courts, and with inmates who have been released from prison. However, for many of those who live near them, the bail homes – unsupervised and without formal planning approval – threaten to create a haven for drug addicts and become a magnet for crime. Petitions are frequently started by neighbours fearful of burglars, predatory paedophiles or violent thugs.
However, the government maintains that much misinformation surrounds the homes and that they never house high-risk offenders. Those who cannot be sent to bail houses include anyone convicted or accused of sexual offences, murder, arson, causing death by dangerous driving, weapons offences, cruelty to children or racially-aggravated crimes …
Private firm ClearSprings now runs 166 homes, with room for 613 people. They are ordinary two-to-five-bedroom houses in residential areas and, unlike traditional bail hostels, they have no on-site supervision … Opposition Justice spokesman Dominic Grieve said there would always be a need for bail hostels but favours the traditional model, with permanent supervision.”These are not really bail hostels, they are places for people to be sent on early release,” he said, referring to the government’s controversial policy of releasing people early from prison sentences to ease overcrowding.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman acknowledged the pressures on the prison system but said early release prisoners made up a minority in ClearSprings accommodation … “These are people who would be bailed into the community but who, for whatever reason, don’t have a home to go to,” he said … As the government points out, many of those who stay in bail houses have not been convicted of any crime.