LETTER FROM DI STEFANO TO THE PAROLE BOARD -  21 December 2006

21 December 2006: I have never been quite so angry as today. Returning from Jordan and Iraq I find a letter from the National Probation Service on my desk regarding Mr Bronson. I immediately wrote to the Parole Board the copy letter below and read before yourselves:

The Parole Board
Grenadier House
99-105 Horseferry Road
London SW1P 2DD
UNITED KINGDOM

20th December 2006

Sirs:

MR CHARLES BRONSON-BT1314 HMP WAKEFIELD

We refer to our letter of the 24th November 2006 and the kind acknowledgement from Mr Duncan Nichol on the 27/11/2006 at 17.32pm and Ms Sally Parkin on 27th November 2006 at 09.40am confirming that our letter would be relayed to the appropriate department.

Since that date we are astounded to learn by letter from the National Probation Service (Bedfordshire Unit) that a Probation Officer had: “booked to come up for your review in September, when you were moved to Full Sutton. I then arranged to come to see you there but you were shipped back to Wakefield. Unfortunately, I had insufficient notice of your last review to attend, although I did try to move things. I am sorry I have been unable to see you as it is easier to talk face to face. However, we are now, also facing financial constraints about travelling.”

We have to say that the above has absolutely astounded us and no less than three Counsels whom we have spoken to regarding the case of Mr. Bronson. In effect the Parole Board have taken a decision which effects the length of custody without hearing from the Probation service in pro per. Further, the situation is compounded that financial constraints now preclude the Probation Service from attending Mr. Bronson for any future report.

This simply cannot be tolerated or acceptable conduct and we are raising this matter directly with the Secretary of State for the Home Department. We must now kindly ask that an URGENT review be commissioned ex improviso since it is now clear that the previous hearing must be treated as a nullity since it clearly and on the written admission of the Probation Service failed to comply with the appropriate standards of justice and invariable contrary to the Rules of the Parole Board.

We note that the Board ‘considered’ the case of the above and on the 13th July 2006 with a sixteen paragraph decision refused to recommend to the Secretary of State either a transfer to open conditions or release on license.

If then as per the written confirmation from the Probation Service Mr Bronson was in fact due to commence a review in September we would be obliged for an urgent explanation by return fax the current status of such and confirmation that no decision will be taken prior to appropriate consultation with ourselves in order that we can arrange representation.

We are extremely concerned that despite the considerable progress made by MR Bronson “financial constraints” preclude a fair hearing following the criteria laid down to the Parole Board by the legislators.

You will appreciate Mr Bronson has remained in custody more than double the recommended term and the comments made by Lord Justice Rose in the Court of Appeal.

Please acknowledge receipt of this letter by return and confirm the urgent actions the Parole Board will now take to ensure Mr Bronson receives an immediate and most urgent review based upon the appropriate criteria.

We are again astonished at the admissions contained in the letter from the Probation Service which re-affirm our views shared by Mr Bronson that his case has not been dealt with in an appropriate and fair manner a position which we insist must be corrected forthwith since at stake is the liberty of the individual.

We take this opportunity at thanking you for your consideration and remain

Yours sincerely

STUDIO LEGALE INTERNAZIONALE

Cc MR CHARLES BRONSON c/o The Governor HMP Wakefield

In short what this means is that Mr Bronson received a Parole Board hearing and an oral hearing at that WITHOUT a Probation Officer present but more important without a Probation Report properly written and compiled. I mean we are talking about the liberty of the person here! Mr Bronson has been in prison double his tariff or recommended term and with a heavy statement from a normally tight judge (Lord Justice Rose) who is normally harsher than the alleged Iraqi Revolutionary Court IN FAVOUR OF MR BRONSON. I mean Jeez if anyone knows Lord Justice Rose if he recommends or makes a statement for the benefit of the Parole Board by golly gosh you have almost your get out of jail card in your hand. But not it seems Mr Bronson who has clearly been discriminated and now we have the clear co9nclusive written proof from the Probation Service. It is appaling! As I say its fairer in Iraq than in the UK it would appear. But I won't surrender the case of Charles Bronson because I can now see clearly that man has been targeted and its without just cause which is what I will suggest to him should be the title of his book when he is released: WITHOUT JUST CAUSE!