A SALFORD prison is one of the most violent jails in the country.
In 10 years, there have been 2,329 attacks by prisoners at Forest Bank jail in Agecroft. Last year alone there were 339.
That makes it the eighth most violent prison in England and the only Greater Manchester institution in a Home Office list of shame.
The category B prison, which houses more than 1,000 young offenders and adults, was criticised by inspectors after a surprise visit.
Their report showed assaults on inmates by other prisoners were running at 25 a month, and attacks on staff were common. A prison reform group described the jail as having a `Lord of the Flies' environment.
Lib Dem spokesman David Heath said violence among prisoners has increased more than 500 per cent nationally in 10 years - the number of reported incidents has risen from 1,791 in 1996 to 11,476 last year.
He said: "The shocking figures reveal how a decade of Labour mismanagement has left prisons in crisis and the public at risk. So many people are crammed into prison violence has spiralled out of control."
Of the 10 most violent prisons, nine, including Forest Bank, house young offenders. The worst institution in the country, at Feltham in the south, averaged more than one violent attack every day.
There were 172 prisoner attacks last year at Strangeways, with 1,188 over 10 years. Hindley Prison, near Wigan, saw 348 attacks last year, with 1,158 over 10 years. Buckley Hall Prison, in Rochdale, had only 57 attacks last year, with 417 over the decade.
And Styal Women's Prison, in Cheshire, has seen an increase in prisoner violence from 13 incidents in 2002 to 39 last year - 189 over 10 years.
The Ministry of Justice said: "One of the reasons for the apparently huge increase is a better reporting regime, which includes minor attacks previously unrecorded."
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 20 and replies | View All
Laura Norder, Didsbury (01/08/2007 at 12:08)
Maybe some of the scallies and ne'er-do-wells 'banged up' in prisons, are being provided with similar treatments to those served by them to their victims on the outside - I'd like to think so. Hell mend them!
Bejjy ex Salford now Malta, Malta (01/08/2007 at 12:21)
come-on-city (01/08/2007 at 12:36)
Shaken (01/08/2007 at 12:46)
Forward with Frank (01/08/2007 at 13:35)
When they are on the inside this creates a power vacuum and the younger one's turn to violence, then they too get banged up and another power vacuum is created. It's a terribly viscous circle.
They would be better off keeping them outside and overall crime will fall.
Tink, Manchester (01/08/2007 at 15:36)
The Catcher, In the Rye (01/08/2007 at 15:51)
xBabyBx (01/08/2007 at 17:09)
The prison officers there dont even know what they're doing! They let the inmates use mobile phones (not that theres anything wrong with using them, but the fact that the prison dont allow them makes the officers look so dumb!!), and smoke weed.
That prison has some REAL issues, communication problems amongst the staff etc. Staff who think they're big and hard (just cos u got flab on you it dont make you look tough!!!) Banning people cos they have money on them doesn't make you look strict...
Guten Tag (01/08/2007 at 17:13)
xBabyBx (01/08/2007 at 17:19)
No thats not right, prisons aren't a place to make people worse, although thats what Forest Bank seems to be doing..
Why should prisoners get involved in fights etc when they've come to serve their time for something else...
You wouldnt like it if someone close to you was sent down for a crime they didnt commit and was wrongly accused! Then was finding themselves fighting against bullies!
Forward with Frank (01/08/2007 at 17:25)
Look at animals, they don't imprison other animals do they ? They bite back hard and the other animals succumb to them. Humans are no different.
I'm not saying that law and order shopuldn't be respected but that there should only be one per cent of prisoners in prison. The rest would be better served outside.
Black Flag (01/08/2007 at 19:24)
Animals do, in many cases, operate on a system of the strong dominating the weak, but I don't agree with you that it is a system to be aspired to.
If somebody larger and stronger than you gave you a severe beating in order to take your possessions or force you to act according to their will, would you happily accept that they were right to do so because they were simply exerting their natural animal superiority?
Forward with Frank (01/08/2007 at 20:27)
A lot of these yobbos don't have me around either at home or school so someone in their community who could restore a bit or order and crack some heads together every now and again wouldn't be such a bad thing I'm sure you'll agree. If these blokes are in prison who is around to keep order?
LauraNorder, Didsbury (02/08/2007 at 09:29)
The men and women that are paid to do so... the Police Service. (Cue: the ignorant, with claims that they don't uphold the law...).
The professionals, often working with one hand secured behind their backs, need the support and help of decent members of the population to maintain the rule of law, they can't be expected to do it alone. If more people reported crime - as it happened - and were prepared to give evidence in the courts, we could all sleep easier in our beds. Too many 'witnesses' believe that 'someone else' will make a stand for them.
FwF: the human race is meant to be evolving from its base animal state... I'm not sure, when people such as yourself, advocate some weird Darwen-esque viewpoint that the stronger thugs should 'dominate' the weaker.
The Catcher, In the Rye (02/08/2007 at 16:13)
Forward with Frank (02/08/2007 at 20:54)
What right do the Police have to exert authority over us as comapared to other equal humans whom you deem thugs? Ha! They both enforce law and order but that of different bodies.
Look at the animal kingdom and find the answers to how we shoud live. Animals have some seemingly brutal ways but they generally live orderley lives. Animals don't hold elections, they respect the strongest physically and everyone below the physically strongest bow in reverance to those above. If we behaved like this the world will be a safer place, beieve me.
Black Flag (03/08/2007 at 11:46)
You're quite right to say that the police have no greater moral right to exert authority than anybody else. The key issue is that the police have to operate in line with the law, something which is often under enforced on them, but a key principle none the less. The original concept of the police was that they were ordinary citizens, with the same rights and responsibilities as everybody else.
If the thugs you idolise were operating as the police should, as ordinary citizens, bringing people suspected of committing crimes before a court of law, I wouldn't object, because I don't believe the police should have significantly greater powers than anybody else, but this clearly isn't what these people are doing. The thugs who dominate and terrorise communities aren't enforcing the law, they're following their own agenda.
Your view of animal societies is romanticised and unworkable in humans. Animals do not respect or revere the strongest, they fear them, but continually challenge them. With our superior ability to communicate and organise you'd soon find that the strongest would be defeated by a group, as even the strongest human would be unable to defeat a group. This group would then only dominate until a larger group came along and so on until you get to a point approaching rule by the majority of those who wish to rule.
The animal kingdom might present examples of how societies could be run, but as humans with the ability to reason, I think we can do a little better.
Forward with Frank (03/08/2007 at 16:18)
What I am saying is that different people react in different ways to authority and the authority needs to behave differently or at least have the ability to be adaptable.
I have the utmost respect for the law. There are those that have the utmost disrespect for the law and don't fear the consequences of breaking it.
These people need something stronger to fear i.e. people within their group who are dominant. If they are caught burgling and get a slap on the wrist from the courts then they will thieve again. If they burgled the home of a local thug and got caught and took a beating would they then try and burgle that home again? Probaly not.
Also they would in a way be helping the police because the police won't have to deal with these thugs as other thugs will dish out their own justice.
LYNSEY (31/08/2007 at 16:11)
mennis (09/11/2007 at 16:52)