Price of freedom

Before prisoners are released, it is vital to assess if they pose a risk to society. Robert Verkaik discovers how the key decisions are made

Mark Woolf likes young girls. He befriends them in shopping centres, asking for directions and then engaging them in seemingly innocent conversations. His questioning quickly becomes more direct as he attempts to unsettle the girl so that she will let him lead her out of the familiar safety of the centre. Within half an hour of their meeting, the girl will have become the victim of a serious sex assault.

Woolf, 23, is a predatory paedophile who has been convicted of a string of sex offences, some involving violence. In a few weeks' time, he'll be released from prison. At Kent Police headquarters in Maidstone, a specialist group of detectives, probation officers and social workers is meeting to finalise a plan that they hope will curb the threat that Woolf poses to girls in his community. These are extremely high stakes. If they get it wrong or misjudge the risk, Woolf's next victim may not survive the attack.

A protection panel will have to make a similar assessment should Ian Huntley ever be ready to return to society. Under a provision for high-profile cases, another panel, in a different part of the country, will shortly convene to manage the release of Huntley's former girlfriend, Maxine Carr. Carr, whose greatest danger is from the public, is one of 52,809 offenders who have been deemed to need special handling by the new public-protection arrangements that came into force two and a half years ago. Some of these offenders are known to be very dangerous, but until they commit another offence, they are free to live anonymously in the community. Only the most high-risk cases are referred to these special panels.

Maurice O'Reilly, a senior Kent probation officer, is chairing the meeting that will decide the management of Mark Woolf. He begins by telling the panel that when Woolf leaves prison, he will not be subject to any statutory probation supervision. This means that Woolf can go about his life unhindered. In most respects, he is an ordinary 23-year-old who likes football, music and girls of his own age. But O'Reilly knows that this makes Woolf more dangerous, not less dangerous.

"It would appear that Mark Woolf is determined to do his own thing, and this has been the pattern of his behaviour from the start," says O'Reilly. "It's difficult to see how his level of risk is going to reduce because he has a pattern of behaviour that offends other people, but at the same time says he is doing nothing wrong."

Jane Hughes, a representative from Kent Social Services, is worried about the safety of Woolf's former girlfriend, Mary. She has two teenage daughters but refuses to meet Jane to discuss the risk, claiming she has split up with Woolf. There is irritation among other panel members that a vulnerable woman who is clearly at risk from Woolf is being unhelpful. Detective Chief Inspector Nora Chandler tells the panel that the monitoring of Woolf's calls from prison has revealed that he has phoned Mary on at least 70 occasions. The panel is very uneasy about the obvious dangers that the two daughters now face. Social Services is also concerned about the welfare of Mary's two babies, who may also be threatened by Woolf once he is released.

Each of the 12 members of the group will be asked to give their own assessment of the level of danger that they believe Woolf poses to society. If there is a disagreement, the two sitting members of a Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel have the casting vote. In Kent, that means Maurice O'Reilly and DCI Chandler.

The risk is so great that the panel agrees that the Kent Police should secretly keep Woolf under 24-hour observation. As a convicted sexual offender, one of the conditions of his release is that he must not have any contact with young girls.

Six weeks later, the panel meets again. DCI Chandler tells the group that within two hours of leaving prison, the police surveillance team witnessed Woolf approaching a young girl at a bus stop. Although he didn't assault her, it is a breach of his order. A few hours later, he made two more determined approaches to two more girls. The surveillance team, taking no more chances, moved in and arrested him.

Mark Woolf is now back in prison, on remand, waiting to be sentenced for the three breaches of his order. The panel's intervention has been a success. Many of the most determined offenders, under the supervision of a public-protection panel, are stopped in this way.

Before the creation of public- protection panels, there was little provision for the police, probation, social services and prison staff to mount a co-ordinated operation against an offender bent on committing further sexual or violent assaults after their release. O'Reilly says: "I think the Soham inquiry is going to place a greater emphasis on public-protection arrangements and greater sharing of information among agencies. In Kent, sharing information has enabled us to manage offenders more successfully." A police representative from the panel has been asked to go to court to ensure that the judge knows exactly what kind of risk Woolf poses to society. The group will continue to monitor Woolf even when he is in prison, serving what the panel hope is a long sentence.

Andrew Mink, 25, poses a different problem for the panel. Since he was a teenager, he has expressed a desire to kill himself, and devoted most of his life to that end, often committing acts of self-mutilation. But, in a worrying development, Mink is showing a desire to die a more dramatic death. After causing a massive explosion in his block of flats, he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. Later this year, he is due for release. The panel fear that, if he is not properly managed, he could cause other deaths in his quest to kill himself. They have asked the Fire Service to assess the risk that he poses.

After a face-to-face interview, Fire Officer Stuart Smith says that he believes that Mink's sole intention is to kill himself. "He said he was intent on committing suicide, not going out with a bang. I don't think he is a fire-setter - I think the issue is self-harm and killing himself." But some of the others suspect that he was telling Smith what he wanted to hear, and are alarmed that Mink was also asking the fire officer questions about the technicalities of causing explosions.

The panel are concerned that Mink has a history of arson, and that he is capable of "manipulation". O'Reilly tells the group: "We should recommend that he should not be released early because the risk hasn't been reduced." The panel concur, but know that he will ultimately be released. They are concerned that he may move back to his mother's home in a large block of flats. They ask the Fire Service to carry out a thorough risk assessment of the building, but strongly advise that he should live in alternative accommodation.

These two cases provide just a snapshot of the panel's work. A study published this month by the British Psychological Society suggests that such professional scrutiny could be called upon even more in the future.

Maurice O'Reilly and Nora Chandler are real names. Other names have been changed