Hell is other people

Another day, another prurient headline. But this time it's not the Telegraph or the Mail, it's the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/10453199.stm).

It seems that Caroline Cartwright has been upsetting her neighbours. Not just her neighbours, but also the postman and even random passing strangers. The lovely Caroline (married, 49) was initially given a noise abatement notice. An Asbo followed in 2005 after she reportedly breached the notice five times. Not one to be deterred, Cartwright went on to breach the Asbo as well on at least three occasions before finally being convicted and receiving a suspended sentence this January. I say 'at least' as it seems unlikely that there were only three incidents during the four years from the Asbo to Cartwright being brought to trial*.

That, sadly for her neighbours, was not the end of it. Cartwright was found to have offended again in March and was up before the beak once more. A further suspended sentence followed, with the judge using the immortal line "this court is giving you one last chance" and promising that a further breach would definitely lead to jail time.

Now for the punchline. What was the cause of the ruckus? We're told that one of Cartwright's crimes was playing loud "dance music", and I would guess this was what really caused most distress to the neighbours. However, what makes this story notable, what actually makes this a story at all, is that Cartwright was also found to have engaged repeatedly in noisy sex. "Shouting and screaming" noisy sex. With her husband, perhaps I should add.

Now that's out of the way, my point - did the judge make the right decision? Not legally, since I assume his decision was legally sound. But was it the right moral decision?

It seems to me that imprisonment serves three purposes: revenge on behalf of society, punishment as a deterrent, and the protection of others. This provides two of my several reasons for not being a fan of locking people up. Firstly, revenge is one of the most ignoble sentiments and a terrible basis for a civilised criminal justice system. One imagines that it is the basis for Daily Mail readers' "throw away the key" mentality, but they're not civilised so don't count (the subject for a seperate blog entry perhaps?) Secondly, punishment as a deterrent clearly does not work (another topic ripe for its own entry). So that leaves the protection of others, something that I am in favour of. But how often is society made safer by locking up a heroin dealer? Hardly ever is the slightly surprising answer (ah, the War On Drugs - the biggest blog entry of all). So all in all prison is pretty rubbish, with the relatively rare exceptions when locking someone up actually protects other people.

Now consider Cartwright's neighbours. This wasn't just a recent or rare phenomenon. It has been going on since at least 2005. Anyone who has endured a neighbour's pumping bass lines knows how unpleasant and frustrating it is. It also tends to be habitual. A knock on the door may be sufficient to fix the problem, at least temporarily, but why should anyone have to ask their neighbours to have a modicum of human decency? And how do we know that our polite request won't be met with abuse, verbal or physical? The unfortunate fact is that noisy neighbours cause great harm. In the words of Cartwright's judge, her neighbours endured her "thoroughly selfish behaviour", making their lives "thoroughly miserable".

So why is she still free? I can only imagine the dispair of the poor people who have endured this destruction of their home lives for over five years. It is horrible to think about. Five years of being woken in the night. Five years of feeling a sense of dread every time you go home. Having gone down the proper legal route they now find that Cartwright is free to return home and carry on making their lives miserable. What's more, being unemployed she's free to do it at any time of the day or night. Isn't it about time the system did something meaningful?

The prison system is horribly overloaded, a stupid situation caused by the desire of political parties to outbid each other in the 'tough on crime' stakes. This has to change and there is at last a hint that it might. Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has said the previously unthinkable: locking people up for the sake of it is not a good idea and other penalties should be used. I passionately agree, but there must always be room behind bars for people who harm others, and in those circumstances we should not hesitate to act.

Cartwright has been destroying her neighbours lives for years. Who knows, perhaps it will never happen again, but that question has been posed too many times already. She should be in jail now.


Unanswered questions: -

- Why wasn't the husband equally guilty?
- How much has the legal process cost taxpayers?
- Why was a 49 year-old woman listening to dance music rather than Robbie Williams?


* The BBC reports that Cartwright received an Asbo (presumably a further one) in April 2009, but breached it three times within 10 days. I assume the number of breaches since the initial 2005 order was much greater. If the April 2009 rate was typical there would have been over 400 breaches in four years.