The Parole Board in Britain denied parole to 75% of applicants in 2024/25, the highest in five years. Photo / Getty Images
Around 700 further dangerous criminals in Britain have been denied release from jail in an apparent toughening of approach by the Parole Board.
Official data shows that three-quarters of prisoners who sought parole in 2024/25 had their applications rejected – the highest proportion for at least five years.
It represents an equivalent increase of 700 in the number of prisoners who would otherwise have been previously freed from jail.
Among high-profile criminals refused parole requests were Gary Glitter, 81, the former pop star who was jailed for 16 years for sexually assaulting three schoolgirls, and Ronald Evans, 83, known as the Clifton rapist for his sex attacks on women in Bristol.
Evans is one of Britain’s longest-serving prisoners, having spent over 50 years in jail.
Glitter, whose real name is Paul Gadd, was judged to be a continued risk to the public after being recalled to prison for breaching his licence conditions by viewing downloaded images of children.
Evans raped and murdered Kathleen Heathcote in 1964 before committing numerous sexual attacks in Bristol in the late 1970s.
He was refused parole in December, having been released in 2018 only to be jailed again in 2023 for sexually assaulting a woman in London in 2022.
The Parole Board is a quasi-judicial body responsible for deciding whether prisoners serving a life sentence or imprisonment for public protection can safely be released at the end of their “tariff”, the minimum period in custody set by the trial judge.
It also decides whether fixed-term prisoners who have been recalled to prison for breaching their licence conditions are safe to re-release.
Data published in the board’s annual report showed it rejected nearly 13,000 applications by prisoners for parole last year – the most for at least five years.
The 75% rejection rate was up from 70% the previous year and was the highest proportion in any of the past five years, according to publicly available data.
Of the 17,165 decisions made by the Parole Board in 2024/25, 3872 (23%) were to release the prisoner, 501 (3%) were to recommend a transfer to open conditions, and 12,790 (75%) were that he or she should remain in custody, according to the figures first revealed by Inside Time, the prisoners’ magazine.
The Parole Board has come under pressure from successive United Kingdom justice secretaries to take a tougher approach.
The apparent hardening in its decisions contrasts with moves by the Government to allow thousands of prisoners on fixed-term sentences to be released early.
It follows scandals including the decision – subsequently reversed – to release John Worboys, the black cab rapist, and to free Colin Pitchfork, the double child murderer and rapist who was recalled to prison after breaching the terms of his licence.
Lawyers specialising in parole cases suggested that changes by Dominic Raab, the former Justice Secretary, could have played a part in the increasing rejection rate.
He made the release test tougher for some prisoners, gave the Secretary of State powers to block individual release decisions, barred probation officers and psychologists from making recommendations regarding releases, and appointed more former police officers to the board.
While some of his reforms have been reversed, others are still in place.
In a letter to the Ministry of Justice, sent in May 2022, the Parole Board said Raab’s changes would be likely to lead to fewer releases.
In a warning that now appears prescient, it said: “If our release rate reduced from 25% to 20%, it would increase the prison population by approximately 800 places per year.”
One senior solicitor with experience of representing prisoners at parole hearings told Inside Time that Raab’s reforms may have had a “chilling effect” on the willingness of the Parole Board to take a risk by releasing prisoners in borderline cases. The Parole Board denied it had become more risk-averse.
The solicitor said the backlog of cases in the Crown Court may also be having an impact, because it means that more prisoners are facing parole hearings with unproven allegations hanging over them, making a release decision less likely.
He added: “There has been a huge amount of new Parole Board members in recent times, and they are just always more risk-averse when they start out.”
A second solicitor who specialises in parole cases said other factors could include Government moves to increase the involvement of victims in the parole process.
The solicitor suggested the “crumbling” probation service could also be to blame, as parole panels might be sceptical that there was adequate supervision in the community.
A shortage of places on offending behaviour programmes in prisons could mean prisoners appearing before parole panels without having completed courses seen as essential to lower the risk they pose.