Questions over early prison release

Hanson was released from prison three months before the murder

Following his conviction for stabbing banker John Monckton to death, questions have been asked about the early release from prison and subsequent supervision of Damien Hanson. Home Secretary Charles Clarke has announced an inquiry into events surrounding the murder.

Hanson, 24, of no fixed address, was released three months before he murdered Mr Monckton. He was seven years into a 12-year jail sentence for shooting a youth three times after he had stolen a Rolex watch from his victim.

Hanson - as someone sentenced to four or more years in jail - was entitled to apply for release on parole - or licence - once half of his sentence had been served.

The Parole Board is required to balance the risk of further offences being committed... against any benefits to the public and the offender of a longer period of resettlement in the community Parole Board

The Parole Board for England and Wales said the safety of the public was "the overriding issue" in deciding whether prisoners could be released on parole at this stage.

"When handling applications for parole release, the Parole Board is required to balance the risk of further offences being committed during the parole period, against any benefits to the public and the offender of a longer period of resettlement in the community," it said in a statement released last week.

Decisions are based on the offender's background and their crimes, what led them to commit their crimes, their progress in prison and reports from agencies that had regular contact with them during their sentence.

In the case of Hanson, his first application to be released on parole - six years into his 12 year sentence - was refused.

Under parole rules, Hanson was entitled to a review after a year.

Parole conditions

At the second attempt, he was granted parole and was released on 27 August 2004 - three months before he murdered Mr Monckton.

It emerged on Friday that Hanson had been let out of jail on licence despite an official assessment calculating that his chances of committing another violent offence were 91%.

Anything above 75% is considered high risk.

It has also emerged that, on his release, he was dealt with solely by the National Probation Service (NPS) rather than with the multi-agency approach usually used to monitor the most dangerous offenders.

This was despite the fact that he has spent most of his life since the age of 14 in prison for a string of convictions including burglary, unlawful wounding, attempted burglary and attempted murder.

And on Monday, it was revealed that Hanson's co-defendant Elliott White - a convicted drug dealer found guilty of the manslaughter of Mr Monckton and wounding his wife Homeyra Monckton - was also under the supervision of probation officers.

He was out on bail at the time of the robbery ahead of a court appearance on heroin and cocaine charges for which he was subsequently sentenced to three years.

Curfew broken

On the day of his release from prison, Hanson moved into a bail hostel in Streatham, south London, as one of the conditions of his parole - or licence.

Hanson was late for a curfew on the day of Mr Monckton's murder

Those conditions vary from case to case.

They can include receiving psychiatric or medical treatment, not to undertake particular kinds of work and not to communicate with named people.

Prosecutors in the Monckton murder case revealed in court that Hanson's conditions included that he must be at his bail hostel between 11pm and 6am.

The court heard that, on the day of Mr Monckton's murder and after he had changed his clothes and gone for a meal, Hanson had arrived at his hostel a few minutes late for his 11pm curfew.

Another condition was that he must not enter the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham - the scene of a number of crimes he had committed in the past.

Breaking a condition would have meant his parole would have been revoked and he would have been returned to jail.

Inquiry call

Martin Wargent, of the Probation Boards Association said there should have been "very tight checks" on Hanson by the Probation Service.

If things work well then there are very tight checks on how people are behaving Probation Boards Association

"He would be supervised by a probation officer, he would be seen very regularly, there would be visits at home, and in some cases where the risk is assessed as very high, there would be police surveillance as well," he told BBC News.

"If things work well then there are very tight checks on how people are behaving and what people are doing but no system is foolproof.

"This is a very sad reflection of that."

In a statement released on Monday, the NPS said it was implementing a "root-and-branch overhaul" of the way it managed offenders in the community.

"The lessons it has learnt from this case have aided the process," it added.

It confirmed that Hanson, as well as co-defendant White, had been under the supervision of probation officers.

Despite all the measures taken, the criminal justice agencies can never fully eliminate the risks posed by dangerous offenders NPS

The service had already reviewed the case, it said.

But while the service took its responsibilities "very seriously" there was "no such thing as zero risk", the statement said.

"Despite all the measures taken, the criminal justice agencies can never fully eliminate the risks posed by dangerous offenders."

Announcing an inquiry into their release and supervision, Mr Clarke said it would have to "look carefully" at the "case management and risk assessment" of Hanson and White.

"It is essential that we have in place systems to deal with violent offenders which are as rigorous as possible and minimise the risk to the public that such offenders may pose," he added.