header-logo header-logo

Magistrates request more creative options for sentencing

15 January 2025
Issue: 8100 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Magistrates have asked for more flexibility and creativity when sentencing convicted criminals, and urged the government not to abolish custodial terms of less than six months.

They also asked the government to recruit more probation officers, in their response last week to the government’s sentencing review, chaired by former Lord Chancellor David Gauke.

Mark Beattie, chair of the Magistrates’ Association (MA), said: ‘At the moment, within the existing sentencing framework, magistrates' options are limited to fines (which can be evaded) or custody when community options aren’t available or aren’t viable.

‘Magistrates should be able to apply other, practical alternatives to fines or custody, that would still be a deterrent to offenders while maintaining public confidence. For example, more use could be made of orders like driving disqualifications, travel restrictions, sexual harm prevention orders and football banning orders.

‘Reducing the current three-year minimum term for some of these orders could increase their applicability in these cases.’

Beattie warned the probation service is ‘under-staffed, resulting in significant delays to starting curfews, unpaid work orders and mental health treatment requirements (MHTR)’ while ‘weekend unpaid work placements—which are vital for those in full-time employment—are almost non-existent in many parts of the country’.

The MA response reports a case where an offender was given an MHTR as part of a suspended sentence but had to wait nearly six months for their first appointment, ‘was not able to access treatment in time and subsequently reoffended’. Other options ‘are so rigid that they are unworkable in the individual case’—for example, some programmes, such as ‘Building better relationships’, have waiting lists of more than 12 months.

More probation officers are therefore needed if more community sentencing is to be delivered.

The magistrates agreed short prison sentences are often counter-productive for many offenders and therefore should be treated as a last resort. However, they argued they are a useful deterrent for prolific shoplifters and offenders who refuse community options and should be retained.

Shabana Mahmood KC, the Lord Chancellor, was forced to release 1,100 prisoners early to ease overcrowding in October 2024, on the day she launched the Gauke review.

Issue: 8100 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors examine recent international relocation cases where allegations of domestic abuse shaped outcomes
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
back-to-top-scroll