NHS Staff cars broken into in Hospital Car Park

[Michael Rolls]

But even then sentences almost always run concurrently. Someone commits GBH in the course of escaping from the scene of a robbery (so it's not robbery with violence) and, fro the sake of argument, the offences carry a five and an eight eight penalty - but he normally only serves half of the eight - so crimes warranting 13 years inside, can actually see the perpetrator back on the streets in 4 years - not impressed
Mike

[Walter]

I don't think most people are we are too soft, the Courts also have to take into account guilty pleas and give them credit for that which often means a lower sentence

[biglouis]

The problem is that if a judge ignores the guidelines then the sentence might then be open to appeal and the crim walks.

[Walter]

Yes any chance they get a convicted criminal will appeal against sentence and or conviction if they think the rules have not been followed to the letter, but the villains themselves don't have any rules total hypocrites.

Reading between the lines the Magistrate gave him the maximum within the guidelines, reason being the Crown Courts are shut down, so no option to commit him to the higher Court for sentence which could have banged him up for much longer.   

[Goingtoseed]

Yes it does not make much sense, problem is the Courts have a set of guidelines tariffs they have to consider when sentencing.

Then there are some offences that can only be tried in a Magistrates Court less serious offences and some triable either way usually more serious offences, triable either by the Magistrates Court or Crown Court the latter has the power to impose harsher sentences.

Absolutely and when it comes to people that work and claim unemployment benefit or pretend that they are sick or disabled they throw the book at them. One guy I know got 6 months (with no previous) for working whilst claiming to be unemployed. The loss to the state - £12,000.
Hasn't worked for over 13 years since due to having a criminal record!!
Goodness only knows what he has cost the state in total in prison + another 13 years+ of claiming benefits.
Break into  cars to steal and get 3 months - makes no sense to me.

[Walter]

Absolutely and when it comes to people that work and claim unemployment benefit or pretend that they are sick or disabled they throw the book at them. One guy I know got 6 months (with no previous) for working whilst claiming to be unemployed. The loss to the state - £12,000.
Hasn't worked for over 13 years since due to having a criminal record!!
Goodness only knows what he has cost the state in total in prison + another 13 years+ of claiming benefits.
Break into  cars to steal and get 3 months - makes no sense to me.

I have no sympathy for anyone who steals from the Public Purse its our tax money that is destined for those who really need it , due to ill health unable to work and the elderly on low incomes.

Why he has not worked for 13 years I do not understand unless his health is bad and cannot work now or has reached retirement age.

His conviction as he was only given 6 months for Fraud and Deception is classed as spent after 2 years from the date of his conviction he does not have to declare his conviction to most employers unless he applied for jobs that require it to be carried out for certain types of work where trust is a must 

[Goingtoseed]

In which case it's a 'hanging' offence to steal government monies whereas breaking into and damaging three cars belonging to NHS workers merely counts as a slap on the wrist?

No he was and still is in reasonable good health. He started to receive his State Pension last August but for the previous 13+ years could not find a job. Are you correct in the sentence being spent after 2 years? He told me way back that it was spent after 10 years hence why he felt compelled to disclose the conviction on every job application for those 10 years. I know (and that's how I got involved) that the JC+ were making his life a misery with sanctions etc because they said not to disclose it as in doing so he was putting ever increasing boundaries of ever being offered a job. He was adamant that it was 10 years.
Just telephoned him to check on this. He says that it was his probation officer who told him it was 10 years (in addition to the prison sentence he was on probation for the next 1 year.)

I have just checked back on the DBS website and it says that the for the date he was convicted (2006) his sentence of 6 months would have been 'spent' after 7 years and because of the additional probation order those 7 years would have been extended by another 1 years. Under these old conditions his offences/conviction would be spent after 8 years and not 10 as he was previously advised.
Yes you are right a lot of changes have occurred recently in that a 6 month sentence will now be spent after 2 years instead of the previous period of 7 years. Presumably the powers that be assume that you are rehabilitated much earlier than was originally thought.

So glad to get to the bottom of this.

[Walter]

I know what the legislation is I read it before I replied to your post the Rehabilitation Offenders Act started in 1974 and constantly updated put in place to help get offenders back into work

The money our Government has is not theirs its ours taxpayers money that's why its called the public purse mistakes and fraud in the benefits system is estimated by some to be roughly £2 billion a year, that would help pay for new hospitals, more nurses Police care homes etc 


The cretin who damaged the NHS Staffs private cars got 12 months imprisonment by the way not 3 months

[Goingtoseed]

I know what the legislation is I read it before I replied to your post the Rehabilitation Offenders Act started in 1974 and constantly updated put in place to help get offenders back into work

The money our Government has is not theirs its ours taxpayers money that's why its called the public purse mistakes and fraud in the benefits system is estimated by some to be roughly £2 billion a year, that would help pay for new hospitals, more nurses Police care homes etc 


The cretin who damaged the NHS Staffs private cars got 12 months imprisonment by the way not 3 months

I am not arguing against your supreme knowledge of the matter. The fact is that for a first offence he was given 6 months in prison. Goodness knows how long their criminal record is and get 12 months (Yes I was wrong to quote 3).
The point I was trying to make was that the magistrates court should have committed them to Crown Court on the basis that the sentence that they could give would not be long enough. I would also mention that my friend ended up in Crown Court and not Magistrates. He was prosecuted under the Theft Act instead of the usual Social Security Legislation.
To balance the books in my opinion they deserved at least 4 years.
And I would mention that more is actually lost by the DWP in errors and mistakes than by fraud and deception.

[Walter]

I am not arguing against your supreme knowledge of the matter. The fact is that for a first offence he was given 6 months in prison. Goodness knows how long their criminal record is and get 12 months (Yes I was wrong to quote 3).
The point I was trying to make was that the magistrates court should have committed them to Crown Court on the basis that the sentence that they could give would not be long enough. I would also mention that my friend ended up in Crown Court and not Magistrates. He was prosecuted under the Theft Act instead of the usual Social Security Legislation.
To balance the books in my opinion they deserved at least 4 years.
And I would mention that more is actually lost by the DWP in errors and mistakes than by fraud and deception.

Not arguing just clarifying matters, the man who damaged the cars was charged with four counts of Attempted Theft under the Theft Act 1968 , he may well have been committed to the Crown Court for sentence under normal circumstances.

However as I understand it the Crown Courts have been closed and trials stopped because of the virus.

Fraud and Deception also under the Theft Act of public funds is treated more seriously especially if carried out over a period time so therefore I am not surprised he was committed to the Crown Court.

You may be right more funds from the kitty are lost due to admin errors , however when it comes to Fraud you can only be sure what has been stolen when you find the Fraud which may lead to the Fraudster or Fraudsters.

You will never find all the Frauds in any large system and only a percentage of the Fraudsters the DWP is targeted by well Organised Crime Fraudsters to the tune of many thousands per year who just disappear into the night, then pop up again under another false name with another method .