Skip to main content

Shoplifting Quota £49.99 per year

A report in today's Birmingham Mail indicates that if someone shoplifts less than £50 they will only get a caution if either it is the first offence during a year or otherwise the first offence.

This shows the problems with cautions. If we are serious about trying to get someone off an addiction for cocaine and/or heroin then we should be looking at treatment orders for possession. Cautions should only be used when it seems quite clear that the offender is unlikely to offend again.

With shoplifting we should be looking for some form of non-custodial sentance rather than merely saying it does not matter. The consequences of the current system is that there are thresholds below which "the system" does not care.

I do not hold either the CPS or the Police reponsible for this. This is driven by Home Office targets and guidelines. It is that which needs to change.

Comments

John Hemming said…
There is no sense comparing recidivism rates for non-custodial and custodial sentences because the people selected vary.

I believe that the figures for non-custodial are lower.

The government do not have any information about cautions and the associated recidivism rate.

Still it remains that I think we as a society should not just ignore theft below £50.
8:35 pm
Bob Piper said…
I would like to take this up with my MP. Which guidelines are you referring to?
10:09 pm
John Hemming said…
It is a mixture of the Home Office Guidelines, but also the nature of the targets set for the CPS. I have a copy of the caution guidelines and all the figures are available as written answers see my entry on theyworkforyou.com

I have a copy of the guidelines and could email it to you if you email me directly.
9:29 am
Richard Gadsden said…
As someone who was cautioned for shoplifting, let me say that it shook me up so much, I've never dreamed of doing it again.

Cautions work well on basically good middle-class kids who are testing the boundaries. How well they work on anyone else is another question that I have no experience to comment on.
1:26 pm
John Hemming said…
I think there is some agreement here. There are clearly people for whom a caution is appropriate. It is, however, important that cautions are not overused.
8:47 pm
Bob Piper said…
I'm struggling to find this consensus you describe John. Richard doesn't think a custodial sentence is suitable, apart from habitual, professional shoplifters. TonyF sees a custodial sentence as the solution. You, on the other hand, as usual, just make some glib remark that blames the government and talk abstractly about "the system". At least Richard examines the category of shoplifter, not some arbitrary monetary value which excited your original post.
12:07 pm
John Hemming said…
Richard Allen's analysis seems to be the best. It takes into account Tony Foley's position that there are too many cautions and Richard Gasden's position that there are some people who should be cautioned as they won't reoffend

In essence we should only allow one caution and only in situations where it is clear to the police that the offender will not reoffend.

Going back to the general situation about Heroin and Cocaine, I think that using a form of treatment order in place of a caution would be sensible.
1:16 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Six months for recording a court hearing - Norman Scarth

The link is in Russian about the imprisonment of Norman Scarth who is actually 85. He has a complex history including a court hearing which found that he used a chainsaw to fight off bailiffs when he was 75. [a court judgment which is disputed see comments] However, that does not justify imprisoning him for 6 months for recording a court hearing (see the link and ask google to translate it if your Russian is not up to it). It has got into the Argyll News Because he has been held such that people cannot get to him to sign paperwork an application for a writ of Habeas Corpus was made today. This has been adjourned until next week. The English judicial system is really not good at responding to major abuses of human rights by the judicial system.
57 comments
Read more