Ongoing debate on merits of prison
Crime in the UK is on the up, but there are widespread calls to reduce punishments for ‘low level’ crime. Peter Madeley reports.
As years of budget cuts have reduced the effectiveness of forces across the country, it is no secret that many so-called low level crimes are going unpunished.
Indeed, many chief constables now readily admit that due to a lack of resources, thousands of offences each year including burglaries, thefts and assaults are not even investigated if it is judged that the chances of identifying a suspect are slim.
Meanwhile, the most senior officer in the West Midlands, Dave Thompson, has advised against charging drug users in possession of cannabis so as not to harm their future chances.
And as we report today, career criminals who have clocked up more than 75 crimes each are walking away from court rooms across the region with their liberty intact.
Offences are being screened out, reclassified and just plainly ignored in an effort to save money and dedicate resources to more serious crimes.
See also:
It is a far cry from the 'broken windows' theory popularised by New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the 1990s, which saw a clampdown on minor offences such as public drinking and graffiti as a step to preventing more serious crimes.
Crime fell dramatically and the city's streets were safer than ever, but for a zero tolerance approach to work you need one thing above all else – boots on the ground to enforce it.
With many forces operating on shoestring budgets community policing has all but disappeared, meaning softer crimes are either written off, or increasingly, not pursued at all.
The school of thought that appears to have gripped the UK's judiciary in recent years is that prison should only be used for the most serious offences.
There appears to be a tacit acceptance that every alternative should be explored before sending a criminal to jail, regardless of the number of crimes they may have committed.
Indeed, The Magistrates Association say previous offending history is only one factor taken into consideration when passing sentence, noting that repeat but low-level offending would not necessarily reach the custody threshold.
Government research shows that jail terms for prolific criminals who commit so-called 'nuisance' offences have little impact, as the perpetrators are often homeless and/or drug addicts who are stealing to feed a habit.
Such views are backed by Prisons Minister Rory Stewart, who wants to scrap jail sentences of six months or less altogether, insisting the move would ease pressure on prisons and give offenders a better chance of turning their lives around.
"You bring somebody in for three or four weeks, they lose their house, their job, their family, their reputation," he said earlier this year.
"They come into prison, they meet a lot of interesting characters – to put it politely – and then you whap them on to the streets again.
"The public are safer if we have a good community sentence... and it will relieve a lot of pressure on prisons."
Such policies do not tend to go down well with a public frustrated at seeing crime on a seemingly perpetual uphill curve while courts repeatedly dole out suspended sentences.
What message does it send out to shoplifters if they know they won't be sent to jail, or in many cases not even prosecuted, for repeatedly committing crimes?
There is a danger that we are giving criminals a green light to steal, to vandalise and even to assault – all with complete impunity courtesy of our criminal justice system.
