Disproportionate sentences

The Grauniad today is asking readers whether a six month prison sentence for stealing £3.50 of bottled water is disproportionate. The Guardian readership, displaying their usual tendency to take refuge in reaction when provoked, seem mostly to think this is a good thing, citing the fact that the guy doing the stealing was contributing to a pretty awful situation, making things worse, etc. etc.

For one brief moment i was tempted to join in. And then my own legal background re-asserted and i realised what a load of stupid and dangerous hogwash the magistrates were perpetrating.

You don’t send people to prison for six months for stealing £3.50 of goods. Period. And if you think you do, then a) you’re an ass and b) you are actively contributing to the undermining of UK law.

Huh? But…wasn’t this a very bad guy, who may not have done anything VERY wrong, but whose wrongdoing contributed to a night of terror for other people. Darn tooting!

But there are laws on the statute book already to deal with such circumstances. Once upon a time, we had a common law on riot which pretty much gave police and authorities carte blanche to deal with rioters. That included a right to use deadly force with no comeback on those employing it. All that was needed was for there to be 12 or more persons assembled for riotous purposes, for the riot act to be read, and for the authorities then to do what authorities do.

Luckily for those out this week, the common law has been replaced by statute (Public Order Act 1986). So the essentials of riot are still there – but the maximum sentence is ten years imprisonment.

Note carefully the wording of the law.

“Where 12 or more persons who are present together use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety, each of the persons using unlawful violence for the common purpose is guilty of riot.”

That phrase “common purpose” also has legal pedigree… or form, as the crim fraternity might term it. Its the well-recognised doctrine that criminal liability adheres to ALL the participants to a criminal enterprise for ALL that results from that enterprise. So, if a bunch of people run riot and someone is killed, it is certainly quite possible for the CPS to contemplate charging not just the immediate perpetrators, but the whole mob, with murder.

Its controversial: common purpose cases have their detractors.

However, there is most certainly law – and laws – capable of dealing with the circumstances of earlier this week (just as existing law is quite capable of dealing with online incitement).

Should the guy have got six months? Quite probably, yes.

Should he have got six months for theft? Absolutely not.

The fact the courts did is an expression of laziness on their part: a desire by magistrates to take the riot element of the case as assumed, without the tedious necessity of proving it.



2 Responses so far »

  1. 1

    Paula said,

    When an MP described by a judge as a “liar and thief” gets 12 weeks and serves 6.. for deliberately and with wilful intent stealing £38,000 from the public purse.. disproportionate?.. indeed it is. Most of the people arrested this week were not guilty in any way of “riot”.. they were the opportunists following the damage and getting a bit of free stuff as a result of the damage caused by others. I didn’t see much “riot” about last weeks affair honestly, a lot of wilful damage, some criminal damage, some breaking and entering, some smash and grab a little arson.. and a lot of opportunist people arriving after the main event to indulge in some after hours shoplifting. I suppose this is what happens when brutalised people are treated like animals by a whole state and society.. some will rise and take what they want in their version of the way they see the very rich taking their futures away from them.

  2. 2

    Thandi said,

    Thank you for posting this. It is clear from the wording of the act that the Judges have not proved the riot element. As stated in the above post, a lot of the people at last weeks events were opportunists, and as such, their actions should have been dealt with using existing laws. It has been assumed by some judges that people were involved in a riot. I also believe that at this stage the Judges are not following the act and instead making up their own laws. I do not approve of what happened last week but the disproportionate sentences are insane. There are essentialy a lot of good people who made a silly error of judgment and who are now having their lives destroyed by such harsh sentences. Furthermore, good people are being sent to jail, and or course, their is a risk that sending good people to jail will turn them into hardened criminals. Civil rights lawyers need to do something to help these people and stop this abuse by the judiciary and the politicians.

Comment RSS · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: