The observations and opinions of a retired magistrate. Also available my magistrate`s diary at https://amagistratesdiaries.blogspot.com/
Monday, 27 November 2017
A QUESTION OF LAW
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The observations and opinions of a retired magistrate. Also available my magistrate`s diary at https://amagistratesdiaries.blogspot.com/
Could you expand on your concern, please?
ReplyDeleteThe Serious Crime Act 2015 section 76 part 11 says:
A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or a fine, or both;
(b)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or a fine, or both.
See: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/9/section/76/enacted
If the magistrates deemed the offence so serious and sent the case up to the Crown Court for sentencing on 7 occasions as the law allows, then was the Kingston upon Hull North MP displaying ignorance?
You make an interesting point. Magistrates Courts on summary matters are normally limited to six months custody maximum on a single offence although for two offences 12 months can be the outcome. It seemed the MP was unaware of the six month maximum. At least that was my interpretation.
ReplyDeleteThe apparent contradiction between 6 months maximum and the legislation is a point which would require the knowledge of a criminal lawyer. As a JP in such a circumstance advice would have been obtained from legal advisor.
Conceivably SCA 2015 was written on the basis that magistrates may be given increased sentencing powers.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, magistrates can only impose a six month sentence or two consecutively, but the offence here is presumably an either way offence as it can be tried summarily or on indictment.
ReplyDeleteIf the matter is heard in a Magistrates' Court and a verdict is found - ie a summary conviction - that doesn't restrict what sentence the offender can receive, it just means that the magistrates send it up to a higher court if their sentencing powers are insufficient.
The MP asks how many summary convictions there have been - ie cases heard in a Magistrates' Court, and then how many have received the full 12 months. To me that doesn't show ignorance, just a perfectly legitimate question and follows the wording of the Act.
Hmmm ... so is anyone demonstrating ignorance in not reading the words of the question carefully?
As for your point about the frequency of the Act being used, the question is about summary conviction, and no information is given about conviction in indictment; we have no indication as to how that section of the Act is applied in total.
Note, too, that sections 70-75 deal with female genital mutilation. So far there haven't been any prosecutions for FGM, so would you argue that the law about FGM should be done away with, too?
It's not often I disagree with the points you make, but this one just felt wrong. Do keep up the good work of highlighting issues.
For example, it would be interesting to know how often the full prison term is imposed for all offences where imprisonment is possible.
Note too, the duff advice the Government is currently giving on Magistrates Courts:
https://www.gov.uk/courts
Sentences a magistrates’ court can give
The court can give punishments including:
- up to 6 months in prison (or up to 12 months in total for more than one offence)
- a fine of up to £5,000
- a community sentence, like doing unpaid work in the community.
As the Sentencing Council states: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/types-of-sentence/fines/
"The maximum fine allowed in a magistrates’ court has generally been £5,000, but for offences committed on or after 12 March 2015 the fines in a magistrates’ court will be unlimited in most cases."
Thanks Ludensian for your comments which do make perfect sense.
Delete