On Dec 29, 12:55*am, MB wrote:
On 28/12/2011 17:01, furnessvale wrote:





On Dec 28, 4:36 pm, Bevan *wrote:

I would suggest that the law needs to be changed so that cable thieves
can be charged with "sabotage& *endangering safety of rail passe ngers",
rather than theft, with severe minimum penalties specified by law, such
that some namby-pamby do-gooder could not reduce to a token level of
sentence. Dodgy scrap dealers should also face similarly severe charges
& *penalties.

Bevan

No need for that. *Theft carries a maximum penalty of 7 years,
handling even more. *When did you see anyone, let alone these scroats,
get anywhere near these sorts of tariff.

As another poster said, the real beef is with the guidlines and the
dickhead who makes them.

George

I would like to see more creative use of charging like happens in the
USA. *If there are a series of thefts then charge them with them all and
give them consecutive sentences. *Add trespassing on railway property,
endangering passengers and not having a dog licence each with
consecutive sentences. *In the UK they seem to chose one specimen charge
often not the most serious one then of course seven years means they
will only serve about three years. *The newspapers play along with the
legal system with headlines like "metal thieves get twenty years" which
when you read them actually mean perhaps five people got sentences of up
to five years so will serve two years.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Defending solicitors may advise their clients to ask for offences to
be taken into consideration, reminding them that there are thresholds
at which higher sentences result. Often the offences to be taken into
consideration fall just short of the nest sentencing threshold - odd
that.



Re Consecutive and concurrent sentences:

"In the case of R v O'Brien and others [2006] EWCA Crim 1741,
(followed in R v O'Halloran [2006] EWCA 3148) the Court of Appeal
considered whether one sentence of imprisonment for public protection
could be ordered to run consecutively to another sentence of
imprisonment for public protection. The Court determined that while
not unlawful, it is undesirable to impose consecutive indeterminate
sentences or an indeterminate sentence consecutive to another period
of imprisonment".

More on http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/s...offenders/#a18

Patrick