What Is The Point Of Concurrent Sentencing And Should We End It?

[Rainbowdust]

Why do we have this concurrent sentencing where a career criminal should get his or hers comeuppance and a very very long sentence but instead have these sentences as concurrent usually at the delight from the criminal in the dock and the dismay at the victims in the courts.

Surely if you do the crime you must do the time and that should mean one sentence after another keeping these criminals where they belong and also deterring would be criminals who are free from offending?

What are your thoughts regarding concurrent sentencing?

[EDDIE51]

I have worked inside a prison and one of the inmates I met was on his 8th sentence for driving with no licence, insurance or tax. He freely admitted that he would buy another car the day he got out and drive it with no documents until he got caught. He knew the maximum sentence for no insurance etc is 6 months of which he would only serve 3 with at least a month 'on tag' so really only 'inside ' for 5 weeks at a time. He just looked on prison as 'part of life' in the same way that you and I look at tax and insurance.

[EDDIE51]

Meant to add that as he never paid over £100 for a car, having it crushed when he got caught was no deterrent either . 'Cheap motoring' was how he saw it. He even told me it normally took 6 to 12 months to get caught each time followed by a 5 week 'holiday' .

[tonywiltshire]

In my view concurrent sentencing is vital to provide an incentive to the criminal to admit to similar crimes that have been committed but which may never come before the court for many reasons but primarily due to a lack of evidence. It must be most frustrating for those victims who believe theirs is one of these offences to see the perpetrator given what may be considered a minor additional sentence.

Fred is of course correct in saying that the best deterrent is the certainty of being caught, sadly this does not exist and the punishment element is increased due to the lack of certainty as seen in other, so called, less advanced societies and our own some years ago prior to the establishment of the police when punishment was severe. If we are to live in a less crime ridden society the punishment element of any custodial sentence must exist but the most important aspect must surely be rehabilitation without which the revolving prison door awaits at enormous cost not just in terms of money. It is this area in which we are failing.

[New Judge]

Concurrent sentencing does not help the victims at all, tony. When they hear that their burglar has been caught but that their break-in was one of his “TICs” or one for which he received a concurrent sentence all it means to them is that he got a “BOGOF”. Many of them may have preferred to learn that he was never caught at all because as far as they are concerned he received no punishment for the devastation he caused them. Of course it helps the police with their clear up rates but that is of little comfort to the victim.

He must have been driving whilst disqualified, Eddie, as you cannot go to prison for no insurance or no licence, no matter how many times you commit the offence.

But what you say exactly demonstrates my point. No amount of “rehabilitation” will alter his ways. To steal the words from my earlier post, it’s what he does and, by his own admission, it’s what he will always do. During his earlier “career” he will no doubt have been given community orders with interventions provided by the probation service. These will probably have included such things as the “Think First” programme to which he responded by immediately committing similar offences. There is no way he is going to think first, last or at all about the possible consequences of his actions. The only way to prevent him presenting a danger to the public is to keep him out of circulation for as long as the law allows. Punishment and protection of the public should be the only purposes of his sentence and no further money should be squandered in efforts to rehabilitate him.

If he commits ten consecutive offences of driving whilst disqualified before being apprehended he should receive ten consecutive sentences. This will not deter him or prevent him from reoffending when he is eventually released, but it will give the rest of us a decent break from his activities.

[tonywiltshire]

Thank you NJ, I agree there is no advantage to the victim in the police improving their clear up rate, but I do not see how victims may prefer for their case to be ignored rather than, as they see it, careful consideration being given to their case and having it TIC in the sentencing, inadequate as they may believe that to be. The alternative to TICs is probably to leave all the cases open and not pursued leaving the victim to believe it is being ignored when the truth may be there is insufficient evidence to proceed without an admission of guilt. On balance I believe concurrent sentencing to be of benefit.
It is my view only a small number of people are born criminals the rest learn their trade often in prison or by association and it is these people who need rehabilitation rather than just claiming it is what they do and locking them up, it may reduce crime whilst they are away but they will be released, probably more determined than ever to commit crimes and get back at society and contribute to the revolving prison door, which is to no one’s benefit.

[FredPuli43]

My experience was that a lot of crime was committed by those under 26 or so.A heck of a lot of these offenders changed when they got older; they got married, settled down, had kids, and stopped offending. That became apparent when the full record of middle aged men who got caught for, say, drink driving or a minor assault was available ;you could see that, as young men,they'd been in frequent trouble but nothing since. I think it's also born out by serious research.

But,unfortunately, a goodly number never do go straight and remain persistent offenders, and annoying ones too,because the offences are never really serious examples of the crime but a long succession of thefts and the like

[jno]

I've seen that research too, FredPuli, though I couldn't find it last time I went googling. Basically, crime is a young man's game. The proportion of older criminals was quite small, though not negligible.