06. Jan. 2010. – 14:49:22
Some years ago sitting in a court room of a
small town in America`s Deep South I witnessed two chained up miscreants
wearing County Jail overalls each making what appeared to be a desperate phone
call. With a look of disbelief on their faces after a few words from the judge
which didn`t reach the back of the courtroom where I was seated they were led
away by a Sheriff`s Deputy complete with Stetson and six gun. Dressed as I was
in a Brit`s uniform for a hot climate, tee shirt and shorts and carrying a bag
of recently purchased goodies, the judge beckoned me to approach the bench and
identify myself. His manner did not allow for any delay in responding to his
command. After explaining who and what I was we had an interesting discussion
on the similarities and differences between a state county court and an English
magistrates` court. When I enquired about the two jailbirds and their phone
calls he explained that for the past year the court had been trying to get them
to pay fines for minor traffic offences but without success. Since even their
final phone calls were of no avail he had sentenced them to serve a day for
every dollar unpaid in the county jail.
What a breath of fresh air when compared to
this country where even for the index crime defendants serve half only of the
custodial term given by the courts. And when it comes to unpaid fines it is
very very rarely that custody is the outcome.
Fines are levied according to means within
the limits laid down by parliament. Before a fine is imposed in any English
court the defendant must declare honestly his income and outgoings on Form
MC100. Virtually never is any proof required of what are generally IMHO
inaccurate figures. Now when it comes to statistics and conclusions there are
as many answers as questions but two figures will suffice for now. At the end
of March 2007 there were outstanding fines of £486,597,240 and a year later the
figure was £500,630,569. It would be churlish to suggest that everyone fined
can afford to pay the full amount on the spot as the law states but half a
billion £ owed......!
Many criminologists agree that high level
offenders don`t appear from nowhere. They usually begin their careers with low
level offending which results in fines. If they play with the system at that
stage their respect for law and order is diminished by "getting away with
it". By its very nature minor criminality is associated with people on
benefits. And of course I am not suggesting that those on benefits are likely
to commit crime. But for those that do I believe that it is iniquitous that
they continue to receive their benefits in full. There is provision in law for
fines to be deducted from earnings or benefits but that is a different issue. I
would suggest that after due calculation of seriousness there should be
reduction in benefit per se after eg three categorised offences. Those on
benefits should not bite the hand that feeds them.
No comments:
Post a Comment