Letter: Criminal Justice Act: probation, magistrates' fines, children's testimony
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: You report (1 October) that the effects of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 will include the raising of maximum fines in the magistrates' courts to pounds 5,000 and a system which links the fines to the disposable income of offenders. 'Thus', your report concludes, 'the rich will pay more than the poor for similar offences.'
This is not quite so, as the Act precludes the 'unit fine' system from applying to companies, arguably the most significant 'rich' defendants in magistrates' courts because of their appearance in cases involving commercially caused death and injury. The fines imposed on companies are often relatively low. The average fine, for example, imposed on companies in the construction industry (1988-90) in cases involving a death at work in London was pounds 1,282.
In its White Paper (Crime, Justice and Protecting the Public) the Government had expressed the belief that there are 'substantial benefits to be gained from maximising the effectiveness of fines' and, commenting on what is now the old system, stated that 'the level of fine can seem derisory where the offender is wealthy'. These tenets were, however, curiously dropped when the position of corporate defendants was legislated.
Yours faithfully,
GARY SLAPPER
Senior Lecturer in Law
Staffordshire University
Stoke on Trent
1 October
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments