Yesterday’s Radio Four and Five news bulletins featured the story of a prolific burglar, one Gavin Gibson, who was given a suspended sentence after pleading guilty to seven counts of burglary and asking for a further 420 offences to be taken into consideration. The recorder stated that the unusual leniency of the sentence was a reward for ‘the unprecedented help given to police following his arrest’.
By amazing chance the BBC had a reporter, Valerie Jones, in court to hear the obscure case of a small-time though prolific crook. She reported that, after being arrested ‘Gibson decided to come clean. Over the next month he confessed to another 420 burglaries. He says he stole to fund his drug addiction and now wants help. The recorder said that if he were to jail Gibson, the public would be protected for a few years – but if he could conquer drugs, Gibson might never offend again’.
What an uplifting, hopeful tale. And how well it fits with the BBCs institutional bias towards the anti-prison lobby. Frances Crook (RealAudio) of the Howard League must be able to find her way to the Today studio blindfold by now.
Let’s just imagine a more cynical, alternative view of the above. Nothing like this could ever happen, of course :
Nicked villain confesses to three-quarters of the burglaries committed in his area (most police forces have an abysmally low clear-up rate for burglary). Such crimes are then considered to be ‘cleared up’, even if no-one is convicted for them, and the police force’s detection rate rises accordingly. Happy police.
Police agree with defence counsel to put in a good word for said villain. Happy defence counsel.
Defence counsel get a broad steer from the recorder that a non-custodial is a possibility – and get in touch with the BBC, alerting them to the possibility of a happy non-custodial story for BBC news.
BBC reporter gets to court, happy story is duly procured, and happiness is general. Except perhaps among the residents of Hatfield and Welwyn.
UPDATE – it appears that such things certainly happen in Essex. From the Police Oracle forum :
And dont get me going on the PPO who coughed 490 odd thefts of and burglaries only to be told thanks for the detections, we will strike a deal to keep you out of prison. This resulted in a male with 50 odd convictions and being bang to rights for 3 thefts of and two burglaries getting 18 months suspended for two years.
Wouldn’t it be easier for the defendant to “conquer drugs” as a guest of HM’s prison service?
Market Participant | Homepage | 09.08.06 – 8:38 pm
You know what your problem is?
You’ve got too much commonsense!
Quite so. The BBC Guardianistas must have been rubbing their hands with glee at the chance to further their liberal anti-prison agenda, while the rest of us wonder how it is that a criminal scumbag who has brought misery to hundreds of familes can once again raise two fingers at the law and escape being sent down.
I wonder if the BBC will be so quick to attend court if he re-offends and is, at last, sent down for a few years of sowing mailbags. Or should that be watching telly, playing pool and visiting the fully equiped prison leisure centre?
A number of years ago my car was broken into & goods stolen.
I had to make a claim on my insurance, so the crime had to be reported to the police.
For the easier explanation to my family, it was necessary that I adjust the scene of the crime in my report to the police.
Lo! Some months later I received a letter from the police informing me that a scroat, currently serving time, had admitted to the offence. As he was already behind bars, no further action would be taken.
As the posting notes – everyone happy.
“The recorder said that if he were to jail Gibson, the public would be protected for a few years”.
Sounds good enough to me. However, it sounds like the Recorder made a judgement about how likely he was to be burgled by this bastard, found the chances were extremely low and let him go.
I guarantee he will be committing burglaries within 6 months.
How’s this for a system – instead of suspended sentences for the criminal, we have them for the magistrate. by letting this burglar go, the magistrate should agree that if the defendant commits a burglary within, say, 12 months then the magistrate should go to prison. It should add a nice touch of personal responsibility to the job.
Rob
Like your suggestion but since when did anyone – certainly in the public sector – take any responsibility for anything? However, I’m sure you’ll be pleased to know, that “lessons have been learned”.
Infuriating.
I wonder if any leniency would have been shown to a foxhunter or to someone who withheld a chunk of council tax as a protest against the crime rate in their area.
And a good point about the Howard League. This charity (who are not about “penal reform”, they are just anti-imprisonment) are given air time on the BBC just about every time a there’s a discussion about prisons/sentencing.
Funny, but the BBC never seem to remonstrate the government about their lapsed “3 strikes and you’re out” policy.
That was from 1999!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/544486.stm
Doesn’t the BBC jail people itself?