the Sentencing Guidelines Council MAY 2005 ISSUE 02 The Sentencing Guidelines Council is acutely aware of the growing need for research and statistical information about sentencing as sentencers and local criminal justice groups grapple with the issue of consistency and effectiveness. This newsletter is the first in a series of biannual publications which will provide both national and local level sentencing data. We hope that this series will provide a basis on which sentencers can have an informative debate about sentencing patterns in their own areas. In this edition, we present analysis produced by the Department for Constitutional Affairs and the Research, Development and Statistics directorate at the Home Office. The statistics provide a picture of sentencing of adults over a decade, from 1993 to 2003. 1 This period has been chosen to cover the impact of the sentencing framework introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 1991. 2 The information here is presented in four main sections: PART 1: National trends in sentencing: An overview of sentencing trends in magistrates courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales is included as well SENTENCING TRENDS Local court area comparisons Sentencing Guidelines Council The data on this CD is in Microsoft Excel 2002. Any queries should be addressed to the Sentencing Guidelines Secretariat, 85 Buckingham Gate, London, SW1E 6PD. Tel: 020 7411 5551 Email: info@sentencing-guidelines.gsi.gov.uk as some trend data for key indicator offences (pp2-7). PART 2: Impact of sentencing on correctional services: How sentencing impacts on prison numbers and probation resources is shown (pp8). PARTS 3 & 4: Criminal Justice System Area and local court level comparisons: Sentencing data for 2003 is presented to help stimulate discussion about sentencing patterns. Further court level trend data can be found on the attached CD. Readers should look at how practice in their own court varies from the national average, the CJS area as a whole and other areas that have similar features, often described as a criminal justice family. It is important to explore the reasons for any differences, and in light of your discussions, to examine whether practice needs to change (pp9-11 & CD). We plan to meet demand for more court level data in future editions of this newsletter and would like to hear from recipients about the sort of information that would be valuable. Please send any comments to Nita Bhupal, Senior Research Officer, at nita.bhupal@sentencing-guidelines.gsi.gov.uk To share your views on any aspect of the work of the Council or Panel please contact: Kevin McCormac Head of Sentencing Guidelines Secretariat, 85 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6PD Telephone: 020 7411 5558 Or email: info@sentencing-guidelines.gsi.gov.uk May 2005 issue 2 1 Sentencing data is for indictable offences for adults only (aged 18 and over). 2 Over this period there have been many other legislative changes and policies or announcements also affecting sentencing.
PART 1: NATIONAL TRENDS IN SENTENCING SENTENCING TRENDS IN THE CROWN COURT Chart 1: Use of s in the Crown Court, 1993-2003 100% 90% 80% 70% 11% 10% 9% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7% 7% 6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 34% 32% 30% 26% 27% 27% 26% 25% 26% 28% 30% 60% 50% 40% 30% 49% 53% 56% 61% 61% 61% 63% 64% 64% 63% 60% 20% 10% 0% 1993 1994 1995 Other 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fine Community sentences Immediate custody Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Immediate custody 31,985 34,804 38,532 41,061 43,698 44,413 43,698 43,041 41,777 43,709 41,974 Community sentences 22,021 21,497 20,460 17,738 19,559 19,578 17,969 17,075 17,104 19,043 20,765 Fine 3,601 3,501 3,254 2,623 2,609 2,481 1,978 1,731 1,778 1,705 1,898 Other 7,196 6,484 6,391 5,662 5,872 5,917 5,584 5,169 4,729 4,670 5,130 Total 64,803 66,286 68,637 67,084 71,738 72,389 69,229 67,016 65,388 69,127 69,767 Between 1993 and 2003 the Crown Court sentenced around 65,000 to 72,000 adult offenders each year. The first half of the decade saw a steady rise in the numbers sentenced reaching a peak in 1998. The following years up to 2001 saw a decline which has been reversed in recent years. The use of custody has increased over this period from 49% in 1993 to 60% in 2003. Across the period of 1996-2003, the use of custody has fluctuated little between 61% and 64%. In comparison, the use of community sentences has decreased from 34% in 1993 to 30% in 2003, although it was as low as 25% in 2000 (see Chart 1). length (months) Chart 2: Crown Court Average Custodial Length (Excluding life sentences) 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 1993 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2
The average length of a custodial sentence has risen each year over this period from just over 20 months in 1993 to nearly 27 months in 2003 (see Chart 2). There has been a decline in the average time served by offenders. In 1993 a prisoner sentenced to 20 months imprisonment served on average 10.6 months (including remand time). In 2003, a prisoner served on average 9.3 months. 3 The number of offenders sentenced to life imprisonment has more than doubled. This reflects in part the automatic life sentence for second serious sexual and violent offences introduced in 1997 (see Chart 3). Chart 3: Number of people sentenced to Life Imprisonment Number of people sentenced to life imprisonment SENTENCING TRENDS IN MAGISTRATES COURT 602 502 402 302 202 102 2 241 382 446 474 533 502 1993 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 3 Prison Statistics for ages 21 years and over. This data includes those released on HDC. It excludes discharges following recall after release on licence, non-criminals, persons committed to custody for non-payment of fines and persons reclassified as adult prisoners. Chart 4: Use of s in Magistrates Courts, Indictable Offences, 1993-2003 100% 90% 27% 25% 24% 23% 24% 23% 23% 23% 23% 23% 25% 80% 70% 60% 46% 43% 42% 40% 40% 39% 38% 35% 33% 33% 33% 50% 40% 30% 20% 21% 24% 25% 26% 26% 26% 26% 27% 28% 28% 26% 10% 0% 6% 7% 9% 10% 11% 12% 14% 15% 16% 16% 16% 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Other Fine Community sentences Immediate custody Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Immediate custody 11,289 14,407 17,117 18,769 22,056 26,810 29,849 31,613 32,263 35,242 33,790 Community sentences 43,832 50,295 47,301 48,906 50,953 55,976 58,094 56,864 57,359 59,798 57,434 Fine 93,935 88,944 80,140 75,907 79,144 84,989 82,812 73,041 68,555 71,358 71,888 Other 55,947 51,869 45,047 43,879 47,338 49,915 49,771 47,088 48,032 50,889 53,643 Total 205,003 205,515 189,605 187,461 199,491 217,690 220,526 208,606 206,209 217,287 216,755 Over the decade, the numbers sentenced for indictable offences in magistrates court has ranged between approximately 187,500 and 220,500 each year. The use of custody has increased from 6% in 1993 to 16% in 2003. From 2001 the use of custody has remained constant at 16%. The use of community sentences has also increased from 21% in 1993 to 28% in 2002, before falling back to 26% in 2003. This coincides with the use of fines falling from 46% in 1993 to 33% in 2003. 3
The average sentence length for those sentenced to immediate custody fell sharply between 1993 and 1998, from 3.2 months to 2.6 months. From 1998 to 2003 the average sentence length has remained fairly constant at 2.5 months (see Chart 5). TRENDS FOR INDICATOR OFFENCES Offence groups used when reporting statistics contain a varied range of offences, e.g. violence against the person, which ranges from murder to assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Changes over time in sentencing for these offence groups may reflect changes in the overall composition of offences within a group rather than changes in sentencing practice. In order to allow for more meaningful comparisons over time, indicator offences have been selected that reflect high volume offences that have a range of sentencing options and generate high numbers sent to custody. However, it should be noted that statistical data does not record severity of offences (e.g. robbery, could have become more violent over the years) which can also have a bearing on sentencing. In selecting the indicator offences, the difference in the mix of case workload in magistrates courts as opposed to that in the Crown Court has been taken into account. Thus a different set of indicator offences have been produced for magistrates courts and for the Crown Court respectively. The basis for this choice is addressed in the relevant sections that follow. Chart 5: Magistrates Court Average Length (Indictable Offences only) length (months) 3.4 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 1993 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 TRENDS FOR INDICATOR OFFENCES IN THE CROWN COURT The key indicator offences identified for the Crown Court are those where there is a combination of high numbers sentenced to custody and long sentence lengths. Table 1: Sentencing trends for Indicator Offences in the Crown Court Offence Total d Immediate Custody % d to Average Community Fine Other Length in Months Burglary in a building other than in a dwelling 1993 4360 48% 45% 2% 5% 13.6 1998 2334 74% 23% 0% 3% 16.4 2002 2034 73% 25% 0% 1% 18.4 2003 1792 69% 29% 0% 2% 17.8 Burglary in a dwelling 1993 7550 64% 33% 0% 3% 15.3 1998 9899 77% 21% 0% 2% 20.9 2002 9243 76% 22% 0% 1% 23.9 2003 8768 69% 29% 0% 2% 24.5 Dangerous driving 1993 1351 50% 32% 13% 5% 8.3 1998 1605 60% 30% 7% 3% 9.9 2002 2222 62% 30% 5% 3% 10.3 2003 2432 60% 33% 4% 3% 10.5 Handling stolen goods 1993 5878 29% 49% 8% 14% 10.0 1998 3789 46% 41% 5% 8% 12.2 2002 2420 45% 45% 3% 7% 11.9 2003 2394 42% 47% 4% 8% 13.2 Robbery 1993 3522 88% 10% 0% 1% 42.3 1998 3337 90% 8% 0% 1% 40.7 2002 4884 92% 7% 0% 1% 44.9 2003 4656 89% 9% 0% 2% 44.4 Theft from shops 1993 1842 20% 41% 14% 24% 6.3 1998 2097 49% 34% 5% 11% 7.2 2002 1937 54% 31% 4% 10% 7.1 2003 1804 49% 34% 4% 13% 7.6 4
As shown in Table 1, burglary in a dwelling accounted for the highest number of offenders being given custody for a single offence. This accounted for almost 14% of all offenders sent to custody from the Crown Court. Robbery (with longer sentence lengths) accounted for the highest proportion (16%) of prison places generated from the Crown Court in 2003. There has been a clear decline in the number of cases sentenced for burglary in a building other than a dwelling and handling stolen goods. For burglary in a dwelling, dangerous driving and robbery the numbers sentenced increased significantly from 1993 to 2002 and have stayed fairly constant or dropped a little in 2003. For all offences there has been a considerable increase in the custody rate between 1993 and 1998. The only exception has been robbery which has always had a high custody rate. Most of the increase in custody rate occurred between 1993 and 1998 with little change up to 2002 and a slight drop in 2003. As with the trend for sentencing as a whole, community sentences have been used less for these offences over the decade. However, they have been used more in 2003 than in the previous year. Average sentence lengths for these offences in 2003 are considerably higher than in 1993. The largest increase has been for burglary in a dwelling from 15.3 months in 1993 to 24.5 months in 2003. TRENDS FOR INDICATOR OFFENCES IN MAGISTRATES COURTS The criteria for selection of indicator offences for magistrates courts were based on offences that are generally non-violent but resulted in large numbers receiving a custodial sentence. These included some summary offences. Table 2: Sentencing trends for Indicator Offences in Magistrates Courts Offence % d to Average Total Immediate Community d Fine Other Length in Custody Months Dangerous driving 1993 2767 12% 30% 54% 3% 3.8 1998 2466 20% 41% 37% 3% 3.8 2002 2150 30% 48% 20% 3% 4.1 2003 2401 27% 52% 18% 2% 4.3 Driving whilst disqualified 1993 21397 24% 46% 24% 6% 3.3 1998 23063 44% 45% 7% 4% 3.4 2002 28094 46% 47% 5% 3% 3.5 2003 32504 42% 50% 5% 4% 3.5 Handling stolen goods 1993 17369 5% 29% 42% 24% 3.0 1998 11407 15% 40% 26% 20% 2.6 2002 8009 22% 42% 18% 18% 2.7 2003 7491 20% 42% 19% 20% 2.7 Theft from a person 1993 1441 10% 26% 37% 27% 3.2 1998 2660 25% 30% 24% 21% 2.7 2002 3117 30% 33% 17% 19% 3.0 2003 3178 29% 33% 17% 21% 2.9 Theft from a vehicle 1993 3925 5% 27% 45% 24% 3.1 1998 3149 19% 36% 28% 17% 2.7 2002 2852 27% 38% 18% 17% 2.6 2003 2878 29% 36% 19% 17% 2.8 Theft from shops 1993 43236 3% 13% 51% 33% 2.4 1998 54785 15% 23% 33% 28% 2.0 2002 70222 22% 27% 24% 27% 2.1 2003 65766 21% 26% 24% 29% 2.1 Unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle 1993 5223 16% 40% 27% 17% 3.4 1998 3683 31% 38% 20% 12% 3.1 2002 3574 33% 37% 18% 12% 2.9 2003 3337 32% 35% 19% 13% 2.8 Other theft and unauthorised taking 1993 19204 4% 22% 42% 31% 3.0 1998 12458 13% 31% 31% 25% 2.6 2002 8957 19% 36% 23% 23% 2.6 2003 7960 19% 34% 23% 25% 2.6 Between 1993 and 2003 the number sentenced for all indicator offences, apart from driving whilst disqualified, theft from a person and theft from shops, has decreased. Custody rates have increased dramatically for all offences, with a small fall back in 2003, in most cases. Theft from shops resulted in the largest number of offenders being sent to custody from magistrates courts in 2003. Almost 42% (14,103) of all offenders sent to custody from magistrates courts for indictable offences were sentenced for this offence. 5
Driving whilst disqualified (a summary motoring offence) had the second largest number of offenders (13,528) sentenced to custody from magistrates courts. The proportion of community sentences given has also increased for all offences apart from unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle, for which it has declined slightly. Use of the fine has fallen considerably. During this period, dangerous driving and driving whilst disqualified have both seen increases in the average length of custodial sentences. Although recorded crime figures do not always reflect the patterns observed in sentencing, some of the changes in the number sentenced are reflected in the recorded crime statistics: The number of recorded robberies has grown from nearly 58,000 in 1993 to just over 108,000 in 2002/03, an increase of 86%. This may reflect the impact of the street crime initiative. Handling stolen goods has decreased from 50,500 in 1993 to 18,600 in 2002/03, a decrease of 63%. Burglary in a dwelling decreased by 40% to 434,000 in 2002/03 and burglary in a building other than a dwelling decreased by 30% to 450,000 in 2002/03 Theft from shops rose by 12% from 1993 to 2002/03 reaching 309,000. Theft from a person has increased almost three-fold between 1993 and 2002/03, reaching 135,000. Theft from a vehicle and unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle has fallen 29% (926,000 in 1993) and 48% (593,000 in 1993) respectively between 1993 and 2002/03. FIRST TIME OFFENDERS Table 3: First Time Offenders d for Indicator Offences in the Crown Court Crown Court Number d (national figures) Changes in sentencing for dangerous driving and driving whilst disqualified may be partially explained by the increase in traffic on our roads, which has risen by 20% approximately between 1993 and 2002. However, casualties where car users were killed or seriously injured fell from approximately 22,800 in 1993 to 18,700 in 2002. 1993-95 2000-02 % First Time Offenders (sample data) Number d (national figures) % First Time Offenders (sample data) Burglary in a dwelling 24,278 8.4% 26,958 18.4% Burglary in a building other than a dwelling 10,978 9.9% 5,832 18.8% Robbery 9,782 18.6% 12,553 29.8% Theft from shops 5,109 18.8% 6,018 29.0% Handling stolen goods 17,953 16.9% 7,556 28.8% Dangerous driving 4,789 19.2% 5,541 28.2% Table 4: First Time Offenders d for Indicator Offences in Magistrates Courts Magistrates Courts Number d (national figures) 1993-95 2000-02 % First Time Offenders (sample data) Number d (national figures) % First Time Offenders (sample data) Theft from a person 5,097 25.2% 8,915 27.9% Theft from a vehicle 11,223 24.2% 8,388 21.7% Theft from shops 121,452 20.1% 203,410 18.8% Unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle Other theft and unauthorised taking 13,555 21.5% 10,205 30.7% 49,899 22.3% 28,880 26.5% Handling stolen goods 50,918 25.1% 25,064 24.5% Dangerous driving * * 6,216 44.0% Driving whilst disqualified * * 78,507 17.7% The percentage of first time offenders sentenced for indicator offences has generally risen between 1993-95 and 2000-02 with the exception of theft from shops, theft from a vehicle and handling stolen goods at magistrates courts where the proportion of first time offenders has dropped a little (see Table 4). 6
Table 5: Disposal Of First Time Offenders: 1993-95 compared to 2000-02* Custody Community Fine Other Total No. % No. % No. % No. % Burglary in a building other than a dwelling 1993-95 CC 54 23 43 25 46 2 4 4 7 2000-02 CC 100 66 66 33 33 0 0 1 1 Burglary in a dwelling 1993-95 CC 103 52 50 44 43 2 2 5 5 2000-02 CC 553 374 68 168 30 3 1 8 1 Handling stolen goods 1993-95 CC 166 40 24 79 48 22 13 25 15 2000-02 CC 231 83 36 106 46 18 8 24 10 1993-95 MC 715 13 2 152 21 319 45 231 32 2000-02 MC 635 60 9 248 39 171 27 156 25 Robbery 1993-95 CC 100 86 86 11 11 0 0 3 3 2000-02 CC 396 349 88 39 10 3 1 5 1 Other theft and unauthorised taking 1993-95 MC 603 21 3 110 18 239 40 233 39 2000-02 MC 824 57 7 270 33 252 31 245 30 Theft from a person 1993-95 MC 65 7 11 17 26 25 38 16 25 2000-02 MC 266 40 15 84 32 70 26 72 27 Theft from a vehicle 1993-95 MC 139 4 3 21 15 73 53 41 29 2000-02 MC 187 14 7 71 38 59 32 43 23 Theft from shops 1993-95 MC 1,323 30 2 107 8 597 45 589 45 2000-02 MC 3,755 391 10 706 19 1,153 31 1,505 40 * Note: 1993-95 data are based on a nine-week sample; 2000-02 data are based on a 16 week sample, therefore actual numbers should be compared with caution. Table 5 compares disposals for first time offenders for selected offences (those with 50 or more sentenced in 1993-95) for 1993-95 and 2000-02. The percentage of first time offenders sentenced to custody for indicator offences has risen between 1993-95 and 2000-02, and there have been increases in community sentences at magistrates courts and decreases for fines. This reflects the trend in sentencing as a whole. The figures on first time offenders are based on a sample from the Offenders Index. Previous convictions are only counted if they are for an offence on the Standard List which includes all indictable offences and some of the more serious summary offences. 7
PART 2: IMPACT OF SENTENCING ON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PRISONS Changes in both custody rates and sentence lengths have been reflected in the large increase in the sentenced prison population over the last 10 years. The total sentenced prison population has grown from 33,046 in June 1993 to 52,269 in June 1998, 57,306 in June 2002, 59,439 in June 2003 and 60,976 in June 2004. 4 Magistrates courts have a relatively smaller impact on the daily prison population but a higher impact on prison throughput, i.e. receptions and discharges. In 2003, 10% of the average daily sentenced prison population, as of the end of June, were under sentences of less than or equal to six months this was the same as in 1993. 5 However, 59% of all custodial sentences came from magistrates courts in 2003. This compared to 43% in 1993. 6 Offenders sentenced at the Crown Court account for the vast majority of the prison population with both sentence lengths and custody rates having an impact and with prisoners on medium to long term sentences having the greatest impact. In 2003, 41,947 adult offenders were sentenced to custody at the Crown Court with an average sentence length of 27 months. One month s increase or decrease in the average sentence length changes the adult sentenced prison population by approximately 1,600. The average custody rate for adults at the Crown Court in 2003 was 60%. Changing this rate by one percentage point changes the sentenced prison population by approximately 450. Remand decisions also have an impact on the prison population. The remand population has grown from 10,632 in June 1993 to 12,903 in June 1998, 13,081 in June 2002, and 13,073 in June 2003. It has fallen slightly to 12,495 in June 2004. The proportion of all offenders remanded in custody at magistrates courts has risen from 2% to 3%, which has increased the number of people remanded in custody from 45,000 in 1993 to 76,000 in 2003. Over the same period the proportion committed for trial in custody has risen from 24% to 30%, with numbers committed for trial in custody, increasing from 20,000 to 25,000. 7 COMMUNITY SENTENCES The majority of community sentences are given at magistrates courts. In 2003, 84% of community sentences were from magistrates courts (all offences). Although use of community sentences has grown at magistrates courts in the last 10 years, from 73,000 in 1993 to 114,600 in 2003, there has not been a substantial change in their use in the five years prior to 2003. At the Crown Court, the number of community sentences was 23,000 in 1993 and 22,000 in 2003, with little change in the last five years. There has been a slight upturn in the use of community sentences since 2001, particularly noticeable in high volume offences such as burglary. DTTOs have increased from 100 in 2000 to 2,444 in 2003. 8 Community sentences were 30% of sentences given at Crown Court in 2003. This proportion fell from 34% in 1993 to 27% in 2001. Since then, there have been signs of a slight increase. The total probation caseload (court orders and post-release licences) was 196,000 at the end of 2003 compared with 145,000 at end of 1993. The average lengths of CROs and CRO element of CPROs have generally decreased from 1993 to 2001, but there appears to be signs of a slight increase in length of approximately 2% in 2002 and 2003. For CPOs the average length of orders has generally decreased from 126 hours in 1993 to 116 hours in 2003. The CPO element of CPROs has been relatively constant from 1994 to 2003. 9 4 Prison Statistics for age 15 years and above. 5 Prison Statistics. 6 For all offences and all ages. 7 Prison Statistics for age 15 years and above. 8 The figures are for DTTOs given for all offences at the Crown Court for adults. 9 Offender Management Caseload Statistics 2003 (for all ages). 8
PART 3: CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AREA COMPARISONS Tables 6 and 7 provide information to allow for area comparisons at the criminal justice area level. Several factors can affect the differences in areas, which are highlighted below: Cautioning practices may affect the numbers coming to court and the mix of offenders dealt with at court. In areas with high cautioning rates more severe sentencing patterns at magistrates courts might be expected although other factors, such as offence mix and detection rates, will also be relevant. Table 6 includes the cautioning rate for those aged 18 or over, i.e. the number of persons cautioned as a proportion of those cautioned or found guilty for indictable offences, for each CJS area in 2003. The cautioning rate has decreased from 30% in 1993 to 28% in 2003. The data in Table 6 does not indicate a clear relationship between an areas cautioning rate and custody rates at magistrates courts. Some differences between areas may arise from different committal practices. For example, if a magistrates court commits a higher than average proportion of cases to the Crown Court for trial or sentence, the offence mix in both magistrates court and the Crown Court is likely to be less serious than in another area. Table 6 includes the committal for trial rate for either way offences (the percentage of those aged 18 or over proceeded against and committed for trial at the Crown Court). Overall the committal rate has decreased from around 16% between 1993 and 1997 to 12% between 1998 and 2003. The decrease was a result of the introduction of plea before venue. There appears to be a tendency for areas that have high committal rates to also have higher than average custody rates and vice versa but the relationship is not very strong. Following plea before venue there was an increase (although smaller than the decrease in committals for trial) in committals for sentence. Table 7 includes the proportion of those sentenced at the Crown Court who were committed for sentence. The data does not show a relationship between custody rates at the Crown Court by area and proportion committed for sentencing. Direct comparisons between areas will be affected by differences in case mix that may exist in each area. This has been taken account of, to a limited extent, in columns (8) 10 and (9) 11 of Table 7 and column (9) of Table 6 where the custodial sentencing figures for an area have been compared with the figures that would result if the national average sentencing pattern applied to each offence group. Areas with a figure higher than the figure produced by applying national average patterns appear to be sentencing more severely than expected given their offence group mix and areas with a figure lower appear to be sentencing less severely than expected given their offence group mix. This measure is different from directly comparing each area s custody rate with the national average. It is calculated using custody rate for each offence group in England and Wales, applying these to each area s offence groups to get an adjusted number to custody for each offence group in an area. Then these adjusted figures across an area s offence groups are totalled to produce one adjusted figure for each area. In magistrates courts, for example, there are areas with the same custody rate sending fewer, about the same or more people to custody than if the national sentencing pattern applied. 10 Prison places generated represents an area's expected actual prison workload. This is derived by taking into account the total number sentenced for each offence and the corresponding custody rate and average sentence length. The figure represents the totality of the workload generated from all these individual offences. 11 The same as 'prison places generated' but assumes that area follows England and Wales averages rather than area specific values. 9
Table 6: Magistrates Courts Sentencing Data by Area 2003 (Indictable offences only) Area (1) Total number of people sentenced (2) Immediate Custody (3) % d to Community (4) Fine (5) Other (6) Average sentence length for custodial sentences (months) (7) Number of People to Custody (8) No of People to Custody if Area followed National Average (9) Persons Cautioned as a Proportion of Persons Found Guilty or Cautioned (10) Committed for Trial Rate (Triable either way offences only) (11) E+W 216755 16% 26% 33% 25% 2.5 33790 33521 28% 12% Avon and Somerset 4741 18% 26% 22% 34% 2.4 850 792 26% 12% Bedfordshire 2228 24% 31% 19% 27% 2.4 529 414 35% 11% Cambridgeshire 2027 15% 36% 26% 23% 3.0 307 347 29% 12% Cheshire 3731 17% 24% 34% 25% 2.4 652 595 18% 11% Cleveland 3978 10% 26% 24% 40% 2.4 399 620 16% 13% Cumbria 1979 12% 38% 33% 17% 3.2 233 327 25% 14% Derbyshire 3163 19% 34% 24% 23% 2.6 616 525 16% 13% Devon and Cornwall 4431 13% 26% 31% 30% 2.2 568 685 33% 11% Dorset 2557 15% 20% 34% 30% 2.3 394 374 18% 8% Durham 2466 15% 31% 23% 31% 2.8 366 393 22% 13% Dyfed Powys 1985 7% 29% 41% 23% 3.0 140 259 53% 8% Essex 4168 24% 27% 32% 17% 2.2 994 647 25% 14% Gloucestershire 1896 14% 33% 28% 25% 2.9 264 307 38% 9% Greater Manchester 12086 17% 28% 25% 31% 2.5 2080 1944 23% 15% Gwent 2677 10% 27% 44% 19% 2.8 275 414 28% 15% Hampshire 5860 13% 29% 36% 23% 2.6 740 911 28% 11% Hertfordshire 2790 14% 30% 34% 22% 2.3 386 457 29% 14% Humberside 3739 17% 30% 23% 30% 2.8 628 653 18% 13% Kent 5676 16% 25% 32% 27% 3.0 929 874 29% 11% Lancashire 7013 13% 26% 31% 30% 2.4 895 1116 25% 9% Leicestershire 3546 16% 32% 26% 26% 2.4 557 567 16% 12% Lincolnshire 2238 9% 32% 27% 32% 2.5 197 365 22% 13% London 34437 19% 20% 44% 17% 2.5 6714 4928 33% 11% Merseyside 8717 14% 22% 45% 18% 2.2 1257 1318 17% 9% Norfolk 2693 12% 29% 29% 30% 2.3 323 411 28% 14% North Wales 2900 11% 29% 41% 18% 2.7 329 445 36% 9% North Yorkshire 2644 14% 32% 25% 29% 2.7 359 446 5% 10% Northamptonshire 2036 19% 30% 21% 30% 3.0 393 357 32% 9% Northumbria 7685 11% 24% 30% 34% 2.9 876 1188 66% 11% Nottinghamshire 4702 14% 29% 27% 30% 2.4 657 760 20% 9% South Wales 6292 10% 25% 41% 23% 3.1 640 896 19% 9% South Yorkshire 6488 16% 31% 23% 30% 2.7 1014 1055 12% 13% Staffordshire 4110 17% 24% 29% 29% 2.5 699 644 32% 12% Suffolk 2324 13% 25% 37% 24% 2.0 304 373 33% 8% Surrey 1830 9% 27% 41% 23% 2.6 165 283 51% 15% Sussex 3902 18% 29% 25% 28% 2.9 684 608 39% 19% Thames Valley 5190 12% 30% 32% 27% 2.6 626 837 27% 9% Warwickshire 1364 11% 40% 25% 24% 2.7 148 228 42% 6% West Mercia 3396 16% 33% 31% 20% 2.8 532 578 36% 13% West Midlands 16059 16% 25% 43% 16% 2.6 2618 2487 31% 12% West Yorkshire 11372 18% 28% 22% 32% 2.2 1999 1765 25% 10% Wiltshire 1965 11% 34% 26% 29% 2.7 208 328 24% 7% Other (not recorded) 1674 15% 35% 24% 27% 3.0 246 10
Table 7: Crown Court Sentencing Data by Area 2003 (Indictable offences only) Area 12 (1) Total number of people d (2) Immediate Custody (3) % d to Average sentence Community length for Fine Other custodial (5) (6) sentences (4) (months) (7) Total Prison Places Generated (8) Prison Places Generated if area followed National Average (9) Proportion Committed for (10) E+W 69767 60% 30% 3% 7% 26.9 46489 46282 22% Avon and Somerset 1782 58% 29% 3% 11% 25.9 1098 1196 27% Bedfordshire 828 69% 23% 3% 5% 27.1 638 556 21% Cambridgeshire 875 66% 26% 3% 5% 26.3 634 603 30% Cheshire 1591 70% 24% 1% 6% 24.6 1123 1045 21% Cleveland 1527 59% 30% 2% 9% 24.4 917 1034 21% Cumbria 442 61% 30% 2% 8% 21.7 242 274 25% Derbyshire 1493 57% 33% 2% 8% 23.0 805 950 31% Devon and Cornwall 1485 50% 34% 5% 11% 26.4 811 965 25% Dorset 544 62% 26% 3% 9% 23.6 330 372 23% Durham 512 48% 37% 3% 11% 22.3 230 335 15% Essex 1375 58% 29% 3% 10% 25.6 840 646 30% Gloucestershire 569 50% 42% 2% 6% 23.8 281 376 35% Greater Manchester 4908 55% 36% 2% 7% 27.8 3081 3202 15% Hampshire 1865 55% 34% 3% 8% 24.4 1022 1263 19% Hertfordshire 535 68% 25% 3% 4% 26.4 395 348 19% Humberside 1545 60% 30% 2% 7% 26.5 1020 1042 28% Kent 1755 69% 21% 2% 8% 26.4 1311 1077 28% Lancashire 2419 65% 28% 1% 6% 24.8 1593 1712 19% Leicestershire 1387 52% 38% 3% 7% 26.4 782 869 19% Lincolnshire 632 56% 32% 3% 9% 25.7 375 381 23% London 11696 62% 26% 4% 7% 32.5 9670 8177 21% Merseyside 2403 62% 31% 2% 5% 29.0 1763 1621 14% Norfolk 830 59% 29% 3% 10% 23.3 469 534 17% North Yorkshire 548 63% 26% 2% 9% 27.0 385 344 26% Northamptonshire 612 73% 21% 1% 5% 24.4 448 407 24% Northumbria 1983 53% 35% 3% 9% 27.5 1176 1311 15% Nottinghamshire 1752 59% 30% 3% 8% 26.7 1140 1153 27% South Wales 3335 58% 32% 3% 7% 22.0 1746 2149 21% South Yorkshire 2369 65% 24% 2% 9% 26.6 1678 1577 23% Staffordshire 1467 60% 31% 3% 6% 25.6 934 951 26% Suffolk 576 66% 26% 2% 6% 22.6 353 366 29% Surrey 572 61% 29% 5% 6% 26.3 381 385 18% Sussex 1313 57% 29% 3% 11% 27.6 855 882 22% Thames Valley 1665 58% 32% 2% 7% 26.7 1072 1165 29% Warwickshire 768 65% 23% 4% 8% 25.1 515 493 24% West Mercia 1250 64% 28% 3% 5% 23.7 784 810 28% West Midlands 4928 59% 32% 3% 7% 25.5 3054 3284 22% West Yorkshire 3232 63% 30% 2% 6% 27.8 2310 2162 25% Wiltshire 399 60% 33% 2% 5% 23.1 228 265 33% PART 4: LOCAL COURT AREA COMPARISONS 12 Crown Court data for North Wales is included in Chester Crown Court, Cheshire and for Dyfed Powys in Swansea, South Wales. The attached CD provides tables with information on sentencing trends for each magistrates court and Crown Court centre in your criminal justice area. Data for all magistrates courts and Crown Court centres in England and Wales, all courts in your area and the other courts in your CJS family are included for comparison. The CJS families have been identified as areas with similar socio-economic, geographic and demographic characteristics. Some courts have closed down, or have been combined with other courts between 1993 and 2003. We have aimed to distribute the earlier figures according to the court or district that now deals with the work. Please be aware that in courts where relatively few people are sentenced each year a small change in the figures may have a large impact on the percentage figures. If you do not have a CD attached to this newsletter, the data can be accessed at our website: www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk Alternatively, please contact Gareth Sweny on 020 7411 5590 for a copy. 11
To share your views on any aspect of the work of the Council or Panel please contact: Kevin McCormac Head of Sentencing Guidelines Secretariat, 85 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6PD Telephone: 020 7411 5558 Or email: info@sentencing-guidelines.gsi.gov.uk 12