Sentencing Guidelines-Social Security Fraud Cases
| Date | 01 August 1987 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201838705100306 |
| Published date | 01 August 1987 |
| Subject Matter | Comment |
Comment
SENTENCING GUIDELINES-SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD CASES
Hardly a day goes by without some sentence imposed being subject
to criticism in the media. Many such criticisms are
ill
informed and
are made without being aware
of
the true facts
of
the case: even in
cases where criticism is well informed, sentences are considered as
being too light
or
too heavy depending on which paper one reads.
One consistent and fair criticism, however,
is
the apparent lack
of
consistency in sentencing practice between different courts. Clearly
the courts should not be trying to achieve uniformity in sentencing
but should be trying to achieve consistency. As such, the decisions
of
the Court
of
Appeal in criminal cases can have a very important
role in trying to achieve that objective. Under the leadership
of
the
present Lord Chief Justice, Lord Lane, the Court
of
Appeal have
seized upon any opportunity they have to lay down clear sentencing
guidelines on particular sentencing points.
For
instance, in the case
of
R.
v.
Barrick
[1985] 7
Cr.App.R., detailed guidelines were laid
down on sentencing practice when dealing with offences
of
theft and
allied offences committed in circumstances where there was a
breach
of
trust.
In the case
of
R.
v.
Stewart (Livingstone)
(1987)
The Times,
March
25,
Lord Lane has now laid down clear guidelines as to how
courts should deal with sentencing in welfare fraud cases, where,
recently, clear inconsistencies in sentencing practice had emerged.
In this case, the Court
of
Appeal was dealing with appeals against
sentence in nine cases involving fraud and the public purse and
allowed six appeals against sentence, including that
of
Livingstone
Stewart and rejected three applications for leave to appeal.
The Lord Chief Justice in his judgment first looked at the
background to cases being brought to the Crown Court. He pointed
out that although expenditure on welfare benefits in
1985-1986
was
f39.1
billion, the risk
of
fraud in many types
of
benefit was small,
and the most vulnerable benefits were supplementary benefit and
unemployment benefit. The D.H.S.S. had changed their policy on
how to deal with such matters and now only prosecuted in cases
involving small amounts when there were special features such as
repeated fraud. This had resulted in a decrease in the number
of
social security offences coming before the court from
30,116
in
1980-1
to
13,084
cases in
1983-4.
The most common method
of
307
To continue reading
Request your trial