Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

100905

registered interest
date	24/10/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Burglary
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, at which courts people with 15 or more previous convictions were not sent to prison on conviction for burglary in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	211920
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/03/2015 answer text <p>Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for our independent judiciary, taking account of the circumstances of the case and the maximum penalty for the offence. But when sentencing an offender the courts must treat recent and relevant previous convictions as an aggravating factor. There is also a mandatory minimum sentence of three years’ imprisonment for a third conviction for domestic burglary. The sentencing guideline for burglary aims to ensure that the effect on victims is at the centre of considerations about what sentence each offender should receive. The average custodial sentence length for domestic burglary has increased from 21.4 months in 2009 to 23.6 months in 2013.</p><p>This Government is committed to strengthening sentences, so that they combine both punishment and requirements that are effective at preventing further offending. We are transforming rehabilitation, by bringing together the best of the public, private and voluntary sectors, and only rewarding them when they actually do reduce re-offending.</p><p>During the 12 months ending June 2014, all local justice areas sentenced at least one offender with 15 or more previous convictions to a sentence that did not entail immediate custody for their latest conviction of a burglary offence.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 23/03/2015 17:54:02 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

147615

registered interest
date	10/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Confiscation Orders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cars have been confiscated by order of a court under section 143 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214091
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2014 answer text <p><strong></strong></p><p /> <p>Section 143 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 allows the courts to make an order depriving an offender of his rights to articles used, or intended to be used, for the purpose of committing an offence. In specified circumstances a court may order an offender to be deprived of a vehicle under this power. Decisions whether to impose forfeiture orders in individual cases are a matter solely for our independent courts.</p><p> </p><p>The number of cars ordered to be forfeit is not centrally recorded. In 2013 the courts ordered the forfeiture of a vehicle, ship or aircraft in respect of 164 offenders, excluding summary motoring offences. Reliable information for previous years is not available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 20/11/2014 17:19:54 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

147621

registered interest
date	10/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he has taken to ensure that victims are made aware in a timely manner of court hearings relating to their case.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	213925
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>The Government’s new Victims’ Code sets out the support and information victims of crime can expect to receive from agencies at every stage of the criminal justice process. Priority victims – victims of the most serious crime, vulnerable or intimidated and persistently targeted victims – are entitled to receive enhanced support and services.</p><p> </p><p>The Victims’ Code outlines that victims are entitled to be informed of the date, time and location of the first court hearing by the police within 5 working days from when they receive this information and 1 working day for priority victims. If the case progresses to trial, the Witness Care Unit should notify victims of court hearings within 1 working day of receiving the information from the court.</p><p> </p><p>Criminal justice agencies have updated their guidance for operational staff, which outlines their duties under the new Victims’ Code. The Government has made a commitment to monitor criminal justice agencies’ compliance with the Victims’ Code and in “Our Commitment to Victims,” launched on 15 September 2014, we announced that criminal justice agencies will publish information on how they have improved services for victims from April 2015.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 20/11/2014 17:11:57 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

147633

registered interest
date	10/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times a sentence has been altered under section 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 in the last five years; and what the (a) offence, (b) sentencing variation and (c) reason for the sentence being altered was in each case.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	213938
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/01/2015 answer text <p /> <p>Section 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Courts Act 2000 provides for the Crown Court to vary or rescind a sentence imposed, or other order made, by the Crown Court within 56 days of the original sentence being made. The power to vary is primarily to rectify small technical errors and not to allow for a fundamental change of mind.</p><p>The number of sentences which were varied in Crown Court trials the last five years is as follows:</p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Number of Crown Court sentences recorded as replaced on CREST, by offence group</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Offence Group</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>09/10</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>10/11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>11/12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>12/13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>13/14</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Burglary</p></td><td><p>120</p></td><td><p>189</p></td><td><p>182</p></td><td><p>220</p></td><td><p>129</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal damage</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>34</p></td><td><p>22</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>13</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Drug offences</p></td><td><p>304</p></td><td><p>436</p></td><td><p>495</p></td><td><p>472</p></td><td><p>407</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Fraud and forgery</p></td><td><p>199</p></td><td><p>333</p></td><td><p>312</p></td><td><p>349</p></td><td><p>228</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Indictable motoring offences</p></td><td><p>35</p></td><td><p>34</p></td><td><p>42</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>24</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Other indictable offences</p></td><td><p>344</p></td><td><p>488</p></td><td><p>604</p></td><td><p>359</p></td><td><p>294</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Robbery</p></td><td><p>125</p></td><td><p>147</p></td><td><p>164</p></td><td><p>130</p></td><td><p>97</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sexual offences</p></td><td><p>313</p></td><td><p>243</p></td><td><p>236</p></td><td><p>284</p></td><td><p>191</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Summary Motoring Offences</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p>7</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Summary Non-motoring Offences</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p>104</p></td><td><p>67</p></td><td><p>99</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Theft and handling stolen goods</p></td><td><p>193</p></td><td><p>282</p></td><td><p>303</p></td><td><p>205</p></td><td><p>256</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Unknown</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>122</p></td><td><p>60</p></td><td><p>44</p></td><td><p>36</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Violence against the person</p></td><td><p>282</p></td><td><p>387</p></td><td><p>390</p></td><td><p>302</p></td><td><p>268</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2,073</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2,812</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2,921</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2,496</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2,044</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong><em>Notes:</em></strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p>1. The above figures only relate to cases committed or sent for trial.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p>2. The above figures relate to actual sentences replaced; they do not relate to the number of defendants involved.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p>3. The data were extracted from CREST, the Crown Court case management system specifically to answer this question.</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p>4. The data are management information and not subject to the same level of checks as Official Statistics.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The fact a sentence has been replaced is recorded on the Crown Court case management system, CREST. Whilst the new sentence will also be recorded it is not possible to link the two for every offence to calculate the variation. The reason for the sentence being varied is not recorded on CREST and can only be found by manually checking case files at disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 15/01/2015 16:09:51 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155538

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of offences taken into consideration for an offender has been (a) on one sentencing occasion and (b) over that offender's whole offending history.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214184
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The court has discretion as to whether or not to take offences into consideration (TICs), but where it does so the court should pass a total sentence which reflects all offending behaviour. The sentence must be just and proportionate and must not exceed the statutory maximum for the convicted offence. The guideline also says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but, again, the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on offences taken into consideration are not available from the information provided centrally to the Ministry of Justice. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice’s extract of the Police National Computer (PNC) from which MoJ uses to publish official statistics on offenders’ criminal histories, while it holds information on those offenders who were cautioned or convicted for recordable offences in England and Wales, it does not in all (most) cases record data on’ disposal qualifiers’ the variable which allows us to identify concurrent prison sentences served.</p><p> </p><p>Data on concurrent prison sentences served is therefore incomplete and unreliable. To provide the information requested, we would be required to contact all the courts in England and Wales and asking them to search individual case files in order to establish whether they hold information on concurrent prison sentences. To collate the information you require, would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214185 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:27:00 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155539

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prison Sentences
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of concurrent prison sentences served by one offender at any one time was in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214185
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The court has discretion as to whether or not to take offences into consideration (TICs), but where it does so the court should pass a total sentence which reflects all offending behaviour. The sentence must be just and proportionate and must not exceed the statutory maximum for the convicted offence. The guideline also says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but, again, the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on offences taken into consideration are not available from the information provided centrally to the Ministry of Justice. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice’s extract of the Police National Computer (PNC) from which MoJ uses to publish official statistics on offenders’ criminal histories, while it holds information on those offenders who were cautioned or convicted for recordable offences in England and Wales, it does not in all (most) cases record data on’ disposal qualifiers’ the variable which allows us to identify concurrent prison sentences served.</p><p> </p><p>Data on concurrent prison sentences served is therefore incomplete and unreliable. To provide the information requested, we would be required to contact all the courts in England and Wales and asking them to search individual case files in order to establish whether they hold information on concurrent prison sentences. To collate the information you require, would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214184 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:26:59 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155540

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Domestic Abuse
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of cases in courts marked as domestic violence incidents related to (a) male perpetrators against female partners and (b) all other forms of domestic violence in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214191
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>This government is committed to tackling domestic violence and abuse and to delivering a better response for the victims of these appalling crimes.</p><p> </p><p>We have ring-fenced £40 million for victims’ services; piloted and rolled out Clare’s Law and domestic violence protection orders; extended the definition of domestic abuse to cover controlling behaviour and teenage relationships; run two successful campaigns to challenge perceptions of abuse; placed Domestic Homicide Reviews on a statutory footing to make sure lessons are learnt from individual tragedies; criminalised forced marriage and consulted on the creation of a single criminal offence of domestic abuse.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on those proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for offences involving domestic violence, such as threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between adults are not separately identified in the data reported centrally to the Ministry of Justice. Furthermore, it is not possible to separately identify the relationship between defendant and victim, and their gender. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 21/11/2014 14:41:48 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155541

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of custodial sentences for a second or subsequent offence were handed down to run concurrently with another custodial sentence in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214192
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The guideline says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p> </p><p>The general approach on whether sentences should be served consecutively or concurrently as it applies to determinate custodial sentences, is that concurrent sentences will ordinarily be appropriate where the offences arise out of the same incident, or where there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind. Consecutive sentences will normally be appropriate where the offences arise out of unrelated facts or incidents, the offences are of a similar kind but the overall criminality will not be sufficiently reflected by concurrent sentences, or where one or more offences qualifies for a minimum sentence and concurrent sentences would improperly undermine that minimum. The guideline deals in more detail with various circumstances including where the offender is serving an existing custodial sentence and is being sentenced to custody for another offence.</p><p> </p><p>The information requested is complex and needs to be extracted from raw data, formatted and checked. This will take some time and I will therefore write to my honourable Friend as soon as it is available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214193 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:44:50 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155542

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of offenders being sentenced to a custodial sentence for a second or subsequent offence were given a concurrent custodial sentence in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214193
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The guideline says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p> </p><p>The general approach on whether sentences should be served consecutively or concurrently as it applies to determinate custodial sentences, is that concurrent sentences will ordinarily be appropriate where the offences arise out of the same incident, or where there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind. Consecutive sentences will normally be appropriate where the offences arise out of unrelated facts or incidents, the offences are of a similar kind but the overall criminality will not be sufficiently reflected by concurrent sentences, or where one or more offences qualifies for a minimum sentence and concurrent sentences would improperly undermine that minimum. The guideline deals in more detail with various circumstances including where the offender is serving an existing custodial sentence and is being sentenced to custody for another offence.</p><p> </p><p>The information requested is complex and needs to be extracted from raw data, formatted and checked. This will take some time and I will therefore write to my honourable Friend as soon as it is available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214192 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:44:51 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155548

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Crime: Victims
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance his Department gives court users on the use of the term victim at the pre-conviction stage of a court case.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214195
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/01/2015 answer text <p>The Ministry of Justice has not issued guidance to court users on the use of the term ‘victim’.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 12/01/2015 13:19:54 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies