First, some basic arithmetic. Roughly 1 in 5 reported cases of shoplifting results in a detection - though reported thefts from shops may be just the tip of the iceberg. The average value of items stolen was £45 in 2009. So it would seem reasonable to assume that of the 21% of shoplifters who were caught, their fines would be at least 5 x £45 = £225. At this level of fine, we have done no more than 'break even', in the sense that the total value of goods stolen has been balanced by the total fines imposed. At this point, we haven't done anything more than ensure that 'crime doesn't pay'.
What's the reality? According to this article, in 2007 (most recent figures available) 44,747 of the 152,059 'successfully detected' shoplifting cases led to a caution. Yup. Just a caution. A further 45,146 cases resulted in a PND (penalty notice for disorder) of between £50 and £80 - but half of these were never paid! That leaves 62,166 who were dealt with in court - only 41% of the total. (Don't forget that this isn't 41% of all shoplifters, it's 41% of the 21% who were caught, or about 8% of all shoplifters).
What's the likelihood that the unlucky 41% will have been given a suitable penalty? I don't have these figures - yet - but I'm not holding my breath.
There's a really simple principle which we seem to have forgotten. Crime must not be allowed to pay. As long as we impose miniscule monetary penalties on thieves, in comparison to the gains they can make through crime, we will lose. When the penalties start matching the gains, we will begin to find the elusive tipping point. This isn't rocket science. It's basic arithmetic so simple that even a hedge fund manager could master it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Courts are always looking for ways to make it easy for the fines to be paid - £1 a week or whatever. So even those that pay don't really feel it as a punishment. Maybe a more fitting penalty would be a three month night-time curfew, or a year long ban from the store they robbed (plus all the other branches) or that particular shopping centre. We need to look at other options, not just fines.
ReplyDeleteI agree that any fine should be 'felt' by the offender. Not sure I'd go for your suggestion of curfews etc - it all needs police manpower to enforce, which risks exacerbating the core problem - that a handful of offenders are tying up our resources to the point where the system simply loses the will to impose itself.
ReplyDeleteSending in the bailiffs might be a reasonable solution to those who try to evade paying fines.