Anger as criminals escape toughest sentences

Victims' rights campaigners have demanded an inquiry after the official figures showed only two out of 4,614 robbers and 1.4 per cent of sex offenders received maximum sentences.

Rose Dixon, of the campaign group Support After Murder and Manslaughter, said she was "shocked" by the figures, adding: "There should be an inquiry into this and the Government must publish a further breakdown of who gets what sentences."

Shipley's Conservative MP Philip Davies obtained the data for 2008 from the Ministry of Justice which showed less than one in 100 of those convicted of a variety of indictable offences, also including fraud and forgery, criminal damage, drugs, and theft, got the longest terms.

The highest proportion of maximum sentences – 5.1 per cent – were handed down for violence against the person, where 496 sentences reached the maximum available out of 13,380 offenders jailed. And 98.6 per cent of sex offenders - 2,796 of 2,835 – escaped the most serious punishment.

"The figures are unbelievably low," he said. "It is outrageous. I am sick to the back teeth of politicians talking tough on crime but not following it through.

"The previous government were past masters at passing draconian laws with draconian sentences to make themselves out to be tough on crime. But it is only meaningful if people are actually given the maximum sentence that the Government makes available to the courts."

But his calls have prompted warnings that increasing maximum sentences for offenders would put undue pressure on the system.

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke is drawing up plans for a "rehabilitation revolution" which would see more criminals given community orders to tackle the prison overcrowding crisis. He has already declared an intention to send fewer criminals to jail for shorter sentences which he said are "costly and ineffectual".

Paul Firth, a retired district judge who used to work in magistrates' courts in Yorkshire, said maximum sentences had to be reserved for only extreme offences and the myriad of official guidelines, which include time off for a guilty plea, are misunderstood by the public.

"The maximum sentence for robbery is life – how many more life sentences for robbery would they want bearing in mind the range of offences robbery covers?" he said. "By any definition you care to mention, the maximum sentence must be used for the worst offence of its kind because there has to be a distinction between burgling a pensioner's home and burgling a garden shed."

He said the practicalities of sentencing include consideration of a raft of different factors.

"By its definition, a maximum sentence is not a starting point, it's not an average," he added. If you give someone 14 years for burglary it has to be for the worst possible scenario for burglary, which will be very rare."

Geoff Ogden, former head of Humberside CID, said a comprehensive review of sentencing was required but added that the prison system could not cope with a big increase in maximum sentences.

He said he supported longer sentences for particularly serious offences but increasing them across the board would create "enormous problems".

A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman said: "Sentencing in individual court cases must always be a matter for the independent judiciary as only they have the full facts of each case.

"The Ministry of Justice is currently conducting a full assessment of sentencing and rehabilitation to ensure that it is effective in deterring crime, protecting the public, punishing offenders and cutting re-offending."

The review of sentencing is due to report by the end of the year.

Comment: Page 10.