Bail

[Happy2408]

Hi does anyone know why if someone has been charged with theft x4 why is it going to magistrates court first before crown seems daft to me

[jackthehat]

Some offences are 'triable either way' which means they can be heard before a Magistrate or at Crown Court.

Depending upon the sentencing restrictions imposed upon Magistrates, the Prosecution case is laid in front of them and then the decision is taken to refer it up to Crown Court where the powers of sentencing are greater.

[Happy2408]

So will the person still get bail they have been told will go to crown court and was told could be as early part of next year why so long that's why I wondered why it was going to magistrates first will they get bail whilst it goes to crown or will they be kept till crown court date when they go to the magistrates

[bednobs]

it seems unlikely that someone would be refused bail for a theft offence - unless there is reason to believe they won't turn up for court?

[hc4361]

Has he been to the plea hearing yet?

[jackthehat]

If there is an application for bail put forwards....and agreed, then you'll get bail......if not, not.

The delay is due to the Crown getting its' facts in order for the case.

[Buenchico]

Everyone who is charged with a criminal offence has the right to bail unless there are specific reasons why bail shouldn't be granted (such as the likelihood of the offender absconding or seeking to interfere with witnesses). The very limited information you've provided us with doesn't suggest any reason why bail could be refused so, unless the court knows more than we do, bail will automatically be granted.

Although 'committal hearings' have now been abolished, all criminal proceedings must still start in a magistrates court, with that court then passing the matter to the Crown court if it's deemed serious enough. That applies even if the charge is, say, one of mass murder.

[Happy2408]

So will there be a judge and jury in the magistrates or just the person and judges

[Happy2408]

If the person is found guilty what is the worst that could happen and they are innocent we talking theft x4 up to 100k

[EDDIE51]

The Magistrates court will have magistrates not Judges, the clue is in the name! There are normally 3 magistrates hearing the cases.
All charges are first heard at a magistrates court even murder. If the case is one that is outside the magistrates scope it will be referred up to Crown Court, that is the one where there are Judges and a jury.

[EDDIE51]

It would depend on the circumstances of the theft, but a £400,000 theft means going to prison for several years.

[EDDIE51]

I do not understand your last question what do you mean by
''and they are innocent'' do you mean they have been wrongly convicted?

[Buenchico]

There's no jury in a magistrates court. Cases are either heard by three magistrates or by a single District Judge. In the case you refer to, the whole thing will probably be over within a couple of minutes. (i.e. the charges will be read to the court, the accused person will be asked to asked to confirm his name, the Chairman of the Bench will glance at his/her fellow magistrates [just as a formality, to check that they agree with his/her inevitable decision] and announce that they're transferring the case to the Crown Court. They'll then consider bail but, as I've stated above, that's likely to be granted almost automatically anyway).

See pages 3 to 8 here to read what a judge must consider when passing sentence for theft offences:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/SC-Theft-Offences-Definitive-Guideline-content_FINAL-web_.pdf

[Happy2408]

So what would they get for 100k would it be suspended

[jackthehat]

The sentence is for the crime......not the amount stolen.

[EDDIE51]

Impossible to say without knowing a lot more about the circumstances. But I would say a suspended sentence for 4 x £100,000 thefts would be VERY unlikely . Probably straight to jail for several years.

[Happy2408]

So they will get bail again then whilst it goes from magistrates to crown they been bailed 4 times I a year already they got charged last week

[EDDIE51]

jackthehat The amount stolen is crucial in theft cases, you do not get the same sentence for stealing £10 as for stealing £100,000 .

[EDDIE51]

As said there is a right to bail unless there is a reason to refuse it. That is shown by your saying they have already been bailed 4 times. Bail is only supposed to be for 28 days at a time but it can take many months to prepare a complicated case so the suspect will get repeated bail.

[Buenchico]

>>> The sentence is for the crime......not the amount stolen

The amount stolen is still an important factor though, Jack. (See my link above).

Sentences of over two year's imprisonment can't be suspended. Further, unless the four (alleged) offences all occurred almost simultaneously (e.g. with a bank clerk clicking a few buttons to withdraw money from four customers' accounts at the same time), the element of repeat offending (taken together perhaps with an element of planning) would seem to make the suspension of any sentence unlikely.

The text in my link states: "Where there are multiple offences, consecutive sentences may be appropriate". At a very rough guess (because we know so little about what the person is accused of), I'd suggest that a judge might consider imposing 4 consecutive periods of 9 months to a year in prison, making an aggregate sentence of 3 to 4 year's imprisonment. (I certainly find it hard to see how a total sentence of less than 18 months could be imposed). The actual time an offender spends 'banged up' is normally half of the nominal sentence.

[jackthehat]

Eddie - We don't know 'what' was stolen.....or how.....or who from.....or how the £100,000 was arrived at....