---

22 July 2008 : Column 1236W—continued

Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many and what percentage of people aged (a) under 16, (b) between 16 and 18 and (c) over 18 years who were convicted of possession of a knife in each of the last 10 years received a fine; and what the (i) average, (ii) smallest and (iii) largest fine in each year was. [220831]

Mr. Straw: The requested information is contained in the following table.

Court proceedings data for 2007 will be available in the autumn of 2008. In 2006, around 11 per cent. received a fine, 47 per cent. community order and 17 per cent. custody.

				Under 16			Aged 16 to 18			Aged 18 and over
	Number sentenced	Number fined	Proportion fined (% )	Average (£)	Smalles t (£)	Larges t (£)	Average (£)	Smallest (£)	Largest (£)	Average (£)	Smallest (£)	Largest (£)
1997	3,360	1,181	35	45	10	100	85	10	500	109	10	1,000
1998	3,804	1,187	31	38	10	75	97	10	500	110	10	1,500
1999	3,564	1,032	29	28	10	50	83	5	700	114	10	1,000
2000	3,562	996	28	50	10	100	83	10	500	112	10	600
2001	4,364	1,164	27	47	10	200	84	10	600	116	10	3,100
2002	5,326	1,356	25	48	10	150	85	1	500	114	10	1,000
2003	5,399	1,289	24	55	10	150	90	20	250	128	10	2,500
2004	5,908	1,148	19	40	10	100	92	20	300	138	1	1,250
2005	6,002	953	16	37	20	50	93	20	350	138	10	1,500
2006	6,334	691	11	57	5	100	123	10	750	153	20	3,500

The independent Sentencing Guidelines Council’s Magistrates Court Sentencing Guidelines for possession of a bladed article (to be implemented on 4 August 2008) states that if the bladed weapon is not used to threaten or cause fear the recommended starting point is a high level community order. If there are mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the guideline suggests a range of a Band C fine (125 to 175 per cent. of weekly income) to 12 weeks custody. Where the weapon was not used to threaten or cause fear but the offence was committed in dangerous circumstances, the suggested starting point is six weeks custody, with a range of a high level community order to referral to the Crown Court. Where the weapon was used to threaten or cause fear and the offence was committed in dangerous circumstances the guideline states that the case should be allocated to the Crown Court.

Offensive Weapons: Yorkshire and the Humber

Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what average sentence was imposed for knife crimes in North Yorkshire in each of the last five years. [219506]

Mr. Straw: Information on the numbers given an immediate custodial sentence and the average custodial sentence length in North Yorkshire for possession of a knife or possession of an offensive weapon (which may include knives) is shown in the following table.

22 July 2008 : Column 1237W

Average length of immediate custodial sentence( 1) for possession of a knife or offensive weapon, all courts, North Yorkshire, 2002-06
Number of persons and average length of sentence (months)( 2)
Offence description		Year	Immediate custody	Average custodial sentence length
Possession of offensive weapons without lawful authority or reasonable excuse		2002	6	4.1
Having an article with a blade or point in a public place			4	4.0
Possession of offensive weapons without lawful authority or reasonable excuse		2003	9	4.5
Having an article with a blade or point in a public place			5	2.0
Possession of offensive weapons without lawful authority or reasonable excuse		2004	4	4.8
Having an article with a blade or point in a public place			6	3.5
Possession of offensive weapons without lawful authority or reasonable excuse		2005	5	7.5
Having an article with a blade or point in a public place			8	4.8
Possession of offensive weapons without lawful authority or reasonable excuse		2006	4	16.0
Having an article with a blade or point in a public place			9	6.3
(1) Excludes life and indeterminate sentences. (2) These average values are based on a very small number of cases. Note: These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Source: OMS Analytical Services

The Courts Proceedings Database from which this information is drawn does not identify separately the circumstances of an offence in which a knife was used. These offences are included in other offences of violence against the person (e.g. grievous bodily harm).

Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many convictions there were for knife crimes in North Yorkshire in each of the last five years. [219507]

Mr. Straw: Information on convictions for knife possession offences covering the years 2002 to 2006 (latest available) is provided in the following table.

There will have been other offences such as grievous or actual bodily harm or violent disorder where knives were used. However, the information held by the Ministry of Justice on court proceedings does not contain information about the circumstances behind each case, beyond the description provided in the statute under which prosecutions are brought.

The figures given in the table on court proceedings relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences, the offence selected is the one for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.

22 July 2008 : Column 1238W

Number of defendants found guilty at all courts for ‘knife possession offences’( 1 ) in North Yorkshire police force area, 2002-06( 2,3)
	Found guilty
2002	52
2003	50
2004	69
2005	66
2006	57
(1) Includes the offences of—Possession of a knife or bladed article in a public place and Possession of a knife or bladed article on school premises (2) These data are on the principal offence basis. (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. Source: Court proceedings database—Criminal Justice Evidence and Analysis—Office for Criminal Justice Reform

---