Written evidence from Jill Stuchfield
JP, Mid North Essex (PB 01)
Are magistrates and judges able to utilise fully
the requirements that can be attached to community sentences?
How effectively are these requirements being delivered?
I am a magistrate sitting in Essex, last week an
issue regarding unpaid work caused considerable concern to the
bench. The bench decided that a defendant charged with driving
with excess alcohol should complete a community order with an
unpaid work requirement.
The bench was informed by probation that the defendant
did not score highly enough on the "ogres" score to
warrant this disposal. The bench requested an explanation from
a senior member of staff who eventually accepted that this was
a decision to be made by the bench and not probation. We were
told that probation have targets and that this defendant did not
reach the suitable score for a community order, despite the fact
that according to our sentencing guidelines they passed the threshold
for a community order.
The bench was left hoping that this order was not
returned to court within a few weeks with the request that it
be lifted.
The question has to be asked as to whether or not
probation targets are conflicting with sentencing guidelines.
Magistrates should be able to utilise unpaid work.
With regard to how effectively these requirements
are delivered, we are told the success rates of the requirements,
purely in terms of attendance and lack of reoffending during the
order. Despite numerous requests we are not given reoffending
rates for defendants completing the requirements. It would be
very useful as a magistrate to know whether or not the requirements
are successful in terms of preventing reoffending.
September 2010
| 
