Canterbury magistrates court

Kent's magistrates have nearly halved the percentage of defendants they put behind bars in the last 10 years, it's been revealed.

Figures released today by the Howard League for Penal Reform show the percentage of defendants dealt with by prison sentences in the county has dropped dramatically since 2001, from 6.6%.

The percentage sent to jail in 2011 - the most recent figures available - show that figure has fallen to 3.6%.

But the charity claims magistrates in Kent are still more than twice as likely to jail defendants as courts in other parts of the country.

New research, released today, shows criminals face a "postcode lottery" when sentenced, according to the league.

This is strongly disputed by the Magistrates' Association.

Kent's 3.6% figure compares with Warwickshire, which jailed 1.5% of criminals, and Northumbria, which set custodial sentences in just 1.6% of cases.

It fell below the national average, though, with 3.8% of convictions ending in jail.

Magistrates’ courts in Kent handed down 31,662 sentences to men, women and children during 2011, of which 1,155 were custodial.

Frances Crook, chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “It is pleasing to see that magistrates’ courts are sending fewer people to prison overall than they have in the past.

"However, one cannot ignore the striking disparity in sentencing trends between different criminal justice areas.

“A short-term prison sentence is a catastrophe for everyone.

"It does not help change the life of the person sentenced – indeed, it is likely to compound issues such as drug addiction and make them more likely to reoffend.

"It costs the taxpayer a fortune and it does nothing to help victims, who get no recompense or easing of trauma."

“A court which imposes short prison sentences increases the likelihood of local people becoming victims of crime, because the failure rate is so high.

“Community sentences are much cheaper than custody and they deliver better results. They not only address a person’s offending, but allow them to access other services they need, such as help with drink, drugs or mental health problems.”

The charity claims statistics released by the Ministry of Justice show short-term prison sentences are failing to cut crime.

Only 36 per cent of adults who began community orders between April 2010 and March 2011 went on to reoffend within a year.

This compares with 58 per cent of adults who completed a prison sentence of 12 months or less during the same period.

The maximum sentence that a magistrates’ court can impose is a six-month prison term, or up to 12 months in total for more than one offence.

But the Magistrates' Association has hit back at the Howard League report.

In a statement released today, the association's chairman, John Fassenfelt, said the research was "highly selective".

He said: "It picks out one or two specific areas where custody numbers are comparatively low and where rates may have increased, while ignoring the major reductions in custodial sentences where good alternatives to custody are available, particularly in major urban areas.

"Their report states that 'some benches are still imposing prison sentences in cases where they are unnecessary' - this, without knowing the details of specific cases or offenders, is no more than an assumption.

No term of custody, short or long, is right unless justified by the seriousness of the offence and every term of custody must be for as short a period as possible."

He said magistrates had a duty to administer justice fairly and properly according to legislation, together with relevant guidelines from the Sentencing Council and the Court of Appeal.

He said the starting point for a sentence was always the seriousness of the offence which, by law, is aggravated by relevant previous convictions.

But, he added: "If the Howard League are right and there is indeed a post code lottery regarding sentencing, then offenders in that county have an obvious, quick and straightforward remedy, which is to appeal their sentence to the Crown Court where the sentence will be reconsidered by a circuit judge sitting with two different magistrates from those who imposed the original sentence."