Burglars face harsher prison sentences

Burglars who break into homes or businesses during future riots could face longer prison sentences under new guidelines announced by the Sentencing Council.

The guidelines were issued to judges across the country last week and reinforce current sentencing practice, which means that offenders burgling people’s homes can expect a custodial sentence.

The guidelines, which will be used in both the Crown Court and magistrates’ courts, covers aggravated, domestic and non-domestic burglary and will be applied from mid-January next year.

Following a three-month consultation on the proposals, the Sentencing Council recognised the damage that could be caused by violent riots, especially for small businesses and shop owners living above or near premises. The new guidelines consider sentencing for burglary offences committed in the context of general public disorder indicating that greater harm is caused when a burglary takes place during riots.

The guidelines are designed to:

•reinforce the particularly serious nature of aggravated burglary – that is, where a burglar has a weapon – and states that sentences for this offence must always be custodial with a range of up to 13 years;

•set a sentencing range of up to six years for domestic burglary, a two year increase on the four years proposed by the Sentencing Council’s predecessor body, the Sentencing Advisory Panel; and

•take a new approach to non-domestic burglary, giving more focus on harm to the victim beyond the economic implications of a burglary, and setting a range of up to five years.

The Council’s definitive guidelines also takes into account research on the views of the public and victims on burglary which has shown that, while many believe those convicted of domestic burglary should receive a custodial sentence, they do not think this is appropriate in every case. It indicates that there is a desire for sentence ranges which allow the court enough flexibility to reflect the factors of the case and decide what sentence is most appropriate.

Lord Justice Hughes, deputy chairman of the Sentencing Council, said: “Burglary is often not simply a crime against property but may have a serious impact on people whose houses or businesses are invaded. Those who burgle people’s houses will normally go to prison.”

The new guidelines ask judges to focus on the harm to the victim, as well as the culpability of the offender and to also consider the seriousness of an offence, for example, if a victim is at home when a burglary takes place or if he or she experiences significant trauma. It also emphasises the seriousness of situations where a burglar has targeted vulnerable victims and the significance of victims being obliged to leave their home as a result of burglary.

The guidelines are intended to provide sentence ranges that cover the vast majority of cases that come before the courts. They do not, however, prevent judges and magistrates from sentencing offenders outside the ranges and up to the maximum sentences available in law where it is in the interests of justice to do so.

The current statutory maximum sentences for burglary offences that judges can give are not, therefore, affected by the new guideline.

Javed Khan, chief executive of Victim Support, said: “Being burgled and having your personal belongings trashed or stolen can have a lasting impact. With a quarter of burglary victims losing confidence, a fifth having trouble sleeping and one in ten suffering from depression, it is only right that the impact is taken into account in sentencing. We are pleased that the new guidelines take this into account and hope it will lead to more victims being offered the opportunity to tell a court about the effect through a victim personal statement.”

There will now be a three-month training and implementation period after which the guideline will come into force on January 16.