Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 10 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Police and Justice Bill.


Police and Justice Bill

My hon. Friend makes an important point. The cases that I was citing are cases in which, I fear, the person concerned has gone on to commit a multiplicity of offences, but there is no evidence that he has been committing offences for some time. In some cases the alleged offender is very old. Difficult issues are involved. I have anxieties about the principle of cautions being used in serious offences. It cuts both ways. If the offence is very serious, people may end up accepting cautions when they ought to be pleading not guilty to the offence. That is a form of plea bargaining, and we know—we will come to it in the next group of amendments—that there may be a massive disparity between the sentence that a person may attract if they are convicted in court, and the relatively lenient sentence that may be visited on them if they accept their guilt previously.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c386-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Abuse Accountability Crime Bail Committees Fraud Extradition Inspections Functions Protection Police Powers Public appointments Police custody Photographs Referendums Mergers Police authorities Police cautions Paedophilia Standards Sexual offences Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Reorganisation Time limits USA Cryptography General Register Office Street bail scheme
Legislation
Police and Justice Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk