Court Costs....

At a time when sweeping cuts are being made by public bodies, today's Leicester Mercury has the following headline; "Teenager's 53p fraud court case costs taxpayers' £1,200". Headlines like this must stick in the throat of people who are facing the loss of community centres or increased costs in caring for their relatives. As the young man in question puts it "I think it was all a bit over the top".  Of course he would; he now has a criminal record and has to pay £185 in costs.

It does seem petty that The Gym, a company that owns 10 clubs, with a further 4 planned, would wish to prosecute an 18 year old lad for 'borrowing' his mate's membership details. It seems strange, to me, that they haven't also prosecuted the mate, after all, he was also part of this fraud. I also wonder if he's still a member.... Isn't there another way of dealing with such matters, that don't involve costs? Couldn't the police have just cautioned him? Did the police really need to get involved?

As a gym user myself, I hate to see people abusing the facilities. My gym has had to install CCTV cameras to the entrance of the superior members only Spa area. Not that it seems to put people off from crawling under the barrier. I mean, why should we (okay, the hubby....) pay extra for facilities when we too could slip under the gate? Similarly, if I knew that the person on the treadmill next to me had borrowed a friend's membership card, I wouldn't be happy about it.

It also raises the issue of how petty does a crime have to be for it to be ignored? Reading the comments left on the local newspapers website leads me to believe that there are a lot of Victor Meldrews who aren't happy with the declining standards in modern day society. They complain that criminals get away with murder. Get a cast iron case, and all of a sudden it's not worthy of court time and costs because it's not "proportional". I believe that ignoring the little things leads to people pushing the boundaries as to what they think that they can get away with. If you knew your mate was giving out his gym membership, would you be tempted to use it? How many other people out there are using gyms like this? And who's to say that this was the one and only time Mr Sparrow did this? This may be a 53p case, but the total cost of 'borrowing' may run into the thousands. Criticism of cases like this one appear, to me, to come from people who may be just as guilty of taking liberties, sailing close to the wind themselves. Yes folks, next time it could be you.

One final thing that irks me is this attitude that criminals get away "scot-free". Comments like this are usually made by people who have never set foot in a court, who have no idea what the criminal justice system involves, and can't be bothered to look up sentencing guidelines to see what considerations have to be made. Yes, mistakes are made; that's why appeal processes exist. But criticising sentencing because you believe that hardened criminals (not cheeky young scamps using their mate's gym passes) should be locked up in solitary confinement for the rest of eternity is more about knee-jerk reaction than considered opinion.