Redressing the legal balance

Sir, - In keeping with protocol, the Government tries to sell new legislation by highlighting the maximum sentence available.

The majority of the public are surely worldly-wise.

The bottom line remains that all the legislation on the statute, absent adequate enforcement by authorities and application by the judiciary in sentencing rapidly loses both effect and credibility.

To proffer an example (necessarily stark to make the point), the common law offence of breach of the peace carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

It bears no resemblance to that which is handed down from the bench, to the extent that its very availability is news to most.

The solution is frustratingly simple – minimum sentencing.

It exists for firearm possession and affords the bench a starting point of five years’ imprisonment.

It can be mitigated “where there exist exceptional circumstances”, but the bar for such mitigation is set very high – and rightly so, in my humble opinion.

It is submitted that had this legislation carried a minimum sentence of even six months’ imprisonment, its deterrent effect would be much greater – perhaps even “lapping at the shores of adequacy”.

The bottom line is that minimum sentencing would do much to redress the balance wherein mitigation has become an “excuse culture”, where the offender gets a slap on the wrist and the victim a slap in the face. Ron Rose. Bridgend, Braco, Dunblane.

Even in the short time since the election there is enough evidence to show that the interests of Scotland will not be upheld or pursued by our Scottish Tories