Can’t pay, will pay..

Crime doesn’t pay... and neither do criminals

Ihad to laugh – although it’s no laughing matter – when a judge gave a woman 75 years to pay off a £900 court charge. Lorraine McCracken (40), from Lincoln Road, Peterborough has been ordered to pay it off at the rate of £1 a month – which will make her 115 by the time the slate is wiped clean. I think even the Chilcot report will have been published by then.

McCracken was in court for beating up her partner – she has previous convictions for similar attacks on the same man and as Cilla might have said ‘Surprise, Surprise she has a drink problem’.

The Recorder Ian Glen QC didn’t want to impose the £900 fee, but was told he had to, so went for the instalment option, presumably because he didn’t think McCracken would or could pay.

Some might point out McCracken has obviously been able to find money to buy booze.

Perhaps her friendly off-licence might let her pay for that bottle of gin in instalments. Perhaps not.

I might be being presumptuous but I think it was the judge’s way of saying “er, I don’t think these charges are a good idea’’.

The government brought in new fixed charges earlier this year (they vary depending on pleas and nature of offence) but give judges no discretion ie a homeless man with no income will still be ordered to cough up.

The theory is fine – make crooks pay for the trouble they put the rest of us to – but the practice is unworkable. Crime doesn’t pay, and like it or not, in most cases, neither do criminals.

It’s bad law and it can be a surprise to no-one that judges don’t like bad law.