Listen
Fiscal fines
19/05/2008
Claims in the media that some sex offenders are being offered fiscal fines rather than face a court are unfounded, the Crown Office said today.
Reports that fiscal fines were also being offered in cases which may have resulted in imprisonment and that summary justice reform had resulted in the liberation of a person accused of rape were also dismissed as inaccurate.
A spokesperson for the Crown Office said:
"Fiscal fines are part of a package of Direct Measures which enable Fiscals to offer accused persons in minor cases the opportunity to accept a penalty or other alternative to prosecution.
"Fiscal fines are intended to deal with cases which would otherwise have clogged up the courts and would have been expected to result in a fine. Our guidance to fiscals makes it quite clear that they must not be issued where there is a significant sexual aspect to the offender's behaviour and, in particular, where it is likely or desirable that the accused will be placed on the Sex Offenders' Register. Equally, there is no question of fiscal fines being issued in relation to assaults resulting in anything more than minor injury.
"Serious cases, such as rape, are not affected in any way by summary justice reform and continue to be given the greatest priority by the prosecution service. A person who has been arrested for rape will only be liberated without charge by the fiscal where there is insufficient evidence to hold him.
"The new range of fiscal fines, that can see an offender offered a fine of up to £300, were only brought into force after significant examination of how cases were actually dealt with in the Summary Courts.
"Figures published by the then Scottish Executive in 2006 show that in 2004/05, in the Sheriff Court, 52 per cent of cases where the accused pled guilty or was found guilty resulted in a fine and that figure rose to 88 per cent in the District Court.
"Out of 83,341 cases that were dealt with by a fine in the Summary Courts in 2004/05, 54,150 cases, or 65 per cent were dealt with by fines of £200 or less. The vast majority of the accused in these cases pled guilty - but in some cases only after repeated adjournments, inconvenience to witnesses and expense.
"The same published figures show that in even the simplest of cases in the sheriff court in 2004/05, a case where the accused pled guilty at the first hearing, the average court and prosecution costs met by the taxpayer were £243. In a 'last minute' plea on the day of a trial with an adjournment for reports the cost went up to £689. These costs do not include legal aid costs for cases where the accused was legally represented at public expense.
"In 2006/07, 35 per cent of cases brought to court had not been concluded within six months of caution and charge by the police; in Glasgow that figure was 53 per cent. Cases dealt with by fiscal fine will normally be dealt with within nine weeks of caution and charge, and much more quickly than that in many cases.
"It makes perfect sense that, wherever possible, such cases should be dealt with out of court, freeing up court time and the time of Procurators Fiscal to deal with more serious cases.
"The reforms to the summary justice system are simply about providing a swifter, smarter and better justice system for all; one where inconvenience and anxiety for victims and witnesses is minimised; one where only cases that need and should go to court do so; one where minor offending is dealt with quickly and appropriately, maintaining the link between the offence and the penalty in the mind of the offender to assist in realising the goal of reducing re-offending."