Two Prosecutions in the paper

Status
Not open for further replies.

38Cto15E

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2009
Messages
822
Location
15E
Here are two prosecutions reported in the Leicester Mercury newspaper yesterday.
*** Male age 36 was found guilty in his absence of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Leicester on September 18th without a valid ticket. He was fined £220 with £79.50 compensation, a £22 victim surcharge and £135 costs. (£456.50)

**** female age 20 was proved guilty of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Market Harborough without paying a £79.50 fare on October 28th. She was fined £440 and told to pay £79.50 compensation.(£519.50)

I am guessing there were a couple of differences with the two offences for them to be fined differently.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Agent_c

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2015
Messages
933
I think maybe we need a 2 or 3 strike rule on the railway. Keep dodging fares and you're banned from the network - get caught in this case (even with an otherwise valid ticket) and its off to Jail.

Maybe that will stop these cases coming up.
 

Phil.

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
1,323
Location
Penzance
I think maybe we need a 2 or 3 strike rule on the railway. Keep dodging fares and you're banned from the network - get caught in this case (even with an otherwise valid ticket) and its off to Jail.

Maybe that will stop these cases coming up.

How do you ban someone?
 

Sleepy

Member
Joined
15 Feb 2009
Messages
1,064
Location
East Anglia
Should be done in a similar way to shops, if you are banned then caught shoplifting they can be done for burglary.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
23,984
Location
Scotland
We ban folks from the football through statutory means, and you can revoke people's implied right of access by notice.
While I agree in principle, in practice it will be nigh on impossible to ban someone from the railway. Unlike football where there are a relatively small number of stadia, which are all staffed and stewarded, there are hundreds of railway stations - many of which are unstaffed.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
11,616
Location
Isle of Man
We ban folks from the football through statutory means

We can ban people from the railway through statutory means, an ASBO (or equivalent) isn't that hard to get.

Preventing access to a football stadium is a lot easier though, especially now most modern stadia use RFID or barcode tickets for entry. You hotlist a season ticket and hotlist a name on sales equipment.
 

reb0118

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
28 Jan 2010
Messages
2,921
Location
Bo'ness, West Lothian
Whilst I agree in principle, in practice it will be nigh on impossible to ban someone from the railway.... there are hundreds of railway stations - many of which are unstaffed.

A ban would still have some merit though. Look on it as a "good behaviour bond" because, whilst you are right in saying that the ban would be very hard to enforce, if the banee© misbehaved and brought attention to himself then the fact that he is also banned would probably come to light and the potential punishment should be greater- as opposed to sitting nice & quiet and obeying the rules so no attention is brought to yourself so no reason for any action to be taken against you.

The ban per se is not (solely) the aim of the punishment as we are after a positive shift in the persons behaviour - a win win situation.
 
Last edited:

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
I am guessing there were a couple of differences with the two offences for them to be fined differently.
The differing fines could even be for the same offence. Criminal fines are stipulated in ranges, within which there is some discretion.
Mitigating circumstances generally apply discounts; an early plea of 'guilt' triggers discounts; the severity of the crime can move the fine up the range; and the accused's weekly disposable income works as a multiplier within certain bands.
 

MP33

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2011
Messages
279
When I see calls for bans from the whole network. I am reminded of when I was a member of CAMRA. In the members newspaper there were notifications of former members being banned from all beer festivals. The ban was usually applied to former branch officials guilty of financial irregularities.

If a banned person who lived in Penzance wanted to attend the Aberdeen beer festival. How would they be spotted?
 

Clip

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,616
While I agree in principle, in practice it will be nigh on impossible to ban someone from the railway. Unlike football where there are a relatively small number of stadia, which are all staffed and stewarded, there are hundreds of railway stations - many of which are unstaffed.

I know plenty of people with football banning orders who still go to games though but your point still stands
 

Hadders

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
8,463
Should be done in a similar way to shops, if you are banned then caught shoplifting they can be done for burglary.

I do wonder if this is a bit of an old wives tale. In my extensive retail experience I've never known the police prosecute a banned shoplifter for burglary.
 

CheesyChips

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
217
I do wonder if this is a bit of an old wives tale. In my extensive retail experience I've never known the police prosecute a banned shoplifter for burglary.

Yep, I worked in loss prevention for many years, it never once happened even with a signed and acknowledged banning letter to accompany the evidence of the theft.
 

Agent_c

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2015
Messages
933
When I see calls for bans from the whole network. I am reminded of when I was a member of CAMRA. In the members newspaper there were notifications of former members being banned from all beer festivals. The ban was usually applied to former branch officials guilty of financial irregularities.

If a banned person who lived in Penzance wanted to attend the Aberdeen beer festival. How would they be spotted?

The idea is when you catch them dodging fares next time, instead of just a fine they're now facing a custodial sentence.
 

185

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
3,992
Here are two prosecutions reported in the Leicester Mercury newspaper yesterday.


I am guessing there were a couple of differences with the two offences for them to be fined differently.

FurnessVale said:
It reads like the male pleaded guilty whereas the female insisted on a trial.
Also from the wording of the report suggests the male could have had an invalid ticket whereas the female had nothing.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
4,931
Location
Sheffield
The idea is when you catch them dodging fares next time, instead of just a fine they're now facing a custodial sentence.

Your original idea was that they would be jailed even if travelling on a valid ticket:
I think maybe we need a 2 or 3 strike rule on the railway. Keep dodging fares and you're banned from the network - get caught in this case (even with an otherwise valid ticket) and its off to Jail.

which is completely different.
 
Last edited:

Agent_c

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2015
Messages
933
Your original idea was that they would be jailed even if travelling on a valid ticket:


which is completely different.

Forgive me if I'm not clear.

Yes, they still would not be allowed on railway property (on paper at least) even with a valid ticket. However, the reality I acknowledge is the chances of this being detected when they do have a valid ticket is low (however, with better CCTV technology and facial recognition this is likely to reduce over time).

When they do get caught however, which is likely to happen when they don't have a valid ticket, they don't just get the "oh, its a x times a ticket, and I get caught only after y rides so I'm still quids in" calculation.
 

FenMan

Member
Joined
13 Oct 2011
Messages
1,002
Forgive me if I'm not clear.

Yes, they still would not be allowed on railway property (on paper at least) even with a valid ticket. However, the reality I acknowledge is the chances of this being detected when they do have a valid ticket is low (however, with better CCTV technology and facial recognition this is likely to reduce over time).

When they do get caught however, which is likely to happen when they don't have a valid ticket, they don't just get the "oh, its a x times a ticket, and I get caught only after y rides so I'm still quids in" calculation.

This is all rather complicated. I'm not going to advocate hanging and flogging for fare dodgers, but it does no harm to publicise abusers of the system getting caught in the act, pour encourager les autres.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
*** Male age 36 was found guilty in his absence of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Leicester on September 18th without a valid ticket. He was fined £220 with £79.50 compensation, a £22 victim surcharge and £135 costs. (£456.50)

**** female age 20 was proved guilty of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Market Harborough without paying a £79.50 fare on October 28th. She was fined £440 and told to pay £79.50 compensation.(£519.50)

Can anyone provide a link to these cases? It seems odd to me that the Mercury would print this in their paper but not publish it online.
 

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
5,138
Location
Powys
I think the story has been updated as there is no mention of the £440 fine any more.

My link shows 7 cases, all with their names and fine details, so it appears that the Leicester Mercury list all the hearings at the Magistrates Court, as they are heard.

So this is another 7!! Someone has having a field day catching them.
 
Last edited:

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
I think the story has been updated as there is no mention of the £440 fine any more.

Nor is there any mention of a 36 year old male, the £220 fine, or any dates in September or October. The link in the OP has no relation to the text in the quote. By coincidence both have a 20 year old female in them, but every other detail is different.

Can anyone provide a link to the cases of the 36 year old male caught fare dodging on Sep 18th and the 20 year old female dodging on Oct 28?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That is a link which shows a general example of people being done for similar examples of fare dodging. What I'm looking for is a link to these two specific cases
*** Male age 36 was found guilty in his absence of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Leicester on September 18th without a valid ticket. He was fined £220 with £79.50 compensation, a £22 victim surcharge and £135 costs. (£456.50)

**** female age 20 was proved guilty of travelling by rail between London St Pancras and Market Harborough without paying a £79.50 fare on October 28th. She was fined £440 and told to pay £79.50 compensation.(£519.50)

I've tried searching myself but I haven't been able to find anything. I was just wondering if anyone else has had more luck?
 

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
5,138
Location
Powys
Nor is there any mention of a 36 year old male, the £220 fine, or any dates in September or October. The link in the OP has no relation to the text in the quote. By coincidence both have a 20 year old female in them, but every other detail is different.

Can anyone provide a link to the cases of the 36 year old male caught fare dodging on Sep 18th and the 20 year old female dodging on Oct 28?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That is a link which shows a general example of people being done for similar examples of fare dodging. What I'm looking for is a link to these two specific cases

I've tried searching myself but I haven't been able to find anything. I was just wondering if anyone else has had more luck?

Well when the opening post was done the link to the 2 relevant cases were there, but as said, it appears that this page has a rolling renewal after each Court Hearing.
I suggest the only way is to search the archives of the Leicester Mercury for the day the thread was opened, or use one of the archive search engines on the 'net.
The Court Records are also published somewhere, so try looking there.

EDIT:
Found the archive:
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/leicester-magistrates-court
Have fun!
Probably would have been even easier if the names hadn't been blanked in the opening post!!
 
Last edited:

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
Well when the opening post was done the link to the 2 relevant cases were there, but as said, it appears that this page has a rolling renewal after each Court Hearing.
I suggest the only way is to search the archives of the Leicester Mercury for the day the thread was opened, or use one of the archive search engines on the 'net.
The Court Records are also published somewhere, so try looking there.

EDIT:
Found the archive:
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/leicester-magistrates-court
Have fun!
Probably would have been even easier if the names hadn't been blanked in the opening post!!

This is what I'm finding so odd.

On the 9th of March, The OP said he read about these cases "yesterday" in the Leicester Mercury.

There is no mention of these cases in the LM archives on the 9th of March, the 8th of March or any other day this month as far as I can see.

It seems that the Mercury have deleted these two cases from their website for some reason. It just seems strange to me. I'd like to get to the bottom of it, but not enough to go rooting through old court records, so I guess it's just going to have to remain a mystery...
 

Busaholic

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
10,025
I do wonder if this is a bit of an old wives tale. In my extensive retail experience I've never known the police prosecute a banned shoplifter for burglary.

In English law theft and burglary are two completely different offences. Shoplifting, a popular term of course, does not exist in law, but can be construed as theft. Burglary would involve either breaking into a premises or otherwise gaining unauthorised access, through an open window for instance, and is generally regarded as a more serious offence, though after the Hatton Garden sentences one wonders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top