Court takes pity on 'completely plastered' man

Absolute discharge given instead of controversial new charge

NEWBURY magistrates have again given a defendant an absolute discharge rather than impose a controversial new charge.

Across the UK, courts are increasingly resorting to the little-used sentencing option that registers guilt but inflicts no punishment – effectively letting the offender off.

Andrew Charles Tucker, aged 49, of Fallows Road, Padworth, admitted being drunk in Oddfellows Road, Newbury, on November 3.

Steve Molloy, defending, outlined the financial and emotional difficulties facing his client and invited magistrates to grant him an absolute discharge to avoid the otherwise mandatory £150 criminal courts charge, plus costs and victim surcharge.

Court clerk Roy Watson interjected, stating that an absolute discharge was not intended to be used in that way, but magistrates announced they knew “where Mr Molloy is coming from” and granted the discharge.

The Newbury court took a similar stance during a minor drugs case in September.

Since April, convicted criminals have had to pay a charge of between £150 and £1,200 towards the cost of their case, regardless of their ability to pay.

The charge was introduced by the Ministry of Justice without consultation and is in addition to other levies such as prosecution costs – typically £85 for a guilty plea – and a victim surcharge of up to £100.

On Friday, November 20, a justice select committee recommended scapping the charge, introduced by former justice secretary Chris Grayling, saying it introduced “perverse incentives” for innocent defendants to plead guilty.

The Ministry of Justice is also under fire for slashing legal-aid budgets and seeking to close courts, including West Berkshire Magistrates’ Court in Newbury, to save money.

A consultation on the proposed closures ended on October 8.

A final decision is expected early next year.