Homeless Woman Convicted of Stealing Sandwich

I'm sure I've previously recounted a case I observed before I applied to become a Magistrate.

In the dock was a homeless man who had walked into a discount retailer and walked out with a tin of corned beef without paying for it. A short time later, by which time he had eaten the corned beef, he was apprehended for the theft. The police arrested the man, who was interviewed and made full and frank admissions - he said he stole the item because he was cold, hungry and wanted something to eat.

I am pleased to report that the bench in that case took a suitably pragmatic and empathetic approach to sentencing, ordering the man to pay 50 pence in compensation to the shop in question. No costs, no surcharge, just a few words of advice, reassurance and wishing him the best of dire situation he was in.

That case still resonates with me to this day. There was a man who had fallen on hard times - but for the grace of God could happen to any of us - who had genuinely stolen in order to eat. He had stolen nonetheless, and there's certainly no way the business should have been left out of pocket, but his daily existence was challenging enough without the court placing additional burden on his liberty or limited means.

In my experience cases like this are now pretty rare, but a similar case appeared before the court shortly before Christmas.

The offender in this case was a homeless, middle-aged woman. She was not heavily convicted, but had previously been in trouble for being drunk and disorderly. In scenes reminiscent of the earlier case, she had walked into convenience store and walked out with a sandwich without paying for it.

Entirely by coincidence (miracle, some would say) there were police officers walking nearby at the time. The shop assistant, alert to what had just happened, followed the woman out of the shop and called over to the officers. They stopped the woman, turned out her bag and recovered the uneaten sandwich in a resaleable condition. The sandwich was returned to the shop, which hadn't suffered any loss, yet the decision was taken to arrest and charge the woman with theft. She made full and frank admissions, saying she had taken the sandwich because she was hungry and had insufficient money to pay for it. 

She was held in the cells overnight and appeared in custody before the court the following morning, which she may have considered a blessing due to the provision of a warm night's sleep and hot meal. We then had to decide what to do with the woman, who had no means whatsoever and whose offence had inflicted no financial loss on the victim.

Step forward section 135 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, which empowers the court to detain anyone convicted of an imprisonable offence within the precincts of the court house or police station until the court rises for the day. This can be used as an alternative to any other sentencing option and does not attract the surcharge. Given the woman had already spent the night in the cells, we instructed the custody staff that she was to be released immediately.

I am totally baffled as to how the theft of a £1.50 sandwich ends up costing the taxpayer thousands in court, CPS and police time and resources. I am equally baffled as to why the police officers in question didn't use a modicum of common sense and discretion in their dealings with the woman.