§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI beg to move amendment No. 91, in page 4, line 6, leave out 'this section' and insert
'section 2 of the Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Act 1997'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 92, 228 to 231, 256, 42, 43, 235, 257, 258, 98, 104, 236, 237, 83 to 85, 87, 100, 101, 88 and 89.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThese are minor technical and drafting amendments.
704 Amendment agreed to.
Amendment made: No. 92, in page 4, line 14, leave out 'this section' and insert
'section 2 of the Crime and Punishment (Scotland) Act 1997'.—[Lord James Douglas-Hamilton.]
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI beg to move amendment No. 2, in page 5, line 15, at end insert—
'(2) In section 196 of the 1995 Act (sentence following guilty plea)—
- (a) the existing words shall become subsection (1); and
- (b) at the end there shall be added the following subsection—
(2) Where the court is passing sentence on an offender under section 205B(2) of this Act and that offender has pled guilty to the offence for which he is being so sentenced, the court may, after taking into account the matters mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) above, pass a sentence of less than seven years imprisonment or, as the case may be, detention but any such sentence shall not be of a term of imprisonment or period of detention of less than five years, two hundred and nineteen days.".'.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 31, 255 and 32.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonAmendments Nos. 2, 31 and 32 deal with the ability of the court to take into account a plea of guilty, and the stage in proceedings and circumstances in which it is made, in determining what sentence to pass under clauses 1 and 2.
What is now section 196 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 makes it clear that the court is able to take into account a plea of guilty in determining what sentence to pass on, or other disposal or order to make in relation to an offender. That operates as a disincentive to postponing a guilty plea until the day of the trial, to the great inconvenience of witnesses, police and jurors. It also acknowledges the possibility that a guilty plea may be regarded as a mitigating factor in sentencing, because it may imply an acceptance of responsibility and contrition on the part of the offender and may spare the victim and other witnesses from having to give evidence.
On further consideration, it appears that the provisions of section 196 of the 1995 Act may not apply to sentences imposed under clauses 1 and 2 as drafted. Although those clauses provide for automatic life and mandatory minimum sentences, there is no reason in our view why the court should not be able to take into account a guilty plea where those sentences would apply on conviction. The amendments would ensure that that is possible.
§ 9 pm
§ Dr. GodmanThe Minister spoke of contrition and how that may assist the courts. I have no doubt about that. However, what about a case involving severe sexual assault? I hope that no leniency would be shown in such a case, no matter when the accused agreed to plead guilty.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI am glad that the hon. Gentleman has raised that issue. It is important to spare the victim the trauma of having to go through a case and have every sort of falsehood thrown at her. She may dissolve in tears—I have seen it happen. We are saying that, if the accused shows contrition by pleading guilty at an early stage and therefore does not put the victim 705 through the process of having to put up with a great deal of abuse and falsehood in court, that is a factor that the court legitimately should be entitled to take into account.
§ Mr. WallaceWhat consideration have the Minister and his colleagues given to the opinion of the recently retired Lord Justice-Clerk Ross, in the case of Strawhorn and McLeod, about inducements to plead guilty at an early stage?
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI would not describe the measure as an inducement to plead guilty. I believe that it could be taken into account as a mitigating factor-which is rather different-if the accused faced up to his responsibility and, instead of making false accusations against a victim, did not put her through that trauma. A court should be entitled to take that into account. As I said, section 196 of the 1995 Act makes it clear that the court is able to take into account a plea of guilty in determining the appropriate sentence. After all, if a person who has committed a very serious crime tells a pack of lies, that is a different situation from that of a person who admits his transgressions and shows some contrition.
Amendment agreed to.