NCJ Number
84130
Date Published
1980
Length
21 pages
Annotation
Sentencing severity in credit fraud cases in England is predominantly affected by the amount of money lost by the victim and whether or not the offender was a principal in a conspiracy, and overall, sentencing is more lenient than that applied to professional thieves.
Abstract
For the purpose of this study, long-firm fraud is considered a business which obtains or attempts to obtain on credit substantial quantities of goods for which the effective owners either know they will be unable to pay or, irrespective of whether or not they are able to pay, have no intention of paying. To analyze the relative importance of a number of offender and offense characteristics in influencing sentencing, sentencing data on long-firm frauds were examined for the Central Criminal Court for 1962-72. The total number of persons sentenced for long-firm fraud during this period was 215. The average sentence was 17 months, and half were given less than 15 months imprisonment. The amount of money involved in the fraud was the best predictor of sentence; however, all the variables taken together, including prior criminal record, could account for only 37.5 percent of the variations in sentence, suggesting that long-firm frauds are not sentenced consistently by any standards. The sentencing is lenient compared to sentences given robbers and burglars. Given that long-firm fraud seriously damages the foundation of the capitalist system, more severe sentencing seems appropriate to deter it. Tabular data and 27 notes are provided.