Burglars should no longer be sentenced to jail, official advisers have said.

Unpaid work or a curfew would normally be a better way of punishing break-ins and thefts, said a panel that issues guidelines to judges.

The report  -  part of a consultation document on criminal sentencing  -  is likely to heighten concerns that Britain's courts are not punishing offenders harshly enough to deter others.

It also says victims of crime could be allowed a say in the way criminals are punished  -  but  only if they call for leniency rather than harsh sentencing.

For the first time, magistrates and judges could be ordered to listen to victims  -  or bereaved relatives  -  and be guided by their views on how an offender should best be punished. But, crucially, only messages of for-

Victims could be allowed a say in the way criminals are punished in court – but only if they call for leniency rather than harsh sentencing.

For the first time, magistrates and judges could be ordered to listen to victims – or bereaved relatives – and be guided by their views on how an offender should best be punished.

But, crucially, only messages of forgiveness would be taken into consideration.

The views of those who demanded the harshest penalties would be disregarded.

There are fears such a system could lead to some offenders intimidating victims into asking for a more lenient term for them. The proposals from the Sentencing Advisory Panel also suggest that criminals sent to prison for less than a year should be let off with a community punishment instead.

Shake-up: Courts will also pay heed to the wishes of victims

This means there should be a presumption that burglars and thieves should not receive a jail term, even though the maximum sentence for burglary is 14 years.

The panel's report argues strongly in favour of jailing fewer criminals for what it calls 'less serious' crimes while making more use of community sentences.

The idea of crime victims or their relatives having their say in court is not new. They can already submit a statement to court explaining how they have been affected. These have considerable emotional impact.

When the killers of Tom ap Rhys Pryce were jailed for stabbing the City lawyer to death two years ago, his fiancee Adele Eastman gave a moving statement telling how 'in a matter of seconds wedding plans and a future together changed to funeral plans and a lifetime apart'.

Under current rules judges can weigh up these statements when the case but must pay no attention to a victim's view on the appropriate punishment.

The SAP report suggests this may change but only in cases in which a victim or bereaved family calls for a lighter sentence.

It says such requests could 'be reflected in a reduction in sentence or a different sentence choice'. It also warns, however, that such a move would mark a
'significant shift' and 'create a certain level of inconsistency'.

It could also 'encourage more attempts at victim or witness intimidation in an attempt to secure a more lenient sentence'.

The panel acknowledges that the plans could upset victims 'on the grounds that their views are only taken into account when they favour the offender'.

The 12-strong SAP  -  made up of judges, academics and other senior figures from the criminal justice system  -  sets out key principles for sentencing in courts in England and Wales. In recent years it has pushed for lighter rather than tougher sentences.

Yesterday's document argues that jail terms of 12 months or less are unlikely to protect the public for long or allow time for useful rehabilitation work in jail.

It adds: 'We must emphasise that we are not suggesting that sentences need to be longer, but rather that there may be better alternatives to short custodial sentences.'

The panel urges courts to make a presumption in favour of community punishments in relation to 'the less serious offences of theft and dishonesty, burglary and motoring offences'.

The document also sets out a list of mitigating factors that could tip the balance in favour of community punishments, including a female criminal being pregnant.

However it acknowledges problems 'if that pregnancy has arisen since the commission of the offence which may raise suspicions that it has been orchestrated to avoid a custodial sentence'.
You could say he was born to the job. Sir Igor Judge has been confirmed as the new top judge in England and Wales.

The appointment means he will be formally known as Lord Chief Justice Judge. Though the title may seem confusing, it is clearer than when he was Judge Judge.

Sir Igor, 67, was one of three judges who rejected hate-preacher Abu Hamza’s attempts to avoid being extradited to America on terror-related charges.

He recently declared that knife crime had risen to ‘epidemic proportions’ and said the courts should impose the most severe sentences to try to stop it. ‘Every knife or weapon carried in the street represents a public danger and therefore, in the public’s interest, this crime must be confronted and stopped,’ he said.

However, although he is known as a conservative, legal experts yesterday claimed that his appointment is unlikely to result in tougher sentences across the board.

Sir Igor, who will take over as Lord Chief Justice when Lord Phillips steps down in October, is currently president of the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court and Head of Criminal Justice. He sits in many of the most serious criminal appeals and is the third most senior civil judge.