Denis Macshane released after 6 weeks.

It happens with everyone, POGS, not just MPs that you dislike.
If he commits another crime before the end of the sentence, he goes back inside straight away.
It's only murderers that are given a minimum tariff, now, I think.

Considering the costs of keeping him in prison - which are all overcrowded-why keep him there longer, he has lost his job, been publicly shamed etc. he isn't a danger to the public.

Demonstrates how pointless short prison sentences are for non-violent crimes. He should have been given an order to work in the community. There's plenty to do out there and community payback orders are useful as a form of punishment and daily loss of liberty doing menial work to benefit the public.

Does he have to pay back the money he has stolen or is that lost forever?

Good point Charleygirl but somehow I doubt that he has to.

Wasn't the money paid back a while ago?

I do think it would have been better justice for him to have served community service in his constituancy and to face his constituants face to face I too believe there was a report that he paid back the monies but not too sure about that.

From what I remember, he paid it back,but what he had done wrong was invent receipts for money that he could have claimed if he'd had the real receipts.
What he did was silly rather than criminal. Even the judge accepted that.

That's right - it was the fraudulent claims under false names and an attempt to pervert justice that did for him.

Sounds criminal to me!

Let he who is without sin....

Were the claims fraudulent or the claims genuine but the receipts fraudulent?
I do recall the judge saying the money was not for personal gain

The claims were false because he invented them to try to recoup expenses money he could have reclaimed genuinely. He set up a fictitious company and signed claims in a false name. They went through at first, but suspicion was aroused with the expenses scandal so they were checked again, then he tried to pervert the course of justice instead of holding his hands up.

I may not be without sin, durhamjen, but I've never resorted to fraud!

I'd be very surprised if anyone who has, or has had, a business can say that they have never put something through the books which was for personal use because they had bought something else for the business and did not have a receipt for it. Not for that amount, obviously.
He put through 19 receipts for over 12 thousand pounds total, I think, because it was all to do with European travel.
A lot of MPs got away with doing far worse because they paid it back.

Durhamjen

I don't follow your reasoning at all. He fraudulently stole money from the tax payer. I will resist commenting on your statement about politicians I do not like, it's not worth getting into an argument over nothin

I would like to ask this, if I may.

If he has served 6 weeks of a 6 month sentence and some GN's feel he should have been given community service, why should he not have to do exactly that, community service for the remaining 4 months of his sentence.??

I am well aware that this happens but I am asking is it right and why not give a shorter sentence and expect somebody to do it's full term. Instead we piddle about with sentencing terms and watch the likes of child murderers getting out halfway through the sentence.

Until recent proposals, no intervention has been available or mandatory for such short sentences, POGS. There have been voluntary, preventative initiatives by probation services, but they were stopped by successive government because they weren't legal requirements. Sex offenders and certain very high risk offenders who need multi-agency management in the community are the exception.

The government is privatising and breaking up sections of offender management that has been covered by probation, and bringing in supervision of short sentences. It's not gone though its final stages yet. It's all a bit of a dog's dinner, and it will cost the tax payer a fortune to bring in private supervision of those revolving door petty and lower risk offenders who keep going in and out of prison. When it's finalised, supervision of short prison sentence offenders doing work in their community may happen - a bureaucratic nightmare, as breaching such conditions means taking someone who didn't do his fortnight or month's work filling in potholes or picking litter back to a clogged up court. Doesn't sound too hopeful, does it?

Whenim

No it doesn't does it.

It just seems to me everything is so 'over thought' when it comes to prison sentences.

Perhaps I am wrong in wondering why you cannot give a shorter sentence that must be adhered to rather than a longer sentence that set's you free after you have only served 25% of the sentence.

What's the point.

It might seem senseless POGS but I think the reasoning is to give a sanction to prison staff. If the full sentence had to be served then there would be no incentive for prisoners to behave well.

Prisons are difficult places; 75%+ have mental health problems, many have learning difficulties. By and large the population is composed of the sad, the mad and the bad. And the bad are the smallest proportion.

Yes - especially as every time a sentence of, say, eight years is announced in the media for a high-profile offender, the general public collectively think 'Oh, so he'll be out in three...'

That post was in response to POGS's - must remember to name posters when I reply...

The judge said that MacShane had legitimately spent the money and could have claimed it back. Therefore he did not steal it from the taxpayer. Instead he paid it back, which meant he was then £12900 out of pocket. The judge also recognised that MacShanes case was completely different from the other cases.
That's probably why he was out in 6 weeks instead of 3 months.
I feel sorry for the man.
He lost his daughter, his mother and his partner, Carol Barnes, the newsreader all within three or four years. He was hounded by the NoW and won damages from them in court.

Thanks again When for your concise and informed post about short prison sentences. As durhamjen says, MacShane has lost so much that really mattered in his life and that will no doubt be his main punishment.
The prisons are full of folks serving short sentences, to what purpose. Fraudsters always seem to be imprisoned. In this case, I agree that some form of community service would have been more appropriate. MacShane doesn't pose a risk to the public, his offending was specific and I honestly think the cost of sending him to prison would have been better spent on CS.