Leicester Teenager admits burgling 278 homes and stealing 60 cars

[Captain...]

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Nobody is saying he shouldn't do the time I'm just saying it is not a light or easy sentence.

[Guest]

Nobody is saying he shouldn't do the time I'm just saying it is not a light or easy sentence.

Neither is making a honest living working in a boring job day after day.

[MooseBreath]

But I am guessing you have never been inside?

Me neither, and I don't intend to be, I spent a few hours in a cell once due to some copper wanting to give me a scare when I was a teen, even though I had done nothing wrong (long story) anyway I don't see 2 years as a light sentence I couldn't even begin to put a value on my liberty, imagine you missed out on being 20-21 just imagine taking them away and tell me 2 years is a light sentence, even if prisons were a luxury hotel you couldn't leave it would be torture for me, yes some people adapt, some people can even find some positives from their time inside, but 2 years without liberty is not a light sentence.

People bandy around 6 months, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years but until you can sit back and actually contemplate that time and what you could achieve, or what you would miss out on, I don't think people really appreciate what a punishment a prison sentence is.

Nah man, you only do two days anyway - the day you go in, and the day you go out

[Zingari]

2 years inside works out at about 2 and a bit days per crime.

[davieG]

Merc

A teenager who confessed to burgling hundreds of homes in a criminal career which began when he was 12 has been jailed for five years.

Adam Crampton, who recently turned 19, was already in prison for burglary and robbery when he admitted to detectives that he had burgled a further 278 Leicestershire and Rutland homes and, on 60 occasions, stolen his victims' cars or mopeds to make his escape.

• 
  ​
  

He appeared at Leicester Crown Court yesterday to be sentenced for three specimen offences of burglary – with 335 burglaries and vehicle thefts taken into consideration.

The court heard that the teenager, of no fixed address, confessed to the offences because he wanted to "clear his slate" and make a fresh start in life.

Crampton is expected to serve half of the five-year sentence before being freed on licence.

James Varley, for Crampton, told the court his client had had a difficult childhood and had spent some time in social services care, and had used cannabis, cocaine and alcohol at an early age.

"At that time, he had been led astray by more sophisticated, older people," Mr Varley said.

"His moral compass was set at the age of 12."

He said the teenager had overcome those problems and made great progress in his employment training while in prison.

Mr Varley said "each and every one" of Crampton's admissions has been scrutinised to ensure they were genuine.

"At last, the best part of 300 families can be told by the police that these matters have been dealt with," he said.

Sentencing Crampton, Judge Simon Hammond said he had been "a persistent and remorseless burglar".

The judge said: "He says he wants to make a fresh start with no other offences pending, hence this full and frank confession which has been helpful to the police and his victims.

"I just want the defendant to reflect on the impact of burglary. For many people, their homes are never the same again."

After the hearing, Detective Inspector Simon Cure, who led the investigation, said: "Today's result is a great success for the victims, who now know who committed the crimes against them and can see that justice has been done.

"This case also sends a message to offenders that we will persist with our criminal investigations until we have located the offender and brought them to justice.

"Adam has made it clear that he wants to take a new path in life and this is a path we would encourage any criminal to take."

Crampton appeared in court yesterday to be sentenced after admitting the crimes at a hearing last month. After that earlier hearing, one of his victims, 60-year-old Sylvia Hammond, said she was relieved to finally know the intruder's identity.

Crampton crept into Mrs Hammond's Oakham home in July 2007 and stole a laptop computer and a digital camera.

She said last month: "You hear that a lot of people in prison go back to their old ways when they are released.

"I just hope he doesn't, now that he has admitted all of these crimes."

Leicestershire Police is running a force-wide campaign, Operation Dynamo, to track down burglars and encourage people to take basic crime-prevention steps to protect their homes.

A total of 230 suspects have been arrested since it was launched at the beginning of August.

[Captain...]

Merc

A teenager who confessed to burgling hundreds of homes in a criminal career which began when he was 12 has been jailed for five years.

Adam Crampton, who recently turned 19, was already in prison for burglary and robbery when he admitted to detectives that he had burgled a further 278 Leicestershire and Rutland homes and, on 60 occasions, stolen his victims' cars or mopeds to make his escape.

• 
  ​
  

He appeared at Leicester Crown Court yesterday to be sentenced for three specimen offences of burglary – with 335 burglaries and vehicle thefts taken into consideration.

The court heard that the teenager, of no fixed address, confessed to the offences because he wanted to "clear his slate" and make a fresh start in life.

Crampton is expected to serve half of the five-year sentence before being freed on licence.

James Varley, for Crampton, told the court his client had had a difficult childhood and had spent some time in social services care, and had used cannabis, cocaine and alcohol at an early age.

"At that time, he had been led astray by more sophisticated, older people," Mr Varley said.

"His moral compass was set at the age of 12."

He said the teenager had overcome those problems and made great progress in his employment training while in prison.

Mr Varley said "each and every one" of Crampton's admissions has been scrutinised to ensure they were genuine.

"At last, the best part of 300 families can be told by the police that these matters have been dealt with," he said.

Sentencing Crampton, Judge Simon Hammond said he had been "a persistent and remorseless burglar".

The judge said: "He says he wants to make a fresh start with no other offences pending, hence this full and frank confession which has been helpful to the police and his victims.

"I just want the defendant to reflect on the impact of burglary. For many people, their homes are never the same again."

After the hearing, Detective Inspector Simon Cure, who led the investigation, said: "Today's result is a great success for the victims, who now know who committed the crimes against them and can see that justice has been done.

"This case also sends a message to offenders that we will persist with our criminal investigations until we have located the offender and brought them to justice.

"Adam has made it clear that he wants to take a new path in life and this is a path we would encourage any criminal to take."

Crampton appeared in court yesterday to be sentenced after admitting the crimes at a hearing last month. After that earlier hearing, one of his victims, 60-year-old Sylvia Hammond, said she was relieved to finally know the intruder's identity.

Crampton crept into Mrs Hammond's Oakham home in July 2007 and stole a laptop computer and a digital camera.

She said last month: "You hear that a lot of people in prison go back to their old ways when they are released.

"I just hope he doesn't, now that he has admitted all of these crimes."

Leicestershire Police is running a force-wide campaign, Operation Dynamo, to track down burglars and encourage people to take basic crime-prevention steps to protect their homes.

A total of 230 suspects have been arrested since it was launched at the beginning of August.

He's a monster, how can you possibly rehabilitate such a remorseless, soulless felon, just reading that makes me want to track him down and kill him myself.

[davieG]

He's a monster, how can you possibly rehabilitate such a remorseless, soulless felon, just reading that makes me want to track him down and kill him myself.

[Zingari]

He made his getaways on stolen mopeds !!

No wonder it took so long to catch him .

[Guest]

"a great success for the victims"

It's not really is it?

[Guest]

And why would that be? Because the lads bollocks are still enact? Because he will be released from prison?

[Guest]

And why would that be? Because the lads bollocks are still enact? Because he will be released from prison?

? Rather agressive.

My thought was that the victim is still the victim, that wouldn't make anything great.

I wasn't even thinking about the violater

I certainly wasn't thinking about his testes, we differ in our thoughts, obviously

[ADK]

And why would that be? Because the lads bollocks are still enact? Because he will be released from prison?

I think probably because it dosn't change the fact that the crimes were committed and victims lives impacted.

A common criticism of modern police is they focus too much on gathering data on crimes already committed and not enough on preventing them in the first place.

[Guest MattP]

And why would that be? Because the lads bollocks are still enact? Because he will be released from prison?

Well no it's because the Victims lives have still been ruined in some cases and the hassle they went through hasn't gone away.

Had this guy burgled me I don't think I be calling the verdict one of my "great successes"

[Captain...]

Well no it's because the Victims lives have still been ruined in some cases and the hassle they went through hasn't gone away.

Had this guy burgled me I don't think I be calling the verdict one of my "great successes"

Depends what they are calling a success, the fact that they have stepped up their pursuit of burglars and arrested 200 odd, or the fact that in this case, after a spell of rehabilitation this kid has shown remorse and a willingness to change and has confessed to all his crimes to clear his slate, do his time and start fresh giving a large number of victims piece of mind that the person that violated their lives is now being punished and rehabilitated.

[Guest MattP]

Possible, I can't say I've ever met a victim of a crime that has called the story of him being rehabilitated a "great success" mind.

Sure there are some around though.

[Captain...]

Possible, I can't say I've ever met a victim of a crime that has called the story of him being rehabilitated a "great success" mind.

Sure there are some around though.

Well it is probably better than never knowing who did it, why they did it, whether they were punished, whether they were sorry, for some it must be of comfort to know it was nothing personal and that they were the victim of an opportunist, rather than the house was cased for a few days.

Although from my experience I would rather not know, it is now behind us and being told who did it, and that he had been caught would bring it all back up again, when I first saw this I did wonder if it was this kid that did our place, but ultimately we are over it now, the only real effect has been that we now have a burglar alarm and a newer car, both of which we are now used to and it is second nature. Better to leave it forgotten personally, it is not like they have caught all burglars, and it doesn't affect our chances of being hit again.

[ithuriel]

Depends what they are calling a success, the fact that they have stepped up their pursuit of burglars and arrested 200 odd, or the fact that in this case, after a spell of rehabilitation this kid has shown remorse and a willingness to change and has confessed to all his crimes to clear his slate, do his time and start fresh giving a large number of victims piece of mind that the person that violated their lives is now being punished and rehabilitated.

His barrister said he has remorse etc., after he was caught after commiting all those crimes.

Paint me a cynic but i doubt he has any remorse what so ever apart from being caught and sentenced.

I really cant find any sympathy for a criminal who is just serving time after finally getting convicted, if he handed himself in or put himself out and worked for charity etc.,

[Guest]

? Rather agressive.

My thought was that the victim is still the victim, that wouldn't make anything great.

I wasn't even thinking about the violater

I certainly wasn't thinking about his testes, we differ in our thoughts, obviously

I think probably because it dosn't change the fact that the crimes were committed and victims lives impacted.

A common criticism of modern police is they focus too much on gathering data on crimes already committed and not enough on preventing them in the first place.

Well no it's because the Victims lives have still been ruined in some cases and the hassle they went through hasn't gone away.

Had this guy burgled me I don't think I be calling the verdict one of my "great successes"

So you don't think that catching the culprit is a success?

Or that the victims wouldn't be reassured he has been caught? Don't you think that knowing who burgled your property has any impact on victims?

Wow.

[OzFox]

I don't buy the desperation theory either, unless you count the addicts that are so desperate for a fix that they will rob anyone and anything to raise the money to buy one. Plenty of mighty intellects have pondered the whys and wherefore's and they tell us its a complex web of this and that. People steal because they can, they want they take. They know what's right and what's wrong but they chose to ignore that. They may be hard up they may not be, they may not have a job, they may come from a broken home, their old man might be a thief, they may live amongst theives, but its their choice. They can do something else if they wanted to. They chose to rob and steal despite knowing its wrong.

I think some people steal because it's unlikely they'll get caught. I pulled into my street after midnight last night, to see a couple of hoodys shining torches and trying car doors. I watched as they tried to steal a toyota, then I followed them through the streets for a while as they broke into other cars. What amazed me was how brazen and casual they were. They knew I had seen them and didn't appear to give a shit.

I called the police who picked them up half an hour later. They had a couple of stolen sat navs on them. The cop seemed genuinely surprised that I'd bothered to call it in. He said they're used to be people not wanting to get involved and turning a blind eye.

[Guest]

So you don't think that catching the culprit is a success?

Or that the victims wouldn't be reassured he has been caught? Don't you think that knowing who burgled your property has any impact on victims?

Wow.

I don't think the victims think it's a great success. It's a pretty simple statement.

Is it true that if you kill 2 people you can get 2 life sentences, yet if you burgle someone 300 times you don't get 300 sentences?

[Guest]

I don't think the victims think it's a great success. It's a pretty simple statement.

Is it true that if you kill 2 people you can get 2 life sentences, yet if you burgle someone 300 times you don't get 300 sentences?

I would recommend sitting in the public gallery, Fridays are best for sentencing. They sometimes read out victim impact statements. You would be surprised by some of the things written by them.

I also know friends and neighbours who have been burgled. Where the police have caught the perpetrators, the victims I know have felt a sense of relief. Partly for the fact they know the scumbags won't return, but also for the fact that the Police have done their job. There is a lot of misguided and ill-informed opinions on how good they are, especially with domestic burglaries. Most occur when properties are empty, or when the owners are asleep. They don't know someone has been in until the burglar has been and gone, leaving no forensic evidence. How are the Police supposed to catch someone when there are no witnesses, no CCTV to pick them out, and where they have left nothing to identify themselves?

With regards to the number of sentences, you are sentenced for every crime you are charged/indicted for. It isn't unreasonable to be charged with multiple burglaries on one indictment, otherwise the Prosecution would have to read out the details of every one of tho 300 burglaries. Seeing as most sentences run concurrently, is it worth the taxpayers money going through the process, and tying up valuable court time to do that?

[Ilkeston_Fox]

I think probably because it dosn't change the fact that the crimes were committed and victims lives impacted.

A common criticism of modern police is they focus too much on gathering data on crimes already committed and not enough on preventing them in the first place.

Sadly, there's not much the police can do for a number of reasons. Insufficient funding, not enough officers, too much paperwork for the existing officers to tackle problems properly/thoroughly.

The police HAVE to gather evidence to such a degree that the general public would deem too much just to get a conviction, otherwise the CPS/courts can't/don't reach a sufficient conviction, and even when the offender confesses to 278 burglaries and 60 vehicle thefts he still only gets 5 years (to serve half) where as that idiot who assaulted Kirkland gets 4 months. Perhaps Lisa can agree/disagree/clear up any issues with the bold text above? It's just my opinion - one that is of course open for discussion.

My humble opinion is that this burglar (whether showing remorse or not) should serve his full sentence for the offences committed. He can learn about remorse whilst inside then start again once he gets out. Why should the victims of his career burgling feel as though justice hasn't been done just because he's remorseful all of a sudden.

[Guest]

A layman's guide to sentencing:

Some offences, you have to serve a minimum term before you can be considered for release. That's no guarantee you will be released, as you have to show that you are no longer a danger to society.

There are also indeterminate tariffs for public protection, which are a minefield, and their future is in question after the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that these are unlawful.

Most offences are punishable by imprisonment for X number of years. The offender serves half in prison, and the remainder in the community, on licence, as they say. There may be conditions attached as part of that licence. As long as the offender commits no further offences, the sentence expires after X years. If the offender reoffends, the licence is revoked, and they usually serve the remainder consecutively to any further sentence they may or may not have. Committing any criminal offence can revoke the licence, so something like being caught speeding can, in theory, send you back inside.

A suspended sentence works in the same way as being on licence. It is not the "cop out" many believe it to be, as the sentence would be served in full, and the period of time the sentence is suspended for is usually longer than the custodial term, for example a sentence of 12 months, suspended for 2 years. That means that offender will have to serve the full 12 months if caught offending in the 2 years following sentencing. It's a huge burden to have hanging over you, especially when going to prison means that the matter is over after 12 months.

Edited to show the policy making element of sentencing:

Britain's prison population is at it's highest level for years. It is policy to try and use custodial sentences only in the most extreme cases. This policy comes from the Government, and not from "left wing" or "liberal" "do-gooder" judges.

One last point. this lad was given 5 years. He's clearly been put into the most serious category of burglary, which has a starting point of 3 years. The maximum is 14 years, but the aggravating features used to determine sentence would not apply, such as carrying weapons, using or threatening violence. If they did apply, I would hope that it would have been reported.

[Guest]

A layman's guide to charging:

Charging is not straightforward, but the main decision on who to charge, and what with, rests with the CPS.

It is possible to charge a person with an offence, before investigations have been completed (as with the April Jones disappearance).

Charges (I include indictments, which is what is read out in the Crown Court) can be changed, either because there is insufficient evidence for a higher level offence, or new evidence comes to light showing there is a more serious offence.

Charges can even be dropped.

Sometimes a charge can be changed where an offender will plead 'guilty' to a lesser offence, but 'not guilty' to the more serious one charged with. Whilst it may seem unfair to the public, who are thinking of the victims, the policy behind it also is thinking of victims, and the public. Pleading 'not guilty' will involve a trial, where not only the offender is cross-examined, but also the victim(s). Sometimes, the victims are more than happy to see a person convicted without them having to relive the incident again.

It also saves the taxpayer, as trial cost a lot of money. Matters can be dealt with more quickly, and the court time can be used to deal with other matters.

[Guest]

I am not saying I agree or disagree with any of the above. It's how the system works.

If you don't agree, then the best person to complain to is your MP. Government determines sentencing, ultimately. The courts can only apply what is given.