Runners buy MDMA pills

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

Runners buy MDMA pills

While there are an increasing number of apps designed to help drug and alcohol users in recovery , drug dealers are also taking advantage of apps to increase their customer base. In a article for the Guardian, Leah Borromeo monstris explored the use of such mainstream apps as Instagram, Tinder, Kik and Depop for drug dealing. I have just 4 April updated the post with another app running in to legal challenges — weedmap. On Instagram, people looking to buy drugs simply search via hashtags such as weed4sale or the names of the drugs themselves mdma, mephedrone etc. The customer then contacts the owner of the account and the deal moves along through direct messages. In the case of Tinder, potential customers can swipe through profiles until they find a dealer and match with them. Buyers can either meet face-to-face or pay online and have their purchases posted to them. While online payments such as bitcoin and pre-paid gift cards such as Vanilla Visa are encrypted, Ms Borromeo says that more traceable measures such as unattributed bank transfers and PayPal are also used. In the UK, this means of selling New Psychoactive Substances or legal highs will soon probably be illegal once the government decides to implement the New Psychoactive Substance Act. It should have come into force on 6 April and is now scheduled for some time in Spring this year — the reasons for the delay are set out in this Guardian article by Alan Travis. In addition to the mis use of mainstream apps, there are also a number of apps dedicated to accessing drugs. For a full rundown, check out this article by Annie Lesser but dedicated apps which piqued my interest for their ingenuity and entrepreneurship include:. Weedmaps sometimes called Yelp for pot the smartphone app Weedmaps enables users to locate dispensaries and delivery services selling the green stuff. The company has been among the breakout success stories of legalization thus far. While federal illegality in the US makes it very difficult for a company to sell cannabis in more than one state, Weedmaps faces no such constraints. When a visitor lands in Portland, Denver or San Francisco, they might not know the local dispensary or product names, but they know to check Weedmaps to find out. Responding to Ajax, Weedmaps did something almost unheard of for a cannabis company: it politely told the regulator to get lost. Nestdrop started as an alcohol delivery service before morphing into an app to help you get medical marijuana delivered. With MyDx, you can find the perfect strain to fit any mood. The device and app developers behind MyDx are also working to apply this technology to test food and water for unwanted chemicals as well as air quality. This app is basically Tinder for stoners. You enter your energy level when on weed, what you want to do with the other party chat, go out, or stay in and list the activities you enjoy when high. When there are so many apps out there to help people access drugs more easily, the value of the work by the Global Drug Survey becomes even more obvious. GDS drugs meter app allows users to see how their drug use compares to other people just like them, offering objective, personalised feedback that takes their personal features in to account. With an overview of total drug use and in depth analysis for nine drugs at present, drugs meter gives objective feedback informed by medical experts. It is committed to giving honest, accurate information. All data is anonymous, secure and cannot be traced back to any individual. Please share any drug apps that you think may be of particular interest via the comments section below. Fascinating insights into changes in drug and alcohol taking behaviour during the global pandemic — interim findings from Global Drug Survey. GDS provides new data on the latest drug trends and crucial public health and policy issues, as well as a range of fascinating facts. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction surveys the latest apps responding to drug use and associated harms. Submit your job opportunities here Contact me Advent Quiz. Click to Subscribe. Using apps to buy and sell drugs. Russell Webster April 19, While there are an increasing number of apps designed to help drug and alcohol users in recovery, drug dealers are also taking advantage of apps to increase their customer base. Share This Post. Related posts. Drug and alcohol use during coronavirus Fascinating insights into changes in drug and alcohol taking behaviour during the global pandemic — interim findings from Global Drug Survey. Seven things I learnt from the Global Drug Survey GDS provides new data on the latest drug trends and crucial public health and policy issues, as well as a range of fascinating facts. Smartphone apps for problem drug users The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction surveys the latest apps responding to drug use and associated harms. Drug and alcohol treatment goes digital Substance misuse treatment providers embrace digital for a better user experience. Eight things I learnt from the Global Drug Survey GDS provides new data on the latest drug trends and crucial public health and policy issues, as well as a range of fascinating facts. I am currently on recovery. I am on treatment with methadone. Twitter Facebook-f Linkedin-in Youtube. Back to Top. Consent Management Privacy Policy. Privacy Policy Required. You read and agreed to our Privacy Policy. Get every blog post by email for free. First Name. Last Name. No Thanks.

Ecstasy (MDMA) and its effects on kidneys and their treatment: a review

Runners buy MDMA pills

Do not retain this copy. Only the online version of a guideline is guaranteed to be up to date. Supplying or offering to supply a controlled drug, Misuse of Drugs Act section 4 3. Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply it to another, Misuse of Drugs Act section 5 3. Triable either way unless the defendant could receive the minimum sentence of seven years for a third drug trafficking offence under section Powers of Criminal Courts Sentencing Act in which case the offence is triable only on indictment. User guide for this offence. Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings. In accordance with section of the Coroners and Justice Act , the Sentencing Council issues this definitive guideline. It applies to all offenders aged 18 and older, who are sentenced on or after the effective date of this guideline, regardless of the date of the offence. Section 59 1 of the Sentencing Code provides that:. This guideline applies only to offenders aged 18 and older. General principles to be considered in the sentencing of children and young people are in the Sentencing Council definitive guideline, Overarching Principles — Sentencing Children and Young People. In assessing culpability, the sentencer should weigh up all the factors of the case to determine role. These lists are not exhaustive. In assessing harm, quantity is determined by the weight of the product. Purity is not taken into account at step one but is dealt with at step two. Where the offence is supply directly to users including street dealing , the quantity of product is less indicative of the harm caused and therefore the starting point is not solely based on quantity. The court should consider all offences involving supplying directly to users as at least category 3 harm, and make an adjustment from the starting point within that category considering the quantity of drugs in the particular case. Note — where the offence is selling directly to users or supply in a custodial institution the starting point is not based on quantity — go to category 3. Having determined the category at step one, the court should use the corresponding starting point to reach a sentence within the category range below. The starting point applies to all offenders irrespective of plea or previous convictions. A case of particular gravity, reflected by multiple features of culpability or harm in step one, could merit upward adjustment from the starting point before further adjustment for aggravating or mitigating features, set out below. Category range Band B fine — Medium level community order. Category range Band A fine — Medium level community order. Where possible, if a financial penalty is imposed, it should remove any economic benefit the offender has derived through the commission of the offence including: avoided costs; operating savings; any gain made as a direct result of the offence. The fine should meet, in a fair and proportionate way, the objectives of punishment, deterrence and the removal of gain derived through the commission of the offence ; it should not be cheaper to offend than to comply with the law. In considering economic benefit, the court should avoid double recovery. Where the means of the offender are limited, priority should be given to compensation where applicable over payment of any other financial penalty. Where it is not possible to calculate or estimate the economic benefit, the court may wish to draw on information from the enforcing authorities about the general costs of operating within the law. When sentencing organisations the fine must be sufficiently substantial to have a real economic impact which will bring home to both management and shareholders the need to comply with the law. The court should ensure that the effect of the fine particularly if it will result in closure of the business is proportionate to the gravity of the offence. Obtaining financial information: It is for the offender to disclose to the court such data relevant to their financial position as will enable it to assess what they can reasonably afford to pay. In setting a fine, the court may conclude that the offender is able to pay any fine imposed unless the offender has supplied financial information to the contrary. Community orders For further information see Imposition of community and custodial sentences. In general, only one requirement will be appropriate and the length may be curtailed if additional requirements are necessary. Sentencing flowcharts are available at Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences definitive guideline. The following factors should be weighed in considering whether it is possible to suspend the sentence:. Factors indicating that it would not be appropriate to suspend a custodial sentence. The imposition of a custodial sentence is both punishment and a deterrent. To ensure that the overall terms of the suspended sentence are commensurate with offence seriousness, care must be taken to ensure requirements imposed are not excessive. A court wishing to impose onerous or intensive requirements should reconsider whether a community sentence might be more appropriate. Ideally a pre-sentence report should be completed on the same day to avoid adjourning the case. Magistrates: Consult your legal adviser before deciding to sentence to custody without a pre-sentence report. The time for which a sentence is suspended should reflect the length of the sentence; up to 12 months might normally be appropriate for a suspended sentence of up to 6 months. The requirements are identical to those available for community orders, see the guideline on Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences. There may be exceptional local circumstances that arise which may lead a court to decide that prevalence of drug offending should influence sentencing levels. The pivotal issue in such cases will be the harm caused to the community. Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence. The following guidance should be considered when seeking to determine the degree to which previous convictions should aggravate sentence:. Section 65 of the Sentencing Code states that:. Section 64 of the Sentencing Code states:. In considering the seriousness of any offence committed while the offender was on bail, the court must - a treat the fact that it was committed in those circumstances as an aggravating factor and b state in open court that the offence is so aggravated. The more sophisticated, extensive or persistent the actions after the event, the more likely it is to increase the seriousness of the offence. When sentencing young adult offenders typically aged , consideration should also be given to the guidance on the mitigating factor relating to age and lack of maturity when considering the significance of such conduct. Where any such actions are the subject of separate charges, this should be taken into account when assessing totality. Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm. The court will need to be satisfied that the offender is genuinely remorseful for the offending behaviour in order to reduce the sentence separate from any guilty plea reduction. Remorse can present itself in many different ways. If a PSR has been prepared it may provide valuable assistance in this regard. This factor may apply whether or not the offender has previous convictions. Evidence that an offender has demonstrated positive good character through, for example, charitable works may reduce the sentence. However , this factor is less likely to be relevant where the offending is very serious. Where an offender has used their good character or status to facilitate or conceal the offending it could be treated as an aggravating factor. Where offending is driven by or closely associated with drug or alcohol abuse for example stealing to feed a habit, or committing acts of disorder or violence whilst drunk a commitment to address the underlying issue may justify a reduction in sentence. This will be particularly relevant where the court is considering whether to impose a sentence that focuses on rehabilitation. The emotional and developmental age of an offender is of at least equal importance to their chronological age if not greater. In particular young adults typically aged are still developing neurologically and consequently may be less able to:. Young adults are likely to be susceptible to peer pressure and are more likely to take risks or behave impulsively when in company with their peers. Immaturity can also result from atypical brain development. An immature offender may find it particularly difficult to cope with custody and therefore may be more susceptible to self-harm in custody. An immature offender may find it particularly difficult to cope with the requirements of a community order without appropriate support. There is a greater capacity for change in immature offenders and they may be receptive to opportunities to address their offending behaviour and change their conduct. Many young people who offend either stop committing crime, or begin a process of stopping, in their late teens and early twenties. Young adult care leavers are entitled to time limited support. Leaving care services may change at the age of 21 and cease at the age of 25, unless the young adult is in education at that point. Where an offender has turned 18 between the commission of the offence and conviction the court should take as its starting point the sentence likely to have been imposed on the date at which the offence was committed, but applying the purposes of sentencing adult offenders. When considering a custodial or community sentence for a young adult the Probation Service should address these issues in a PSR. Refer to the Sentencing offenders with mental disorders, developmental disorders, or neurological impairments guideline. This factor is particularly relevant where an offender is on the cusp of custody or where the suitability of a community order is being considered. See also the Imposition of community and custodial sentences guideline. For offenders on the cusp of custody, imprisonment should not be imposed where there would be an impact on dependants which would make a custodial sentence disproportionate to achieving the aims of sentencing. Where custody is unavoidable consideration of the impact on dependants may be relevant to the length of the sentence imposed and whether the sentence can be suspended. For more serious offences where a substantial period of custody is appropriate, this factor will carry less weight. The court should ensure that it has all relevant information about dependent children before deciding on sentence. When an immediate custodial sentence is necessary, the court must consider whether proper arrangements have been made for the care of any dependent children and if necessary consider adjourning sentence for this to be done. When considering a community or custodial sentence for an offender who has, or may have, caring responsibilities the court should ask the Probation Service to address these issues in a PSR. Useful information can be found in the Equal Treatment Bench Book see in particular Chapter 6 paragraphs to For class A cases, section of the Powers of Criminal Courts Sentencing Act provides that a court should impose an appropriate custodial sentence of at least seven years for a third class A trafficking offence except where the court is of the opinion that there are particular circumstances which a relate to any of the offences or to the offender; and b would make it unjust to do so in all the circumstances. If the circumstances of the offence, the previous offences or the offender make it unjust to impose the statutory minimum sentence then the court must impose either a shorter custodial sentence than the statutory minimum provides or an alternative sentence. Having reached this stage of the guideline the court should have made a provisional assessment of the seriousness of the current offence. In addition, the court must consider the seriousness of the previous offences and the period of time that has elapsed between offences. Where the seriousness of the combined offences is such that it falls below the custody threshold, or where there has been a significant period of time between the offences, the court may consider it unjust to impose the statutory minimum sentence. The court should consider the following factors to determine whether it would be unjust to impose the statutory minimum sentence;. The court should take into account sections 73 and 74 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act assistance by defendants: reduction or review of sentence and any other rule of law by virtue of which an offender may receive a discounted sentence in consequence of assistance given or offered to the prosecutor or investigator. The court should take account of any potential reduction for a guilty plea in accordance with section of the Criminal Justice Act and the guideline for Reduction in Sentence for a Guilty Plea where first hearing is on or after 1 June , or first hearing before 1 June In circumstances where an appropriate custodial sentence of 7 years falls to be imposed under section of the Powers of Criminal Courts Sentencing Act third Class A drug trafficking offences , the court may impose any sentence in accordance with this guideline which is not less than 80 per cent of the appropriate custodial period. If sentencing an offender for more than one offence, or where the offender is already serving a sentence, consider whether the total sentence is just and proportionate to the offending behaviour. See Totality guideline. In all cases, the court is required to consider confiscation where the Crown invokes the process or where the court considers it appropriate. It should also consider whether to make ancillary orders. Section of the Criminal Justice Act imposes a duty to give reasons for, and explain the effect of, the sentence. The court must consider whether to give credit for time spent on bail in accordance with section A of the Criminal Justice Act In the earlier guidelines, published in , ecstasy tablet quantities were based on a typical quantity of mg MDMA per tablet. We use some essential cookies to make this website work. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Cookie settings. You can read more about our cookies. Skip to content. Magistrates' court menu Magistrates home Search offences Explanatory materials Explanatory materials back Aggravating and mitigating factors Ancillary Orders Explanatory materials back 1. Introduction to ancillary orders 2. Anti-social behaviour orders 3. Binding over orders 4. Confiscation orders 5. Criminal behaviour orders 6. Deprivation of ownership of animal 7. Deprivation orders 8. Destruction orders and contingent destruction orders for dogs 9. Disqualification from driving — general power Disqualification from ownership of animals Disqualification of company directors Drinking banning orders Exclusion orders Football banning orders Forfeiture and destruction of drugs Forfeiture and destruction of goods bearing unauthorised trade mark Forfeiture and destruction of weapons orders Forfeiture or suspension of liquor licence Parenting orders Restitution orders Restraining orders Sexual harm prevention orders Sexual offences prevention orders Automatic orders on conviction for sexual offences Additional note: Availability of ancillary orders. Explanatory materials back 1. Imposition of community orders 2. Breach of community order. Imposition of custodial sentences 2. Breach of a suspended sentence order. Explanatory materials back Approach to the assessment of fines Explanatory materials back 1. Approach to the assessment of fines - introduction 2. Fine bands 3. Definition of relevant weekly income 4. Assessment of financial circumstances 5. Approach to offenders on low income 6. Offence committed by an organisation 8. Reduction for a guilty plea 9. Maximum fines Multiple offences Imposition of fines with custodial sentences Payment Collection orders. Introduction to compensation 2. Suggested starting points for physical and mental injuries. Racial or religious aggravation — statutory provisions 2. Aggravation related to disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity — statutory provisions 3. Approach to sentencing. Introduction to out of court disposals 2. Cannabis or khat warning 3. Simple caution 4. Conditional caution 5. Penalty notices — fixed penalty notices and penalty notices for disorder 6. Community resolution 7. Offences for which penalty notices are available. Obligatory disqualification 2. Special reasons 3. Discretionary disqualification 5. Disqualification until a test is passed 6. Reduced period of disqualification for completion of rehabilitation course 7. New drivers 9. Extension period of disqualification from driving where a custodial sentence is also imposed. Victim personal statements 2. Prevalence and community impact statements. Overarching guidelines back Allocation Domestic abuse: overarching principles General guideline: overarching principles Imposition of community and custodial sentences Offences taken into consideration Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea - first hearing on or after 1 June Sentencing Children and Young People Sentencing offenders with mental disorders, developmental disorders, or neurological impairments Totality. Calculators back Fine calculator Drink-driving calculator Using the calculators. Pronouncement back Pronouncement builder How to use the pronouncement builder. Draft guideline for consultation only. Draft guidelines should not be taken into account when sentencing. Where no offence-specific guideline exists, refer to General guideline: overarching principles. Applicability In accordance with section of the Coroners and Justice Act , the Sentencing Council issues this definitive guideline. Harm In assessing harm, quantity is determined by the weight of the product. Indicative quantities of the most common drugs, upon which the starting point is to be based are given in the table below. Where a drug is not listed in the table below, sentencers should expect to be provided with expert evidence to assist in determining the potency of the particular drug and in equating the quantity in the case with the quantities set out in the guidelines in terms of the harm caused. There will often be no precise calculation possible, but courts are reminded that in cases of particularly potent drugs, even very small quantities may be held to be equivalent to large quantities of the drugs listed. The seriousness of the offence should be the initial factor in determining which requirements to include in a community order. Offence specific guidelines refer to three sentencing levels within the community order band based on offence seriousness low, medium and high. The culpability and harm present in the offence s should be considered to identify which of the three sentencing levels within the community order band is appropriate. See below for non-exhaustive examples of requirements that might be appropriate in each. A suspended sentence is a custodial sentence. Community orders can fulfil all of the purposes of sentencing. Where an offender is being sentenced for a non-imprisonable offence, there is no power to make a community order. Sentencers must consider all available disposals at the time of sentence; even where the threshold for a community sentence has been passed, a fine or discharge may be an appropriate penalty. In particular, a Band D fine may be an appropriate alternative to a community order. Sentences should not necessarily escalate from one community order range to the next on each sentencing occasion. The decision as to the appropriate range of community order should be based upon the seriousness of the new offence s which will take into account any previous convictions. In many cases, a pre-sentence report will be pivotal in helping the court decide whether to impose a community order and, if so, whether particular requirements or combinations of requirements are suitable for an individual offender. Whenever the court reaches the provisional view that a community order may be appropriate, it should request a pre-sentence report whether written or verbal unless the court is of the opinion that a report is unnecessary in all the circumstances of the case. If an adjournment cannot be avoided, the information should be provided to the Probation Service in written form and a copy retained on the court file for the benefit of the sentencing court. However, the court must make clear to the offender that all sentencing options remain open including, in appropriate cases, committal for sentence to the Crown Court. Custodial sentences Sentencing flowcharts are available at Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences definitive guideline. The approach to the imposition of a custodial sentence should be as follows: 1 Has the custody threshold been passed? A custodial sentence must not be imposed unless the offence or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it was so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified for the offence. There is no general definition of where the custody threshold lies. The circumstances of the individual offence and the factors assessed by offence-specific guidelines will determine whether an offence is so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified. Where no offence specific guideline is available to determine seriousness, the harm caused by the offence, the culpability of the offender and any previous convictions will be relevant to the assessment. The clear intention of the threshold test is to reserve prison as a punishment for the most serious offences. Passing the custody threshold does not mean that a custodial sentence should be deemed inevitable. Sentencers should be clear that they would impose an immediate custodial sentence if the power to suspend were not available. If not, a non-custodial sentence should be imposed. Pre-sentence report Whenever the court reaches the provisional view that: the custody threshold has been passed; and, if so the length of imprisonment which represents the shortest term commensurate with the seriousness of the offence; the court should obtain a pre-sentence report, whether verbal or written, unless the court considers a report to be unnecessary. Suspended Sentences: General Guidance i The guidance regarding pre-sentence reports applies if suspending custody. Previous convictions,. Previous convictions are normally of relevance to the current offence when they are of a similar type. Numerous and frequent previous convictions might indicate an underlying problem for example, an addiction that could be addressed more effectively in the community and will not necessarily indicate that a custodial sentence is necessary. If the offender received a non-custodial disposal for the previous offence, a court should not necessarily move to a custodial sentence for the fresh offence. In cases involving significant persistent offending, the community and custody thresholds may be crossed even though the current offence normally warrants a lesser sentence. If a custodial sentence is imposed it should be proportionate and kept to the necessary minimum. Where the previous offence is particularly old it will normally have little relevance for the current sentencing exercise. The court should consider the time gap since the previous conviction and the reason for it. Where there has been a significant gap between previous and current convictions or a reduction in the frequency of offending this may indicate that the offender has made attempts to desist from offending in which case the aggravating effect of the previous offending will diminish. Where the current offence is significantly less serious than the previous conviction suggesting a decline in the gravity of offending , the previous conviction may carry less weight. When considering the totality of previous offending a court should take a rounded view of the previous crimes and not simply aggregate the individual offences. Where information is available on the context of previous offending this may assist the court in assessing the relevance of that prior offending to the current offence. Offence committed on bail. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Section 64 of the Sentencing Code states: In considering the seriousness of any offence committed while the offender was on bail, the court must - a treat the fact that it was committed in those circumstances as an aggravating factor and b state in open court that the offence is so aggravated. Attempts to conceal or dispose of evidence, where not charged separately. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence The more sophisticated, extensive or persistent the actions after the event, the more likely it is to increase the seriousness of the offence. Failure to comply with current court orders. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Commission of an offence while subject to a relevant court order makes the offence more serious. The extent to which the offender has complied with the conditions of an order including the time that has elapsed since its commencement will be a relevant consideration. Where the offender is dealt with separately for a breach of an order regard should be had to totality Care should be taken to avoid double counting matters taken into account when considering previous convictions. Offence committed on licence or post sentence supervision. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence An offender who is subject to licence or post sentence supervision is under a particular obligation to desist from further offending. The extent to which the offender has complied with the conditions of a licence or order including the time that has elapsed since its commencement will be a relevant consideration. Where the offender is dealt with separately for a breach of a licence or order regard should be had to totality. Care should be taken to avoid double counting matters taken into account when considering previous convictions. Established evidence of community impact. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence This factor should increase the sentence only where there is clear evidence of wider harm not already taken into account elsewhere. A community impact statement will assist the court in assessing the level of impact. For issues of prevalence see the separate guidance. Factors reducing seriousness or reflecting personal mitigation. No previous convictions or no relevant or recent convictions. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm First time offenders usually represent a lower risk of reoffending. Reoffending rates for first offenders are significantly lower than rates for repeat offenders. In addition, first offenders are normally regarded as less blameworthy than offenders who have committed the same crime several times already. For these reasons first offenders receive a mitigated sentence. In general the more serious the previous offending the longer it will retain relevance. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm The court will need to be satisfied that the offender is genuinely remorseful for the offending behaviour in order to reduce the sentence separate from any guilty plea reduction. Lack of remorse should never be treated as an aggravating factor. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm This factor may apply whether or not the offender has previous convictions. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Where offending is driven by or closely associated with drug or alcohol abuse for example stealing to feed a habit, or committing acts of disorder or violence whilst drunk a commitment to address the underlying issue may justify a reduction in sentence. The court will be assisted by a PSR in making this assessment. Serious medical conditions requiring urgent, intensive or long-term treatment. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence The court can take account of physical disability or a serious medical condition by way of mitigation as a reason for reducing the length of the sentence, either on the ground of the greater impact which imprisonment will have on the offender, or as a matter of generally expressed mercy in the individual circumstances of the case. However, such a condition, even when it is difficult to treat in prison, will not automatically entitle the offender to a lesser sentence than would otherwise be appropriate. There will always be a need to balance issues personal to an offender against the gravity of the offending including the harm done to victims , and the public interest in imposing appropriate punishment for serious offending. A terminal prognosis is not in itself a reason to reduce the sentence even further. The court must impose a sentence that properly meets the aims of sentencing even if it will carry the clear prospect that the offender will die in custody. The prospect of death in the near future will be a matter considered by the prison authorities and the Secretary of State under the early release on compassionate grounds procedure ERCG. Either or both of these considerations may justify a reduction in the sentence. In particular young adults typically aged are still developing neurologically and consequently may be less able to: evaluate the consequences of their actions limit impulsivity limit risk taking Young adults are likely to be susceptible to peer pressure and are more likely to take risks or behave impulsively when in company with their peers. Mental disorder or learning disability. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Refer to the Sentencing offenders with mental disorders, developmental disorders, or neurological impairments guideline. Note in particular paragraph 5 for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic offenders. Sole or primary carer for dependent relatives. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm This factor is particularly relevant where an offender is on the cusp of custody or where the suitability of a community order is being considered. In addition when sentencing an offender who is pregnant relevant considerations may include: any effect of the sentence on the health of the offender and any effect of the sentence on the unborn child The court should ensure that it has all relevant information about dependent children before deciding on sentence. Our use of cookies We use some essential cookies to make this website work. Cookie settings Accept all cookies Reject additional cookies. Cookie settings Hide this message. You can read more about our cookies Accept all cookies Reject additional cookies. Starting point High level community order. Starting point Low level community order. Offences that obviously fall within the community order band. Offences only just fall below the custody threshold or the custody threshold is crossed but a community order is more appropriate in the circumstances More intensive sentences which combine two or more requirements may be appropriate. Factors indicating that it may be appropriate to suspend a custodial sentence. Realistic prospect of rehabilitation. Immediate custody will result in significant harmful impact upon others.

Runners buy MDMA pills