back to article Distie thief gets 14 months despite CPS 'incompetence'

A former Ingram Micro worker received a 14-month sentence for theft offences today, despite the actual offences happening four years ago. Nicholas Greenhood, 32, stole iPods and satnavs worth £160,000 from Ingram Micro while he was working at its Daventry centre. Greenhood pleaded guilty to the thefts between October 2005 and …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Daniel 1

    Put Northumbria Police in a better light, doesn't it?

    Northumbria police lose track of madman, in Natural Unreachable Wilderness, who has promised to shoot any policemen he sees.

    Northamptonshire Police lose track of coke-addled tax payer in Milton Keynes, who assumed they forgotten about him.

    1. Linker3000

      To be fair

      To be fair, the grid road structure in Milton Keynes is pretty confusing.

      1. Arclight

        To be even fairer....

        Milton Keynes is a far worse punishment than any prison.

        The place is full of theives, they even nicked an entire football club.

        Up the Wombles

  2. Steven Jones

    why is four years important?

    "A former Ingram Micro worker received a 14-month sentence for theft offences today, despite the actual offences happening four years ago."

    Uhmm - what's that got to do with it? Last I heard the UK didn't have a general statute of limitations for criminal offenses (rather than civil liability claims) and this one is serious enough to warrant following up on the basis of it being in the public interest. It's not an excuse for CPS incompetence, but I'd much rather that the public interest test was used for prosecutions rather than the arbitrary sime periods used in some administrations that allow some to get away with their crimes. It's well within the powers of a judge to over-rule the CPS if necessary. I'm not suggesting that it's worth following up a parking ticket 4 years after the offence, but as the sentence shows, this was not a trivial misdemeanour.

    1. Tricky Dicky

      No statue of limitations-

      No, but this was clearly "abuse of process", he had admitted the offence, to take 4 years to bring him before the court was just ridiculous.

      I am surprised he didn't get a conditional discharge or at the very least have his 14 months sentence suspended – for 4 years of course.

      1. Gordon is not a Moron

        Re: No statue of limitations

        but there is Article 6 of the ECHR, where trials have to be conducted within a reasonable time. And trial delayed by roughly four times the length of the sentence doesn't seem reasonable, to me at least.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Four years.

      He's entitled to swift justice and has been since Magna Carta.

  3. JaitcH
    Thumb Down

    Just how incompetent can Plod get?

    Judges are usually busy brown nosing Plod and praising them to Hell and back, ignoring their 'exaggerations' so for one of them to say "I'm quite used to incompetence but this really takes the biscuit. ... this is a disgrace. Nothing surprises me now about the lapses and incompetence of prosecutions." REALLY highlights the problem.

    Pity it wasn't in Canada or the USA where time limits apply to these situations.

    Most likely Plod was too busy harassing photogs under Sections 43 and 44 whilst they took pictures of military installations called castles and owned by the National Trust.

    Let's hope the new government gets a grip on them.

  4. 7mark7
    Thumb Down

    After following the phorm scandal ...

    ... the incompetence of the Shite Sherlock's comes as no surprise.

  5. LuMan

    Lose Lose

    Well, it does prove that the CPS are incompetent and need taking to task over this, but I still think that Greenhood should be expected to serve his time (a crime is still a crime). Just a shame that he has to do it now and start to rebuild his life in 14 months time instead of having it all behind him.

    Well done, CPS. Here's a badge with your name on it (just in case you forget!).

  6. John Robson Silver badge

    statute of limitations

    this is why it should apply...

  7. Wommit

    Police and CPS incompetance...

    Nothing new here, move along now. Nothing newsworthy here.

  8. Jacqui

    Nurthumbria police

    A friend was pulled over today for speeding. She somehow managed to hit between 31 and 32 MPH between a roundabout and a chicane. There were 8 police officers stopping cars (one at a time) and a few PSCO (aka platic plod) assisting. While her details were being taken by a friendly WPC the gun wielding officer wandered over and rammed it in her face screaming "LOOK! LOOK!" thankfully this 73 yr old is an ex lion tamer and not put off by such behaviour.

    The one thing in the police "good books" was the WPC apologised for his behaviour.

    My friend then went straight to the local station and made a formal complaint. OK the officer probably had not made his number of arrests this month and was under pressure but to take it out on a quiet 73 yr old doing ONE MPH over the speed limit , screaming at her to try and scare her into admitting guilt is just criminal.

    From my relations in the forces I understand some officers **like** formal complaints - as they often get the union to force through a promotion to counter the "formal warning" on the record and this leads to more pay. Basically they get paid a bonus for assaulting the public :-)

    I am deffo in the wrong job.

    1. Mark 65


      Surely 1 mph over the limit is beyond the combination of accuracy and resolution of the average speedometer. I mean, 1 mph still has the needle sitting on the mark unless your speedometer stops at 70. Challenge it I say.

    2. mccp

      Eh? What are you trying to say...

      32 in a 30 zone is OK? What about 33? 35? Did you friend get a speeding ticket? If not, plod pointing out that she was speeding does not seem unreasonable.

      You want to try living next to a speed camera which is constantly flashing at berks who seem to think that the 30mph signs are advisory and not compulsory before you try and defend someone who can't keep below 30mph "between a roundabout and a chicane".

      1. Anonymous Coward

        RE: Eh? What are you trying to say

        I think it's pretty clear what they are trying to say. However, after reading your comment I suspect that the following statement would summerise the general consensus of what people would like to say to you.

        Fuck off.

  9. Graham Bartlett

    @Steven Jones

    If we accept that the purpose of prison is for deterrent, punishment and/or rehabilitation, a 4-year lapse during which time the bloke is away free doesn't do a right lot for any of those categories.

    1. Anonymous Coward


      ... is the reason his sentence should be adjusted due to the timeframe. IF he's achieved rehabilitation already by his own effort, spent those 4 years beating his addiction, building a whole new circle of friends, getting a decent job by which he pays taxes then why should all that be flushed down the crapper by a 14 month stretch inside? He'll come out to no job, no friends (unless they already know or can forgive his past), likely be back on drugs and thoroughly disaffected. The system fu##s him if he's good just as much as it fu##s him if he's bad so why bother trying?

      I don't know the case so I'm not saying that's what should happen. It's just a possibility.

      The persons who should be looking at a short stretch of free B&B are the CPS cretins, coalface and managerial, responsible for this.

  10. JohnG


    Given this bloke was not prosecuted for more recent crimes than the thefts of 4 years ago and is a taxpayer, he doesn't appear to be a threat to the public. As the government are releasing many prisoners early (like Raoul Moat), a custodial sentence seems OTT in this case.

  11. Robert E A Harvey
    Dead Vulture

    'ang on a minute

    "and had been living at his registered address"

    What the blue blistering baked black enamel is a 'registered address'? Do we need permission to live somewhere now?

    I hope not. I've never 'registered' my address with anyone. Am I now a criminal?

  12. Graham Bartlett

    "Registered address"

    You don't need to be registered *to* live somewhere. However, where you live may be registered *with* a whole bunch of people.

    So, the address he registered with the police and CPS when he was arrested, perhaps? Or maybe the address for which he's registered for council tax? Or the address he's registered for voting? Not to mention the addresses registered with your bank, mortgage company, car loan company, insurance company, and any number of purveyors of junk-mail.

    All this notwithstanding, if you've been living somewhere without telling the council and paying council tax, then you're going to be done under civil law. This doesn't make you a criminal, but subsequently failing to pay the tax demand certainly will. If you've moved areas and have still been voting in your old area though, I believe that *is* a criminal offence. And if you're out of prison on license and you move elsewhere without permission, that's a criminal offence too and will get you back in the big house for the rest of your sentence.

  13. Anonymous Coward

    I know him...

    ... and he has re-built his life since his mis-deeds. He's kicked his drug habbit, hasn't committed any further crimes and now has a family with a fiancee and a young child. He has had one, continuous job since the events four years ago and that employer is more than willing to take him back on his release.

    As the article states, he admitted to it four years ago and the last he heard before his re-arrest was "you might get a summons in the post". There is really no excuse for the time delay and it does just seem to be one big abuse of process.

    In addition to the CPS/Police apparent disregard for Article 6 of HRT, the Probation service were recommending non-custodial punishment so it baffles me that this seemingly awake Judge handed down an un-suspended Custodial scentence.

    However, given the way the prison system works in the UK, if he behaves inside and the Probation board deems him to not be a risk, he could be released after 1/3rd of his scentence (~5 months)

    @Robert E A Harvey - his "Registered Address" is where he is registered to vote, pay taxes and, funilly enough, the address the police had for him.

This topic is closed for new posts.