PF v JOHN HOLDEN

At Inverness Sheriff Court Sheriff Abercrombie QC sentenced John Holden to 12 months in prison after he was found guilty of benefit fraud.

On sentencing Sheriff Abercrombie made the following statement in court:

“Council tax benefit and Income Support are designed — as you will know Mr Holden to assist those on low income and who struggle to survive financially. These benefits are paid for by society at large — as part of a social contract whereby those who are better off contribute to those who are financially poorer.

By deliberately making false claims for benefit and by deliberately failing to notify your true financial circumstances you together with all other cheats who try to beat the system for personal gain — have undermined that social contract. You have shown cold contempt for it.

Despite what you repeatedly maintained during your evidence Mr Holden, the end does not justify the means. No matter how justified you think your charitable works were — no matter how good such works made you feel and they undoubtedly did that — or how many good works were in fact carried out, as they undoubtedly were- it was still your responsibility to make f disclosure of all your income from every source. Indeed many might think that someone engaged in good works would recognise that they had even more of an obligation to account for what they took in and to be transparent about what they did.

In this respect, I was impressed by the Crown witnesses’ position during this trial where it was stated that opportunities to explain and vouch what you received and what you said you spent it on. You failed to take these opportunities.

Your justification for your failures to act honestly amounted to simply this — “I’m an honest, trustworthy person carrying out good works. Trust me and believe me when I say that. The fact that I say this is enough.”

It is not enough, Mr. Holden. It is not enough in the face of the overwhelming evidence this court has heard. You are not an honest man. You have deliberately and repeatedly lied over many years.

Moreover, the scale of your undisclosed income is simply breathtaking.

Even now, you do not seem to understand that it is not the Crown witnesses, or the Procurator Fiscal,   or the Court or even your own solicitor who is out of step — but you. It may be for some of the reasons suggested in the Social Enquiry Report. that you have deluded yourself to consider that you are above the law and in a category apart from your fellow citizens.

In this respect, I read with particular surprise your assertion that your whole story and explanation has not been placed before the court and that you had not been given a sufficient opportunity to explain the circumstances surrounding the offence. These statements appear to be part of your approach to bury your head in the sand, to fail to hear what is actually said, and to determinedly lay the blame elsewhere, anywhere else, apart from your own doorstep.

Again, that statement is not true. In my view, Mr. Holden, your defence was conducted in this court in accordance with the high standard expected.
I have listened with care to everything that Mr. Chapman has said on your behalf. I think he has said everything that he could possibly say. I have borne in mind, when considering sentence, that you have not been a councillor throughout the period of the third charge. I have carefully considered the Social Enquiry Report and all other documentary material produced to me in open court.

I consider that I am bound by the recent High Court case of Gill and Others v. P.F. Glasgow HC JAC 99. That case and the authorities and guidelines referred to make it clear that unless there are exceptional circumstances, the law demands, at the level of benefit fraud we have here, a custodial sentence.

Try as I have, I cannot find any such exceptional circumstances in all the sentencing material which has been put before me. I consider I have no alternative but to impose a custodial sentence.

After deliberation I have decided that on charge 1 you will serve 1 month; on charge 2 you will serve 3 months; and on charge 3 you will serve 12 months. All these periods will run concurrently”.