When my Dad was a police officer in the 50s and early 60s the justice system was better and fairer than today.If for example, a man was caught breaking into garden sheds, he would be arrested, put into a cell, brought before the next available magistrates court and in all probability would be ensconced in Lincoln Prison in under 72 hours.
In the rare cases where a not guilty plea resulted in a trial, there was some delay built into the process but there was every chance that he would be remanded in custody in any case until the outcome was known, it was only the more serious cases sent to Quarter Sessions [precursor of Crown Court] where delays were of any note and would rarely exceed 12 weeks as a maximum.
There were of course, no endless lines of bureaucratic hurdles to o'er leap.
There was no question of decisions being questioned by a Judge-in-Chambers. It was either an appeal or nothing.
Today of course, that man would almost certainly not go to prison at all. It would be called a 'non-domestic burglary' and guidelines would recommend 'a community penalty'. This decision could easily be delayed by weeks or months. The chances of it being dealt with to finality during the first court appearance would be very slim - being dealt with at an 11th court appearance is by no means unusual!
If there were 'a custody issue' then delays tend to increase. A trial might easily be four or six or eight months or more after the event. I have known MUCH longer!
Once the punishment is detached from the offence by time, clearly, in the mind of the offender the two are no longer connected which is a psychological disaster where deterrence is concerned.
For the persistent offender today - particularly those of lesser intelligence - I would surmise that three quarters of the time there is little or no connection in their minds between the specific offence and disposal.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
