Considerations for sentencing
Reliance upon deterrence theory:
“There is an overwhelming obligation on sentencing courts to do what they can to ensure the protection of the public, whether in their homes or in their businesses or in the street and to protect the homes and businesses and the streets in which they live and work. This is an imperative. It is not, of course, possible now, after the events, for the courts to protect the neighbourhoods which were ravaged in the riots or the people who were injured or suffered damage. Nevertheless, the imposition of severe sentences, intended to provide both punishment and deterrence, must follow. It is very simple. Those who deliberately participate in disturbances of this magnitude, causing injury and damage and fear to even the most stout-hearted of citizens, and who individually commit further crimes during the course of the riots are committing aggravated crimes. They must be punished accordingly, and the sentences should be designed to deter others from similar criminal activity.” R v BLACKSHAW AND ORS  EWCA Crim 2312.
Is any sentence of imprisonment is compensatory. Reformation in Prison? The above reason for harsh punishment is no reason at all. In such cases even people who were induced by temporary greed are lured to pick things up. They cannot always be distinguished from those who started riot.