Mandatory sentencing : a criminological perspective

This paper will give a ‘criminological perspective’ on mandatory sentencing. It will however largely avoid the issues of the effect of mandatory sentencing provisions on the judicial process and judicial independence, as this has already been covered by Sir Anthony Mason. It will also avoid the legal issues concerning the constitutional, human rights and international law aspects of mandatory sentencing which will be covered by later speakers. The aim will be to give a brief overview of research which evaluates the effects of mandatory sentencing provisions in terms of the available evidence of whether they meet their stated aims of deterrence, selective incapacitation and the reduction of crime rates. This will be done in two parts, first in relation to the more extensive experiment in mandatory sentencing in the USA which has provided some of the impetus and metaphors ("three strikes") for recent Australian developments; and second the recent mandatory sentencing provisions in Western Australia (WA) and the Northern Territory (NT). Evidence from both the US and WA (NT is hard to assess because of the lack of proper monitoring and criminal statistics) indicates that mandatory sentencing does not produce the effects of deterrence, selective incapacitation and crime reduction which are its stated justifications and does produce a range of damaging side effects in terms of distortion of the judicial process, wildly disproportionate sentencing, additional financial and social cost and deepening social exclusion of individuals and particular communities. So what is left are the less acknowledged underpinnings of mandatory sentencing in the form of the symbolic politics of law and order, the politics of social exclusion and a displacement of racial anxieties and hostilities onto the terrain of the legal. In fashioning this necessarily brief overview a number of sources have been heavily drawn upon, in particular the excellent work by Neil Morgan from UWA (Morgan, 1995;1999; 2000); Dianne Johnson and George Zdenkowski in their detailed report to the Senate Inquiry (2000); and a number of articles appearing in 1999 in an excellent special issue of the UNSW Law Journal, all of which are highly recommended for further reading.

Measuring the effects of small group deliberation on public attitudes towards sentencing : benefits and challenges

This article reports on the outcomes of small group deliberations on levels of punitiveness and public confidence in the sentencing functions of Australian criminal courts, conducted as part of a larger project investigating public attitudes to sentencing. One hypothesis of the project as a whole was that a more informed and involved public is likely to be less punitive in their views on the sentencing of offenders, and to express less cynical views about the role of sentencing courts. The aim of the small group deliberations as part of the broader project was to engender a more thoughtful and considered approach by participants to issues around sentencing. It was hypothesised that the opportunity to discuss, deliberate and consider would lead to a measurable reduction in punitiveness and an increase in people’s confidence in the courts. While the results do indeed indicate such changes in attitudes, the current study also shed light on some of the conceptual, methodological and practical challenges inherent in this type of research.

Sentencing and public confidence in Australia: The dynamics and foci of small group deliberations

This study is the first of its kind in Australia to use the deliberative small group methodology to explore participants’ deeper, nuanced thoughts on specific criminal justice issues in order to gain insight into the underlying beliefs that influence people’s opinions on sentencing. The use of small group discussions allows an analysis of the dynamics of people’s interactions and the potential of these to elicit deeper, more thoughtful deliberation. Participants’ comments around two policy areas – mandatory sentencing and the use of alternatives to imprisonment – were founded on concerns about the need for judges to tailor the sentence to fit the specific circumstances of each case. The methodology itself has shown that people may change their initial opinions on complex issues when given the opportunity to discuss and reflect on their beliefs.

‘Structuring’ judicial sentencing discretion : consistency, guidance or pandering to the punitive?

Until quite recently, most Australian jurisdictions gave statutory force to the principle of imprisonment as a sanction of last resort, reflecting its status as the most punitive sentencing option open to the court.1 That principle gave primary discretion as to whether incarceration was the most appropriate means of achieving the purpose of a sentence to the sentencing court, which received all of the information relevant to the offence, the offender and any victim(s). The disestablishment of this principle is symptomatic of an increasing erosion of judicial discretion with respect to sentencing, which appears to be resulting in some extremely punitive consequences.

‘Not a criminal in the classic sense': @DrRimmer on the sentencing of Jono Moylan #leardblockade #standwithjono

On July 25, 2014, Justice David Davies sentenced Jonathan Moylan at the Supreme Court of New South Wales for a breach of section 1041E (1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). The ruling is a careful and deliberate decision, showing equipoise. Justice Davies has a reputation for being a thoughtful and philosophical adjudicator. The judge convicted and sentenced Moylan to imprisonment for 1 year and 8 months. The judge ordered that Moylan be “immediately released upon giving security by way of recognisance in the sum of $1000 to be of good behaviour for a period of 2 years commencing today”.

There is 'hope for you yet': The female drug offender in sentencing discourse

Language and gender research has, in recent years, emphasised the importance of examining the context-specific ways in which people ‘do gender’ in different situations. In this paper, we explore how women involved in drug offences, specifically methamphetamine manufacture offences, are constructed within the language of the courts. Thirty-six sentencing transcripts from the New Zealand courts were examined to investigate how such offences, committed by women, are understood. In order to explore the representation of female offenders, a critical discourse analytic approach was adopted. Such an approach recognises that linguistic modes not only create and legitimise power inequalities but also embody a specific worldview. Three gendered discourses were identified in the sentencing texts: (i) the discourse of femininity, reinforcing the socially prescribed female role; (ii) the discourse of aberration, concerning women who breach traditional gender role expectations, and; (iii) the discourse of salvation, presenting aberrant women with an opportunity to become ‘good’ women once again. The findings illustrate the ways in which processes of gendering take place within a specific community of practice: the courtroom.

The Criminal Codes : Commentary and Materials

This edition has been substantially revised to increase overall clarity and to ensure a balanced examination of the criminal law in the 'Code' states, Queensland and Western Australia. The work has been brought up-to-date in all areas and provides valuable comment on the recent wide-reaching reforms to the law of homicide in Western Australia. Significant developments in both states discussed in this edition include: The abolition of wilful murder and infanticide, and the new definition of murder (WA); The introduction of the new offence of unlawful assault causing death (WA); The abolition of provocation to murder (WA), and whether this excuse still has a part to play (Qld); The reformulation of the excuse of self-defence, and the introduction of excessive self-defence (WA); The creation of offences for drink spiking (Qld and WA); and Current and proposed sentencing considerations (Qld and WA). Fundamental principles of the criminal law are illustrated throughout the book by selected extracts from the Codes and case law, while additional materials foster critical reflection on the law and the need for reform.

Crime in Rural and Regional Areas

This Chapter provides an overview of available corrent data measuring crime in Australia's States and Territories broken down into regions and localities The data is limited, has reliability problems and lots of gaps. Nevertheless when the data are analysed according to offence type (in particulary violence versus property offences) an interesting but complicated empirical picture emerges that departs from what most scholars and policy makes have commonly assumed about crime and rural communities - that there is not much of it! The chapter begins with an assessment of the uses and limitations of different ways of measuring crime for those interested in a spatialised analysis of crome dispersion in rural communities.

Rights versus reality : the difficulty of providing 'access to English' in Queensland Courts

This report was developed out of a Legal Practitioner on Trust Account Fund grant from the Department of Justice and Attorney-General in Queensland, to review the Aboriginal English in the Courts Handbook. Judges, Magistrates, barristers and court staff were interviewed about the Handbook. The findings extend beyond Aboriginal English into access to English in Queensland Courts. Recommendations are made about language difficulties faced by witnessed and the ability to the courts to respond to them.

Indigeneity and the judicial decision to imprison : a study of Western Australia’s higher courts

Internationally, sentencing research has largely neglected the impact of Indigeneity on sentencing outcomes. Using data from Western Australia’s higher courts for the years 2003–05, we investigate the direct and interactive effects of Indigenous status on the judicial decision to imprison. Unlike prior research on race/ethnicity in which minority offenders are often found to be more harshly treated by sentencing courts, we find that Indigenous status has no direct effect on the decision to imprison,after adjusting for other sentencing factors (especially past and current criminality).However, there are sub-group differences: Indigenous males are more likely to receive a prison sentence compared to non-Indigenous females. We draw on the focal concerns perspective of judicial decision making in interpreting our findings.

Offending Youth : Crime, Sex and Justice

Rates of female delinquency, especially for violent crimes, are increasing in most common law countries. At the same time the growth in cyber-bullying, especially among girls, appears to be a related global phenomenon. While the gender gap in delinquency is narrowing in Australia, United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, boys continue to dominate the youth who commit crime and have a virtual monopoly over sexually violent crimes. Indigenous youth continue to be vastly over-represented in the juvenile justice system in every Australian jurisdiction. The Indigenisation of delinquency is a persistent problem in other countries such as Canada and New Zealand. Young people who gather in public places are susceptible to being perceived as somehow threatening or riotous, attracting more than their share of public order policing. Professional football has been marred by repeated scandals involving sexual assault, violence and drunkenness. Given the cultural significance of footballers as role models to thousands, if not millions, of young men around the world, it is vitally important to address this problem. Offending Youth explores these key contemporary patterns of delinquency, the response to these by the juvenile justice agencies and moreover what can be done to address these problems. The book also analyses the major policy and legislative changes from the nineteenth to twenty first centuries, chiefly the shift the penal welfarism to diversion and restorative justice. Using original cases studied by Carrington twenty years ago, Offending Youth illustrates how penal welfarism criminalised young people from socially marginal backgrounds, especially Aboriginal children, children from single parent families, family-less children, state wards and young people living in poverty or in housing commission estates. A number of inquiries in Australia and the United Kingdom have since established that children committed to these institutions, supposedly for their own good, experienced systemic physical, sexual and psychological abuse during their institutionalisation. The book is dedicated to the survivors of these institutions who only now are receiving official recognition of the injustices they suffered. The underlying philosophy of juvenile justice has fundamentally shifted away from penal welfarism to embrace positive policy responses to juvenile crime, such as youth conferencing, cautions, warnings, restorative justice, circle sentencing and diversion examined in the concluding chapter. Offending Youth is aimed at a broad readership including policy makers, juvenile justice professionals, youth workers, families, teachers, politicians as well as students and academics in criminology, policing, gender studies, masculinity studies, Indigenous studies, justice studies, youth studies and the sociology of youth and deviance more generally.-- [from publisher website]

Vulnerabilities in the courtroom

Book summary: In a constantly evolving context of performance management, accountability and risk assessment, police organisations and frontline police officers are required to pay careful attention to what has come to be known as ‘at risk people’, ‘vulnerable populations’ or ‘vulnerable people’. Vulnerable people have become a key focus of policy. Concurrently, there have been stronger demands on police, and a steep increase in police powers in relation to their interaction with vulnerable people. The premise of this protectionist and interventionist agenda is threefold: to protect the rights of vulnerable individuals proactively cater for their vulnerability within the justice system; and to secure police operations and protocols within strict guidelines. This collection unpacks ‘vulnerable people policing’ in theory and practice and guides the reader through the policing process as it is experienced by police officers, victims, offenders, witnesses and justice stakeholders. Each chapter features a single step of the policing process: from police recruit education through to custody, and the final transfer of vulnerable people to courts and sentencing. This edited collection provides analytical, theoretical and empirical insights on vulnerable people policing, and reflects on critical issues in a domain that is increasingly subject to speedy conversion from policy to practice, and heightened media and political scrutiny. It breaks down policing practices, operations and procedures that have vulnerable populations as a focus, bringing together original and innovative academic research and literature, practitioner experience and discussion of policy implications (from local and international perspectives). The particular nature of this collection highlights the multi-disciplinary nature of police work, sheds light on how specific, mandatory policies guide police officers steps in their interaction with vulnerable populations, and discusses the practicalities of police decision making at key points in this process.