Sex and sentencing disparity in South Australia’s higher courts

In Australia, studies examining sex differences in sentencing are limited. Using data from South Australia’s higher courts, this article explores a study on the impact of sex on the decision to imprison and the length of imprisonment. After adjusting for past and current criminality, results showed that men were significantly more likely than women to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment and that when sentence length was decided, men received longer periods of incarceration. Furthermore, the study’s results suggest that different factors may be important in determining sentencing outcomes for women and men.

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.

Measuring risk and blameworthiness in the sentencing of criminal defendants : an exploratory study in Western Australia's Higher Courts

The focal concern perspective dominates quantitative explorations of judicial sentencing. A critical argument underlying this perspective is the role of judicial assessments of risk and blameworthiness. Prior research has not generally explored how these two concepts fit together. This study provides an empirical test of the focal concerns perspective by examining the latent structure among the measures traditionally used in sentencing research, and investigates the extent to which focal concerns can be applied in a non-US jurisdiction. Using factor analysis (as suggested by prior research), we find evidence of distinct factors of risk and blameworthiness, with separate and independent effects on sentencing outcomes. We also identify the need for further development of the focal concerns perspective, especially around the role of perceptual shorthand.

Applications for advice from courts by insolvency practitioners

This article examines the nature of the powers of insolvency practitioners in applying for advice from the courts. It examines first the policy justification for granting these unusual rights to insolvency practitioners having regard to the nature of the work undertaken in the modern insolvency context. Second, the notion that subtle differences exist in relation to seeking advice from the courts in different types of administrations is explored. The question then as to whether it is appropriate that such differences exist, given that the policy basis of an insolvency practitioner seeking advice in different administrations does not appear to be different, is considered. Conclusions are drawn in favour of a consistent approach across all types of administration and suggestions are made for the legislation to be altered to provide a single set of provisions around this issue.

Problem-solving courts, therapeutic jurisprudence and the constitution : if two is company, is three a crowd?

Court costs, resource-intensive trials, booming prison populations and the obduracy of recidivism rates all present as ugly excesses of the criminal law adversarial paradigm. To combat these excesses, problem-solving courts have evolved with an edict to address the underlying issues that have caused an individual to commit a crime. When a judge seeks to help a problem-solving court participant deal with issues like addiction, mental health or poverty, they are performing a very different role to that of a judicial officer in the traditional court hierarchy. They are no longer the removed, independent arbiter — a problem-solving court judge steps into the ‘arena’ with the participant and makes active use of their judicial authority to assist in rehabilitation and positive behavioural change. Problem-solving court judges employing the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence appreciate that their interaction with participants can have therapeutic and anti-therapeutic consequences. This article will consider how the deployment of therapeutic measures (albeit with good intention) can lead to the behavioural manifestation of partiality and bias on the part of problem-solving court judges. Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution will then be analysed to highlight why the operation and functioning of problem solving courts may be deemed unconstitutional. Part IV of this article will explain how a problem-solving court judge who is not acting impartially or independently will potentially contravene the requirements of the Constitution. It will finally be suggested that judges who possess a high level of emotional intelligence will be the most successful in administering an independent and impartial problem solving court.

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

This project reviewed the success of the Aboriginal English in the Courts booklet which was published by the Department of Justice and Attorney-General in 2000, with a view to improving access to the courts for speakers of Aboriginal English in Queensland. Surveys and interview were conducted with judges, magistrates, prosecutors, legal aid lawyers and courts registry staff. The feedback from the research has shown that the handbook has had little impact on ‘access to English’ in Queensland courts. The problems relate to the tension between protecting the rights of the accused under an adversarial system and legitimately introducing the issues of language uncertainty to the court in a non-prejudicial manner. In addition, the interviews have brought to light emerging language issues in remote communities that cannot be remedied under existing language policy mechanisms, such as the provision of interpreters or friends of court.

Web 2.0, social networking and the courts

In the last decade or so, we have witnessed the growth of web 2.0 technology and social networking platforms, and their rapid rise in popularity as methods of social interaction and communication. Yet, platforms such as Facebook and Twitter are not just online social phenomena, but can impact on the way the law and courts operate. This article highlights the issues that legal practitioners and courts need to be aware of in engaging with this technology, and suggests possible ways forward.

Pre-sentence Report, Magisterial Discourse and Agency in Youth Courts in England

This article draws on interviews with Youth Court magistrates to examine if and how discourses, strategies and technologies of risk governance have affected Youth Court magistrates in England and Wales. The aim of the article is to detail the complex relationship between magisterial agency in decision making and youth justice policies which focus on risk control and management. The article demonstrates that, contrary to what might be assumed from the youth and risk governance theoretical literature, Youth Offending Team risk assessments form only one part of the information used by magistrates to explain young people’s presence in courts. This article concludes that magisterial decision making is framed not by formal, expert assessments of risk, but by magistrates’ claims that they are ‘knowing outsiders’, who through judicious use of information presented to them and their own life experiences are able to make objective judgements about both the risk assessments authored by Youth Offending Teams and the young lawbreakers before them.

Indigeneity and the likelihood of imprisonment in Queensland’s adult and children’s courts

Australian research on Indigenous sentencing disparities of the standard of international work is somewhat recent. Contrary to expectations based on international research, Australian studies generally have not found Indigenous offenders to be treated substantively more harshly than non-Indigenous offenders in similar circumstances. However, this research has primarily focused on adult higher courts, with little attention to lower courts and children’s courts. In this article, we examine whether Indigeneity has a direct impact on the judicial decision to incarcerate for three courts (adult higher, adult lower, children’s higher court) in Queensland. We found no significant differences in the likelihood of a sentence of incarceration in the higher courts (adult and children’s). In contrast, in the lower courts, Indigenous defendants were more likely to be imprisoned than non-Indigenous defendants when sentenced under statistically similar circumstances.

Physiological, perceptual and technical responses to on-court tennis training on hard and clay courts

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of court surface (clay v hard-court) on technical, physiological and perceptual responses to on-court training. Four high-performance junior male players performed two identical training sessions on hard and clay courts, respectively. Sessions included both physical conditioning and technical elements as led by the coach. Each session was filmed for later notational analysis of stroke count and error rates. Further, players wore a global positioning satellite device to measure distance covered during each session; whilst heart rate, countermovement jump distance and capillary blood measures of metabolites were measured before, during and following each session. Additionally a respective coach and athlete rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured following each session. Total duration and distance covered during of each session were comparable (P>0.05; d<0.20). While forehand and backhands stroke volume did not differ between sessions (P>0.05; d<0.30); large effects for increased unforced and forced errors were present on the hard court (P>0.05; d>0.90). Furthermore, large effects for increased heart rate, blood lactate and RPE values were evident on clay compared to hard courts (P>0.05; d>0.90). Additionally, while player and coach RPE on hard courts were similar, there were large effects for coaches to underrate the RPE of players on clay courts (P>0.05; d>0.90). In conclusion, training on clay courts results in trends for increased heart rate, lactate and RPE values, suggesting sessions on clay tend towards higher physiological and perceptual loads than hard courts. Further, coaches appear effective at rating player RPE on hard courts, but may underrate the perceived exertion of sessions on clay courts.