Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Introduction Read chapter Read first chapter

2016 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

3. Theorising Sentencing

Author : Maggie Hall

Published in: The Lived Sentence

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter contains an analysis of sentencing law focusing on the aims of sentencing, which, it is argued, are more than broad philosophical statements and transmits the meaning to the subjects of criminal justice processing. One of the underlying aims of the book is to theorise the connection between the “in-court” part of sentencing and the serving of the sentence by the prisoner. Therefore, an examination of sentencing law and philosophy is an important first step. It is argued that the aims need to be “operationalised”; that is, the actions and responsibilities envisaged need to be made explicit. The inclusion of aims with a “restorative justice” flavour make this even more important as attention to process and procedural justice is a foundational tenet of restorative justice.
The second part of the chapter examines how courts in NSW deal with the concept of “risk” which has become a dominant theme in correctional practice. The relevance of this lies in the apparent contradiction between the individualised messages of the sentencing court and the operational, risk-oriented correctional system.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter The Socio-Political Context of Imprisonment in New South Wales
next chapter Experiencing Sentencing
Footnotes
1
Although parsimony appears, with little fanfare, to have disappeared from the law of NSW (NSW Sentencing Bench Book).
 
2
The importance of demonstrating inner emotional processes in a commonly understood and acceptable way is manifested by the cases of Lindy Chamberlain, and possibly the more recent case of Kathryn Folbigg, convicted of killing all four of her babies. The ambiguities of Folbigg’s diary references are transformed into a convincing dialogue of guilt, in the light of evidence of her behaviour, which did not conform to commonly held perceptions of motherhood (Cunliffe 2007, p. 820).
 
3
A full analysis of the different philosophies of punishment is beyond the scope of this book. In NSW, the practice of judges offers few examples of such discussion but a combination of desert (retributive) theory and a form of pragmatic consequentialism appears to prevail.
 
4
Wong v The Queen; Leung v The Queen, [2001] HCA 64.
 
5
Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988)164 CLR 465.
 
6
Bugmy v The Queen (1990) 169 CLR 525.
 
7
Attorney General’s Application under s37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (No 2 of 2002) (2003)137 A Crim R 196.
 
8
R v Scott [2005] NSWCCA 152.
 
9
R v Dodd (1991) 57 A Crim R 349.
 
10
Blundell v R (1991) 57 A Crim R 349.
 
11
Webb v O’Sullivan [1952] SASR 65 at 66 per Napier CJ.
 
12
Yardley v Betts (1979)1 A Crim R 329.
 
13
R v Fernando (1992)76 A Crim R 58.
 
14
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) HCA 37.
 
15
R v Lian (1990) 47 A Crim R 444.
 
16
Attorney General for the State of New South Wales v Tillman [2007] NSWSC 605.
 
17
Featherstone v R (2008) NSW CCA71. A risk assessment was completed on the basis of material in the offender’s file and no clinical interview was undertaken.
 
18
An exception is the conferencing provisions of the juvenile justice legislation in NSW.
 
19
As Cunneen (2001:97) points out in the ‘aboriginal domain’ in which customary law operates, there may be a “lack of distinction between public/private’’ and a range of different sanctions used.
 
20
Although Kirchenghast (2008) suggests that NSW is more restrictive than other jurisdictions and that victim impact statements may help “define victim interests as part of the broader public interest” (Kirchenghast, 2008: 630), suggesting that s 3(g) of the Crimes( Administration of Sentences Act) supports this.
 
21
R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76.
 
22
Justice reinvestment relies on careful targeting of resources – much of the literature (eg Clement M, Schwarzfeld M, Thompson M (2011) relies on risk assessment and evidence of “what works” in order to argue for a reinvestment from prisons to community resources.
 
23
Director of Public Prosecutions v GTR [2007]WASC 318.
 
24
The legislation requires the court to consider evidence from two psychologists or psychiatrists.
 
25
(2002) NSWCCA 70 (12 March 202).
 
26
(2003)223 CLR 575.
 
27
(2007) NSWSC 605.
 
28
(2007) NSW CA 374.
 
29
[2009] NSWSC 778.
 
30
2008 [NSWSC] 1211.
 
31
(UNHRC 2010).
 
32
AA prisoners are said to pose a “special risk to national security” Cl 22 Crimes ( Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2001.
 
33
Lucia Zedner touched on this in a recent account of the wide ranging study of Preventive Detention currently underway at Oxford University (Zedner, 2012 UNSW Scientia Lecture).
 
34
[2006] NSWCCA 292.
 
35
The fact that these orders are made by the Supreme Court may serve to limit this tendency.
 
36
[2008] NSWCCA 481.
 
37
Featherstone v R (2008) NSW CCA71.
 
38
R v SLD [2002] NSWSC 758.
 
39
R v Robinson [2002] NSWCCA 359.
 
40
Lyons v The Queen [1987] 2 SCR 309.
 
Literature
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Ackland, R. (2005, April 22). Where pure evil is no longer the correct label. Sydney Morning Herald, 2005.
Anthony, T. (2008) Late modern developments in sentencing practice for indigenous offenders: Beyond David Garland’s framework. Proceedings of the 2nd Critical Criminology Conference (pp. 2–27). Sydney: Crime and Justice Research Network.
Ashworth, A. (2010). Sentencing and criminal justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Audit Office of NSW (2006). “Prisoner Rehabilitation” (Auditor-General’s Report of Performance Audit of the Department of Corrective Services) Report No 151, Sydney: Audit Office.
Bagaric, M. (2000). Incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation: Flawed ideals or appropriate sentencing goals. Criminal Law Journal, 24, 24–48.
Booth, T. (2012). ‘Cooling out’ victims of crime: Managing victim participation in the sentencing process in a superior sentencing court. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 45(2), 214–230.CrossRef
Bronitt, S. (2008). Balancing security and liberty: Critical perspectives on terrorism law reform. In M. Gani & P. Mathew (Eds.), Fresh perspectives on the ‘War on Terror’ ANU E-Press.
Brown, D. (2002). The politics of law and order. Law Society Journal, 67, October 2002.
Brown, D. (2005). Continuity, rupture, or just more of the ‘volatile and contradictory’? Glimpses of New South Wales penal practice behind and through the discursive. In J. Pratt, D. Brown, M. Brown, S. Hallsworth, & W. Morrison (Eds.), The new punitiveness: trends, theories, perspectives. London: Willan.
Brown, M. (2000). Risk in contemporary penal practice. In Mark Brown & J. Pratt (Eds.), Dangerous offenders. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Brown, M. (2008b). Toward a new economy of suspended rights: Sex offenders and post-sentence confinement and control. School of Social and Political Science, Melbourne University, Australia.
Carlen, P. (Ed.) (2008). Imaginary penalties. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
Clement, M., Schwarzfeld, M., & Thompson, M. (2011). Addressing recidivism, crime, and corrections spending, National Summit on Justice Reinvestment and Public Safety, Council of State Governments Justice Center, USA.
Cunliffe, E. (2007). (This is not) a story: Using court records to construct judicial narratives. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 27, 71–95.CrossRef
De Graaff, P. (2005). Should education in corrections be publicly required and compulsory? In Inside learning for outside living Conference. Australian Corrections Education Association.
Doyle, D. J., & Ogloff, J. R. P. (2009). Calling the tune without the music: A psycho legal analysis of Australia’s post—Sentence legislation. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 42(2).
Duff, A., & Garland, D. (1994). A reader on punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eades, D. (2008). Telling and retelling your story in court: Questions, assumptions and intercultural implications. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 20, 209.
Edney, R., & Bagaric, M. (2007). Australian sentencing: Principles and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fernandez, L. (2003). Fundamental aspects of sentencing. Legal Aid Commission of NSW.
Finkelstein, C. (2004). A contractarian approach to punishment. In M. Golding & W. Anderson (Eds.) The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of law and legal theory. Wiley - Blackwell, Oxford.
Freiberg, A. (2000). Guerrillas in our midst? In M. Brown & J. Pratt (Eds.), Dangerous offenders: Punishment and social order. London: Routledge.
Frieberg, A. (2002). Affective vs. effective justice. Punishment and Society, 3(2).
Hall, M., & Rossmanith, K. (2016). Imposed stories: Prisoner self narratives in the criminal justice system. International Journal of Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 5(1), 38–51.CrossRef
Halliday J., French, J., & Goodwin, C. (2001). Making punishments work: Review of the sentencing framework for England and Wales. London: Home Office.
Halsey, M. (2008). Risking desistance. In P. Carlen (Eds.), Imaginary penalities. pp. 218–252. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
Hebenton, B., & Seddon, T. (2009). From dangerousness to precaution: Managing sexual and violent offenders in an insecure and uncertain age. British Journal of Criminology, 49(3), 343–362.CrossRef
Hutchinson, S. (2006). Countering catastrophic criminality: Reform, punishment and the modern liberal compromise. Punishment and Society, 8(4), 443–467.CrossRef
Johns, R. (2002a). Sentencing law: A review of developments in 1998–2000. NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service, Briefing Paper 2/02.
Johnson, P. (2003). Reforms to NSW sentencing law: The Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Sentencing) Act 2002. Judicial Commission of NSW.
Kemshall, H., & McGuire, J. (2001). Public protection partnership and risk penality—The multi-agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders. Punishment and Society, 3(2), 237–264.CrossRef
Kirchengast, T. (2008). Sentencing law and the ‘emotional catharsis’ of victim rights in New South Wales homicide cases. Sydney Law Review, 30(4) 615–637.
Laster, K., & O’Malley, P. (1996). Sensitive new age laws: The reassertion of emotionality in law. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 24(1) 21–40.CrossRef
Lynch, M. (2000). Rehabilitation as rhetoric: The ideal of reformation in contemporary parole discourse and practice. Punishment and Society, 2(1), pp. 40–65.
Marinos, V. (2005). Thinking about penal equivalents. Punishment and Society, 7(4), 441–455.CrossRef
Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How Ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books.CrossRef
McGowen, R. (2000). Revisiting the hanging tree: Gatrell on emotion and history. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 1–13.CrossRef
McGuire, J. (2005). Deterrence in sentencing: Handle with care. Australian Law Journal, 79, 448.
McSherry, B. (2005). The introduction of terrorist related offences into Australia: Comfort or concern? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 12(2), 279–288.CrossRef
Potas, I., & Traynor, S. (2002). Sentencing methodology—Two tiered or instinctive synthesis. Judicial Commission of NSW Trends and Issues in Sentencing No. 25.
Pratt, J. (1998). Governing the dangerous: Dangerousness, law and social change. Annandale: Federation Press.
Robinson, P. H., & Darley, J. M. (2003). The role of deterrence in the formulation of criminal law rules: At its worst when doing its best. Georgetown Law Review, 91, 949.
Ruschena, D. (2003). Determining dangerousness: Whatever happened to the rules of evidence? Psychiatry, Psychology and the Law, 10(1), 122–139.CrossRef
Sotiri, M. (2003). Punishment and Imprisonment in New South Wales: Towards a conceptual understanding of purpose. Doctoral thesis, UNSW.
Sykes, G. (1958/1999). The society of captives: A study of a maximum security prison. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Tait, D. (2002). Sentencing as performance: Restoring drama to the courtroom. In C. Tata & N. Hutton (Eds.), Sentencing and society: International perspectives (pp. 469–482). Burlington VT: Ashgate.
Tata, C. (2007). Sentencing as craftwork and the binary epistemologies of the discretionary decision process. Social and Legal Studies, 16(3), 425–447.CrossRef
Tata, C. (2002). Accountability for the sentencing process. In N. Hutton & C. Tata (Eds.), Sentencing and society: International perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate
Tombs, J. (2008). Telling sentencing stories. In P. Carlen (Ed.), Imaginary penalities. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
Von Hirsch, A., & Ashworth, A. (1998). Principled sentencing: readings, theory and policy. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Von Hirsch, A., & Maher, L. (1992). Should penal rehabilitationism be revived? Criminal Justice Ethics, 11(1), 25–30.CrossRef
Warner, K. (2003). The role of guideline judgments in the law and order debate in Australia. Criminal Law Journal, 27(1), 8–22.
Warner, K. (2006). Sentencing scholarship in Australia. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 18(2).
Yannoulidis, S. (2002). Negotiating ‘dangerousness’: Charting a course between psychiatry and law, Psychology and Law, 92, 151–162.CrossRef
Hutton, N., & Tata, C. (2002). Sentencing and Society: International Perspectives.
Mackenzie, J. (2005). How Judges Sentence. Annandale: Federation Press.
Loukas (2008). “Court of Criminal Appeal Update 2007” Public Defenders Office, Department of Justice New South Wales.
Cunneen, C. (2001). Conflicts, Politics and Crime: Aboriginal Communities and Police. Allen and Unwin Sydney.
Murphy, T., & Whitty, N. (2007). Risk and Human Rights in United Kingdom Prison Governance. British Journal of Criminology, 47(5), 798–816.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Theorising Sentencing
Author
Maggie Hall
Copyright Year
2016
Book
The Lived Sentence

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45037-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-45038-4

Copyright Year: 2016

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45038-4_3