Current studentsExisting staffContact us
 

Why sentence? Comparing the views of jurors, judges and the legislature on the purposes of sentencing in Victoria, Australia

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorWarner, K.
dc.contributor.authorDavis, J.
dc.contributor.authorSpiranovic, C.
dc.contributor.authorCockburn, H.
dc.contributor.authorFreiberg, A.
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractIn recent times, parliaments have introduced legislation directing judges to take defined purposes into account when sentencing. At the same time, judges and politicians also acknowledge that sentencing should vindicate the values of the community. This article compares the views on the purposes of sentencing of three major participants in the criminal justice system: legislators who pass sentencing statutes, judges who impose and justify sentences and jurors who represent the community. A total of 987 Australian jurors in the Victorian Jury Sentencing Study (2013–2015) were asked to sentence the offender in their trial and to choose the purpose that best justified the sentence. The judges’ sentencing remarks were coded and the results were compared with the jurors’ surveys. The research shows that, in this jurisdiction, the views of the judges, the jurors and the legislators are not always well aligned. Judges relied on general deterrence much more than jurors and jurors selected incapacitation as the primary purpose in only about a fifth of ‘serious offender’ cases where parliament has provided that community protection must be the principal purpose.
dc.identifier.citationCriminology & Criminal Justice : CCJ, 2019; 19(1):1-19
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/1748895817738557
dc.identifier.issn1748-8958
dc.identifier.issn1748-8966
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11541.2/129420
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSAGE Publications
dc.relation.fundingARC DP130101054
dc.rightsCopyright 2017 The Author(s) Access Condition Notes: Postprint available on open access
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/1748895817738557
dc.subjectjudges
dc.subjectjuries
dc.subjectpublic opinion
dc.subjectsentencing purposes
dc.titleWhy sentence? Comparing the views of jurors, judges and the legislature on the purposes of sentencing in Victoria, Australia
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished
ror.fileinfo12150918710001831 13196789530001831 9916162793001831_12150918710001831_13150928720001831_CS
ror.mmsid9916162793001831

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
9916162793001831_12150918710001831_13150928720001831_CS.pdf
Size:
351.91 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version
Download

Collections