• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

The Scottish Journal of Criminal Justice Studies The Journal of the Scottish Association for the Study of Delinquency Editor Jason Ditton Scottish Centre for Criminology, First Floor, 19 Kelvinside Gardens East, Glasgow, G20 6BE Tel: 0141-946 4325 Email: [email protected] Assistant Editor Michele Burman Sociology Department, Glasgow University, Adam Smith Building, Glasgow G12 8RT Tel: 0141-330 6983 Email: [email protected] Volume 9, July, 2003. 1 2 EDITORIAL This is the ninth volume of the Scottish Journal of Criminal Justice Studies. In this issue, our branch generated article was initially aired at a meeting of the Edinburgh Branch in March, 2003. For the first time in this volume, we reprint the content of posters that were on display at the Annual Conference. In the final section, we reprint a note on the Objects and Membership of SASD, list the Associations’ Office Bearers and Branch Secretaries and add a note on how to start a new Branch. In future volumes of the Journal, I hope to continue to publish as articles those papers presented at Branch Meetings or Day Conferences that Branch Secretaries think are worth offering to a wider audience. Original articles will also be considered for publication. There is no copy deadline. Branch Secretaries are invited to send suitable articles to me (in Word 2000 – or earlier versions - or in .rtf format) by attaching them to an email to me. Jason Ditton 3 4 CONTENTS Page Editorial ......................................................................................................................3 Keynote Article By Richard Simpson, MSP, Deputy Minister for Justice ..........................................7 Conference Report “Sentencing” SASD’s 33rd Annual Conference. Conference Report by Carolyn McLeod ..................................................................19 “Sentencing fundamentals and the impact of Europe” by Nicky Padfield, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge..................30 “What do the Scottish public think about sentencing and punishment?” by Neil Hutton, Centre for Sentencing Research, University of Strathclyde..........................................................................................41 “Drug Courts – The Scottish experience” by Sheriff Michael O’Grady ................55 Conference Posters ................................................................................................69 Branch Generated Article “The Employability needs of young offenders”, by Bernadette Monaghan, Director of Apex Scotland ............................................78 Original Article “Worry about housebreaking: Is it affected by employment status?” by Jason Ditton, Director of the Scottish Centre for Criminology ..........................96 Book Reviews The Ferris Conspiracy Reviewed by Pat Quinn..........................................................................................100 Indictment: Trial by Fire, The Ferris Conspiracy, Deadly Divisions and Glasgow’s Hard Men Reviewed by Hazel Croall......................................................................................104 A Human Rights approach to prison management: Handbook for prison staff Reviewed by Roger Houchin..................................................................................113 Obituary ................................................................................................................120 SASD Objects and Membership........................................................................................122 Office Bearers ........................................................................................................123 Branch Secretaries ..................................................................................................124 Starting a new branch ............................................................................................125 5 6 Keynote Article by Richard Simpson, MSP, Deputy Minister for Justice Introduction I intend to cover 4 areas: The philosophy of sentencing. the way that philosophy applies in Scotland today, how the changes we have made and are making to sentencing will contribute to a safer and fairer Scotland, and my vision of where we should be going next. Philosophy of sentencing Sentencing has never been a simple matter. Humans have realised for thousands of years that sentencing is a balancing act requiring the denunciation of crime, fairness to the individual, meeting the expectations of victims and society, and elements of deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation. Different societies have placed more or less emphasis on different aspects. The dilemmas of punishment are articulated in our heritage literature, from the Bible to Dostoevsky. Sometimes it appears that punishment is a metaphysical concept, rather than one which human agencies can achieve. It is bound up with psychological concepts of sin and repentance. This gives our sentencers a hard job and creates high expectations of them to have a God-like wisdom. We legislators try to help them, by prescribing penalties on the statute book and making a range of sentencing options available. But the dilemmas continue, as can be shown in the restless pursuing of new ideas on sentencing in various Western jurisdictions including the USA and our nearer neighbours England and Wales. Part of the driver of change is, in the modern world, cost. The state pays for the administration of penalties which vary greatly in cost. The limited availability of public resources creates one set of tensions. We also expect, nowadays, to live in safe communities, and we expect sentencing practices to contribute to making our community a safer place. At one time the criminal justice system tried to make the world safer by executing lots of 7 criminals, sending them abroad to the colonies, and leaving the rest to moulder away in horrendous prison conditions. The penal reforms of the 19th century changed all that. Obviously we can’t go backwards, but we are still fearful of criminals. The desire for ever more cautious disposals, which incapacitate or severely restrict the liberty of dangerous individuals, creates another set of tensions. Indeterminate sentencing In an effort to reconcile these different pressures, during most of the 20th Century, a model has prevailed which is sometimes referred to as ‘indeterminate sentencing’. This should not be confused with passing an indeterminate or discretionary life sentence. It is, rather, the system whereby sentences for particular crimes are not prescribed in law. Indeterminate sentencing systems are characterised by multiple, overlapping discretion of prosecutors, judges, corrections agencies, and a parole board. They are premised on the need to make individualised decisions about offenders subject to sentencing and corrections goals that vary from case to case. In some jurisdictions, including Scotland, there have been attempts to nibble away at the edges of indeterminate sentencing by introducing concepts of mandatory minimum sentences, 3 strike rules, and truth in sentencing. B u t indeterminate sentencing regimes remain remarkably robust and the Scottish system is a classic example. It is a gloriously flexible model, allowing a number of different goals of sentencing to be achieved through the decisions of sentencers and the way they are implemented by the prison service, social workers and the voluntary sector. The disadvantages of indeterminate sentencing regimes are that by leaving a great deal to discretion, they may appear to under-emphasise the need for consistency in sentencing. Yet, by giving the offender individualised treatment, they may fail to acknowledge sufficiently the’ expectations of victims and society. This is also something we are grappling with in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill. Challenges to indeterminate sentencing There are various alternative approaches to sentencing which emphasise particular goals and so appear, superficially, to provide advantages over ‘indeterminate sentencing’. I intend to demonstrate that our current policies, particularly the measures we have already taken in the Scottish Parliament, and those we are taking in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, can deliver at least some of these goals. 8 ‘Comprehensive structured sentencing’ is an approach which sets sentencing standards for a range of crimes and offences. These standards are often expressed in sentencing guidelines or ranges which may nonetheless allow considerable discretion for sentencers. Such systems often contain concepts such as ‘truth in sentencing’ and may abolish parole, so as to make the meaning of sentences more transparent. Comprehensive structured sentencing has acquired growing popularity in the USA and I sense a move in that direction in England and Wales. I have in mind the Home Secretary’s decision, announced in ‘Justice for All’, to establish a Sentencing Guidelines Council, chaired by the Lord Chief Justice. ‘Justice for All’ also announces the decision in England and Wales to abolish discretionary early release from custody for all but high risk offenders, others serving a year or more being automatically released on licence at the half- way point. We in Scotland have never worried unduly about consistency; believing that in a small jurisdiction with a collegiate High Court, also acting as appeal court, consistency will emerge. Statutory provision exists for judicial sentencing guidelines but this has not really taken off. Nevertheless, periodic attempts are made

Load more

  128

Copy Link