A sense of justice: the role of pre-sentence reports in the production (and disruption) of guilt and guilty pleas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The criminal justice process in the lower and intermediate courts depends on defendants admitting guilt and being seen to do so voluntarily. Hitherto, there has been limited academic consideration of how pre-sentence reports and their associated processes interact with the dynamics of guilty pleas. Drawing on recent research following through the production, use, and interpretation of a sample of reports, this article concentrates on the troubling inconsistency with which legal professionals (especially judges and lawyers) are continually confronted: namely, between their ideals of ‘proper’ legal justice and the pragmatic daily reality in which they have to participate. How do legal professionals manage this sense of inconsistency? The article suggests that reports are vital to enabling legal professionals to process defendants in good, or at least not bad, conscience. In particular, reports pacify the lingering unease felt by legal professionals that the everyday summary court processes may be too abrupt, abstract and impersonal. Reports and their associated processes pacify this unease in three ways. Firstly, reports display to legal professionals that defendants are treated individually, and with a degree of respect and humanity. Secondly, report processes (including their anticipation) assist the management of defendants and facilitate the production of guilty pleas. Thirdly, reports, generally (but by no means always), help to facilitate the ‘closure’ of guilty pleas. In these three ways, the ‘efficienct’ mass processing of defendants via guilty pleas is enabled by a sense among legal professionals of the individualised justice which reports seem to them to display.
LanguageEnglish
Pages239-261
Number of pages23
JournalPunishment and Society
Volume12
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2010

Fingerprint

sense of justice
guilt
justice
conscience
lawyer
respect
pragmatics
interpretation
management

Keywords

  • guilty pleas
  • mitigation
  • pre-sentence reports
  • punishment
  • sentencing
  • pre-sentence investigation
  • plea bargaining
  • penology
  • probation
  • criminal Justice
  • criminal justice social workers
  • defence lawyers
  • legal ethics

Cite this

@article{88e0f1d9178c4928830c308bc3fe11be,
title = "A sense of justice: the role of pre-sentence reports in the production (and disruption) of guilt and guilty pleas",
abstract = "The criminal justice process in the lower and intermediate courts depends on defendants admitting guilt and being seen to do so voluntarily. Hitherto, there has been limited academic consideration of how pre-sentence reports and their associated processes interact with the dynamics of guilty pleas. Drawing on recent research following through the production, use, and interpretation of a sample of reports, this article concentrates on the troubling inconsistency with which legal professionals (especially judges and lawyers) are continually confronted: namely, between their ideals of ‘proper’ legal justice and the pragmatic daily reality in which they have to participate. How do legal professionals manage this sense of inconsistency? The article suggests that reports are vital to enabling legal professionals to process defendants in good, or at least not bad, conscience. In particular, reports pacify the lingering unease felt by legal professionals that the everyday summary court processes may be too abrupt, abstract and impersonal. Reports and their associated processes pacify this unease in three ways. Firstly, reports display to legal professionals that defendants are treated individually, and with a degree of respect and humanity. Secondly, report processes (including their anticipation) assist the management of defendants and facilitate the production of guilty pleas. Thirdly, reports, generally (but by no means always), help to facilitate the ‘closure’ of guilty pleas. In these three ways, the ‘efficienct’ mass processing of defendants via guilty pleas is enabled by a sense among legal professionals of the individualised justice which reports seem to them to display.",
keywords = "guilty pleas, mitigation, pre-sentence reports, punishment, sentencing, pre-sentence investigation, plea bargaining, penology, probation, criminal Justice, criminal justice social workers, defence lawyers, legal ethics",
author = "Cyrus Tata",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1177/1462474510371734",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "239--261",
journal = "Punishment and Society",
issn = "1462-4745",
number = "3",

}

A sense of justice : the role of pre-sentence reports in the production (and disruption) of guilt and guilty pleas. / Tata, Cyrus.

In: Punishment and Society, Vol. 12, No. 3, 07.2010, p. 239-261.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A sense of justice

T2 - Punishment and Society

AU - Tata, Cyrus

PY - 2010/7

Y1 - 2010/7

N2 - The criminal justice process in the lower and intermediate courts depends on defendants admitting guilt and being seen to do so voluntarily. Hitherto, there has been limited academic consideration of how pre-sentence reports and their associated processes interact with the dynamics of guilty pleas. Drawing on recent research following through the production, use, and interpretation of a sample of reports, this article concentrates on the troubling inconsistency with which legal professionals (especially judges and lawyers) are continually confronted: namely, between their ideals of ‘proper’ legal justice and the pragmatic daily reality in which they have to participate. How do legal professionals manage this sense of inconsistency? The article suggests that reports are vital to enabling legal professionals to process defendants in good, or at least not bad, conscience. In particular, reports pacify the lingering unease felt by legal professionals that the everyday summary court processes may be too abrupt, abstract and impersonal. Reports and their associated processes pacify this unease in three ways. Firstly, reports display to legal professionals that defendants are treated individually, and with a degree of respect and humanity. Secondly, report processes (including their anticipation) assist the management of defendants and facilitate the production of guilty pleas. Thirdly, reports, generally (but by no means always), help to facilitate the ‘closure’ of guilty pleas. In these three ways, the ‘efficienct’ mass processing of defendants via guilty pleas is enabled by a sense among legal professionals of the individualised justice which reports seem to them to display.

AB - The criminal justice process in the lower and intermediate courts depends on defendants admitting guilt and being seen to do so voluntarily. Hitherto, there has been limited academic consideration of how pre-sentence reports and their associated processes interact with the dynamics of guilty pleas. Drawing on recent research following through the production, use, and interpretation of a sample of reports, this article concentrates on the troubling inconsistency with which legal professionals (especially judges and lawyers) are continually confronted: namely, between their ideals of ‘proper’ legal justice and the pragmatic daily reality in which they have to participate. How do legal professionals manage this sense of inconsistency? The article suggests that reports are vital to enabling legal professionals to process defendants in good, or at least not bad, conscience. In particular, reports pacify the lingering unease felt by legal professionals that the everyday summary court processes may be too abrupt, abstract and impersonal. Reports and their associated processes pacify this unease in three ways. Firstly, reports display to legal professionals that defendants are treated individually, and with a degree of respect and humanity. Secondly, report processes (including their anticipation) assist the management of defendants and facilitate the production of guilty pleas. Thirdly, reports, generally (but by no means always), help to facilitate the ‘closure’ of guilty pleas. In these three ways, the ‘efficienct’ mass processing of defendants via guilty pleas is enabled by a sense among legal professionals of the individualised justice which reports seem to them to display.

KW - guilty pleas

KW - mitigation

KW - pre-sentence reports

KW - punishment

KW - sentencing

KW - pre-sentence investigation

KW - plea bargaining

KW - penology

KW - probation

KW - criminal Justice

KW - criminal justice social workers

KW - defence lawyers

KW - legal ethics

U2 - 10.1177/1462474510371734

DO - 10.1177/1462474510371734

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 239

EP - 261

JO - Punishment and Society

JF - Punishment and Society

SN - 1462-4745

IS - 3

ER -