Abstract
| Language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages | 835-855 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | British Journal of Criminology |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| Early online date | 19 Aug 2008 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Nov 2008 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- sentencing
- pre-sentence reports
- Scotland
- social enquiry reports
- pre-sentence investigation
- community sanctions
- judicial decision making
- judicial discretion
- profession
- sociology of professions
- Penal
- penology
- criminal Justice
- criminal justice social workers
- penal reform
- penal practice
Cite this
}
Assisting and advising the sentencing decision process : the pursuit of 'quality' in pre-sentence reports. / Tata, Cyrus; Burns, Nicola; Halliday, Simon; Hutton, Neil; McNeill, Fergus.
In: British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 48, No. 6, 11.2008, p. 835-855.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Assisting and advising the sentencing decision process
T2 - British Journal of Criminology
AU - Tata, Cyrus
AU - Burns, Nicola
AU - Halliday, Simon
AU - Hutton, Neil
AU - McNeill, Fergus
PY - 2008/11
Y1 - 2008/11
N2 - Pre-sentence reports are an increasingly prevalent feature of the sentencing process. Yet, although judges have been surveyed about their general views, we know relatively little about how such reports are read and interpreted by judges considering sentence in specific cases, and, in particular, how these judicial interpretations compare with the intentions of the writers of those same reports. This article summarizes some of the main findings of a four-year qualitative study in Scotland examining: how reports are constructed by report writers; what the writers aim to convey to the sentencing judge; and how those same reports are then interpreted and used in deciding sentence. Policy development has been predicated on the view that higher-quality reports will help to 'sell' community penalties to the principal consumers of such reports (judges). This research suggests that, in the daily use and interpretation of reports, this quality-led policy agenda is defeated by a discourse of judicial 'ownership' of sentencing.
AB - Pre-sentence reports are an increasingly prevalent feature of the sentencing process. Yet, although judges have been surveyed about their general views, we know relatively little about how such reports are read and interpreted by judges considering sentence in specific cases, and, in particular, how these judicial interpretations compare with the intentions of the writers of those same reports. This article summarizes some of the main findings of a four-year qualitative study in Scotland examining: how reports are constructed by report writers; what the writers aim to convey to the sentencing judge; and how those same reports are then interpreted and used in deciding sentence. Policy development has been predicated on the view that higher-quality reports will help to 'sell' community penalties to the principal consumers of such reports (judges). This research suggests that, in the daily use and interpretation of reports, this quality-led policy agenda is defeated by a discourse of judicial 'ownership' of sentencing.
KW - sentencing
KW - pre-sentence reports
KW - Scotland
KW - social enquiry reports
KW - pre-sentence investigation
KW - community sanctions
KW - judicial decision making
KW - judicial discretion
KW - profession
KW - sociology of professions
KW - Penal
KW - penology
KW - criminal Justice
KW - criminal justice social workers
KW - penal reform
KW - penal practice
U2 - 10.1093/bjc/azn055
DO - 10.1093/bjc/azn055
M3 - Article
VL - 48
SP - 835
EP - 855
JO - British Journal of Criminology
JF - British Journal of Criminology
SN - 0007-0955
IS - 6
ER -