Impact of Information About Sentencing Decisions on Public Attitudes Toward the Criminal Justice System

Research reveals public dissatisfaction with perceived leniency of the criminal justice system. However, when asked to sentence hypothetical offenders, members of the public tend to choose dispositions similar to what current court practices prescribe. In two studies reported here, subjects completed a mock sentencing exercise and a general attitude survey. In an initial pilot study, they expressed general dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system but the relative punitiveness of their sentences (in terms of their perceptions of how severe various sentencing options are) was only slightly elevated above a set of reference sentences. Providing a typical judge's sentencing decisions did not decrease dissatisfaction but was associated with an anchoring effect. This effect was explored in the main study by manipulating the provided reference sentences to be either lenient, moderate, or punitive. Again, participants expressed general dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system but prescribed generally moderate sentences, anchoring their sentences to the information provided. However, only those exposed to moderate typical sentences subsequently reported reduced dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system.     

Recent Trends in Sentencing Policies in the Netherlands

This article considers sentencing in the Netherlands and in particular the changes that have been introduced since the 1980s, both in the adult and in the juvenile justice system. Several questions will be treated in the article. Sentencing in the Netherlands in the last two decades is analysed and some explanations for the changing trends are presented. Results indicate that the Netherlands is following a general pattern, prevalent in Europe and the US, of more punitive and repressive punishment. Also, the extent to which new sentencing options, such as community sanctions have made a difference to the upward trend in imprisonment, will be analysed. In an effort to reduce the costs of the system new policies are being developed, introducing both 'front door' and 'back door' varieties in sentencing. These will lead to some important and radical changes in the criminal justice system.     

论犯罪后的态度对量刑的影响

根据并合主义与责任主义的要求,在正确选择了法定刑后,首先根据影响责任刑的情节裁量责任刑,然后在责任刑之下根据影响预防刑的情节裁量预防刑并确定宣告刑。犯罪后的态度是影响预防刑的重要情节。对于自首、立功与坦白能否从宽以及从宽的幅度,必须进行实质判断;不自首、不坦白是行为人犯罪后的常态,不能成为增加预防刑的情节。反省、悔罪与赔礼道歉虽然不是法定量刑情节,却是减少预防刑的重要情节,法官在裁量预防刑时必须予以重视。事后积极退赃、赔偿损失与积极挽回损失的行为,既可能使特殊预防必要性减少,也可能使一般预防必要性减少。行为人犯罪后为逃避刑事责任而隐瞒事实、毁灭证据与负案潜逃属于犯罪后的常态,不能成为增加预防刑的情节。     

Restorative Sentencing: Exploring the Views of the Public

Within the past decade, restorative justice has emerged as a truly global phenomenon. Although retributive justice has dominated the penal landscape, more recently, restorative principles at sentencing have attracted increased attention. Restorative sentencing emphasizes the importance of compensation and reconciliation between victims and offenders and pays less attention to establishing proportionality between the seriousness of the offense and the severity of the sentence imposed. Although voluminous (and proliferating), the scholarly literature on restorative justice has to date neglected one critical issue: public opinion with respect to this justice paradigm. Public opinion researchers too, have generally overlooked this topic. The goal of this paper is to determine which elements of the new paradigm generate public approval, and which features are likely to encounter or provoke public opposition, drawing upon related international research published in English over the past 20 years (1982–2002). The review reveals widespread support for restorative sentencing options, such as community service, compensation, and restitution, particularly when applied to young offenders. However, it also seems clear that public support for these alternatives to punitive sentencing options declines as the seriousness of the offence increases, suggesting strong public adherence to the retributive principle of proportionality in sentencing.     

Revenge,Retribution, and Values: Social Attitudes and Punitive Sentencing

This study examined the pattern of relations between vengeance attitudes, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and social dominance orientation (SDO) using the structure of value types proposed by Schwartz (Adv Exp Soc Psychol 25:1–65, 1992). Relations between these variables and support for a variety of sentencing options, including capital punishment, were then investigated. One hundred and forty-eight students in Adelaide, South Australia, completed a Vengeance Scale (Stuckless and Goranson, J Soc Behav Pers 7:25–42, 1992), measures of RWA and SDO, the Schwartz Value Survey (1992), and a Sentencing Goals Scale. As predicted, vengeance attitudes and SDO were found to be positively related to the importance of power values and negatively related to the importance of universalism and benevolence values. Vengeance attitudes were negatively related to rehabilitation and positively related to support for retribution and incapacitation sentencing goals, while RWA was positively related to the endorsement of deterrence and incapacitation as sentencing goals. Regression analyses indicated that only RWA and vengeance attitudes were unique predictors of death penalty support. Results provide support for the suggestion that vengeance is closely associated with our notion of retributive justice.     

Public and Parliamentary Attitudes to Welfare

One of the core functions of parliament in the United Kingdom is arguably to represent the views of the people. While opinions differ as to the precise nature of this representation, one would expect to find a broad measure of comparability between public opinion and the opinions of those representing the public in parliament.

This article examines the extent to which shifts in political attitudes towards the welfare state have been reflected in public opinion, particularly since the election of New Labour in 1997. Using data derived from a series of interviews with MPs from all sides of the House of Commons, and information on public attitudes to welfare collated from the British Social Attitudes survey, it seeks to identify and explain areas of disagreement and consensus in public and parliamentary attitudes to welfare. It focuses in particular on questions regarding commitment to state welfare provision, priorities in welfare spending and attitudes towards funding for welfare services.     

Personal and Vicarious Experience with the Criminal Justice System as a Predictor of Punitive Sentencing Attitudes

This study examined the impact of prior personal or vicarious experience with the criminal justice system on sentencing attitudes. Existing research on sentencing attitudes has examined factors such as race, gender, income level, political affiliation, and education level, but few research studies have focused on actual contact with the criminal justice system and its influence on perceptions of sentencing as either too harsh or too lenient. The current study utilized data collected by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Over 1,500 respondents were surveyed nationwide in 2006 regarding sentencing attitudes. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess the impact of factors of interest on sentencing attitudes. Results indicated that individuals who had been charged with a crime (personal experience), or who had an immediate relative or close friend who had been charged (vicarious experience), were more likely to perceive the criminal justice system as too harsh, regardless of race/ethnicity.     

Sentencing Recommendations by Probation Officers and Judges: An Examination of Adult Offenders Across Gender

Connecting the courtroom workgroup model with attributions and stereotyping based on the focal concerns perspective and gender sentencing literature, the present study investigates the extent to which probation officer recommendations influence judicial sentencing, and whether the gender of the offender further conditions this relationship. Results from logistic and ordinary least squares regression indicate that there is concordance between probation officer recommendations and sentencing by judges. Offender gender has both direct and indirect effects on judicial sentencing through its relationship with probation officer recommendations, and Black males tend to receive lengthier sentences than other race/gender counterparts. These findings provide evidence that probation officer recommendations are an important part of the sentencing process and offer additional insight on how extralegal factors such as gender and race impact criminal justice decision making.     

Sentencing Disparity and Sentencing Guidelines: the Case of China

Asian Journal of Criminology - This study investigates sentencing disparity under the sentencing guidelines in China. Drawing upon the firsthand data of 509 criminal cases from a county-level court...     

论量刑情节的适用和基准刑的确定

中段论假定,均质化的、排除任何情节的"裸"的犯罪行为类型,其客观的法益侵害还是主观的人身危险都是中间程度的,但是这一假设不能成立。因此,基准刑应当针对具体罪行分别确定,而不能按照法定刑的中点抽象地、简单地确定。而适用量刑情节时,基准刑应当为起点刑,在从重从轻情节竞合情形,在量化的前提下,可以通过加减方式量刑,但是在适用减轻情节时,必须把握减轻处罚优先原则。     

论标准对公共政策的支撑作用

标准对于公共政策的技术支撑作用已得到许多国家的广泛认可。通过对标准与公共政策之间的关系进行分析，总结欧盟、美国、英国等国家在标准支持公共政策方面的做法和经验，结合对我国标准支持公共政策现状和问题的剖析，并在此基础上提出了我国建立标准支持公共政策的机制的建议。     

Revising Images of Public Punitiveness: Sentencing by Lay and Professional English Magistrates

England grants unusually broad responsibility for sentencing of criminal offenders to voluntary part-time lay magistrates who, like their legally trained professional colleagues, sentence a wide range of offenders. Using simulated cases, archival analyses, and observational techniques, this article compares the sentencing decisions of the lay and professional magistrates in London. The study reveals no evidence of the lay preference for more severe sentencing that is typically shown in public opinion polls. The extent to which legal training, court experience, panel decisionmaking and role within the court system can explain the relative leniency of the lay magistrates are considered Consistent with results from other studies, these findings suggests that when laypersons assign sentences to particular offenders rather than express generalized satisfaction or dissatisfaction with current sentencing practices, laypersons are no more punitive than professional judges.     

Criminal Punishment in Islamic Societies: Empirical Study of Attitudes to Criminal Sentencing in Iran

Public opinion on criminal sentencing and aims of punishment has been surveyed mostly in Western countries. In non-Western countries, especially Islamic societies, little has been published, at least in Western journals, on these issues. In fact, no published study examining public views toward criminal sentences and the aims of punishments in Islamic societies may be located in any major database of Western literature. As a result many questions like the relationship between perceived purpose of criminal punishment and its severity and the interactions between the belief in Islam and its Shari’a (Islamic culture) and punitive attitude to criminality have remained unasked. Therefore, the meaning and motive behind the death penalty and other severe forms of punishment in Islamic countries remains unknown to scholars, whether within or outside these countries. This paper introduces, first, Shari’a sentencing laws and practices in some Islamic societies and then, by drawing on a survey administered in Iran in 2008, tries to show and explain the variations in attitudes to Shari’a criminal laws and different forms of punishment, mostly based on Shari’a, across different genders and professions (judges, lawyers, students, Tulab and police).     

量刑的价值判断与公正量刑的途径

量刑是事实判断与价值判断的有机统一。量刑的事实判断以犯罪的主客观事实为基础,量刑的价值判断体现国家和社会惩罚与预防犯罪的特殊需要。《刑法》第61条规定的是量刑的事实根据与法律根据,在价值判断上有所缺漏。量刑的价值判断与规范判断并不相同。影响量刑的非规范性价值评价因素主要包括:情势变迁、文化背景、价值观念以及犯罪人的家庭、生活状况等。公正量刑的途径在于:坚持事实判断与价值判断相结合;适时调整量刑的依据和标准;赋予法官适度的自由裁量权;建立和完善相关的程序机制。     

量刑轻缓化趋势与非监禁刑

一、序言苏格兰的刑法与英格兰和威尔士有显著差异。在英格兰和威尔士 ,刑法基本上是一种以制定法规定犯罪的制度 ,该制度对每一种犯罪都有明确规定的刑罚 ,通常表现为法定最高刑。而在苏格兰 ,大多数刑事犯罪的法律渊源是普通法 ,也就是那些来源于 1 70 7年以前苏格兰议会所颁布的古老法案 ;或者来源于著者们所描述的无可追忆的惯例 ;或者来源于法庭在适用法律过程中对法律所作的发展的法律。一般而言 ,苏格兰法律中的法定犯罪是指那些规定于英联邦议会颁布并适用于整个英联邦国家的制定法中的犯罪—例如道路交通、毒品和攻击性武器等领域…     

量刑思维规律下的量刑方法构建

量刑在本质上不是＂刑之量化＂,而是＂刑之裁量＂。这决定了量刑思维不只是形式逻辑思维或辩证逻辑思维,而是二者的有机统一。量刑方法作为量刑思维的表现手段,需遵循量刑思维的以上逻辑规律。传统的经验量刑法虽然是辩证逻辑思维的充分展现,但没有融入现代形式逻辑的现代科技手段;而所谓现代量刑方法虽然使用了现代科技手段,但又只是遵循现代形式逻辑规律,规避了辩证逻辑规律。刑法现代化下的量刑方法构建,应是基于量刑思维的逻辑规律,把传统经验量刑法与各所谓现代量刑方法进行整合,以形成定量与定性相结合的量刑方法。     

量刑程序改革语境中的量刑证据初探

在量刑程序改革的背景下，对量刑证据的研究显得尤为重要扣迫切。以证据为核心进行量刑裁判是量刑公正性和合理性的有效保障。量刑证据在证明对象、证明标准、证据能力规则等层面均表现出不同于定罪证据的特质。在死刑案件中，对量刑证据规则的设定以及量刑证据的判断和运用应该更加严格。     

量刑基准论

量刑基准的合理确定,是量刑公正的基础和关键。量刑基准客观地存在于经验型法官的潜意识之中。量刑基准包含基准事实和基准刑两方面。在确定量刑基准时,应该先确定量刑基准的基准事实,后寻找基准事实对应的基准刑。为调和各地具体情况的差异性与宏观上量刑的相对统一性之间的紧张关系,应当同时构建由最高人民法院确立个罪基准事实、由地方各级法院确定基准刑并逐级备案的量刑平衡机制。     

Non-custodial Dispositions and the Politicsof Sentencing

In 2012, the Government of Victoria, Australia, introduced a new form of non-custodial disposition known as the “community correction order” (“CCO”). In 2014, the Victorian Court of Appeal was asked to provide guidance to sentencing courts so that CCOs could fulfil their potential as an alternative to imprisonment. The Court’s guideline judgment concluded that the advent of the CCO had the potential to transform sentencing in Victoria but that this would depend upon the community being properly informed about the capacity of a CCO to operate punitively, as well as to promote rehabilitation. This did not occur, however, and there was strident criticism of the judgment as authorising inadequate punishment of serious offences. Although sentencing courts have utilised the CCO appropriately in the light of the judgment, the Government recently legislated to restrict its availability.