Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of case studies
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- 1 Psycholegal research: an introduction
- 2 Eyewitnesses: key issues and event characteristics
- 3 Eyewitnesses: the perpetrator and interviewing
- 4 Children as witnesses
- 5 The jury
- 6 Sentencing as a human process
- 7 The psychologists as expert witnesses
- 8 Persuasion in the courtroom
- 9 Detecting deception
- 10 Witness recognition procedures
- 11 Psychology and the police
- 12 Conclusions
- Notes
- References
- Author index
- Subject Index
6 - Sentencing as a human process
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 December 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of case studies
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- 1 Psycholegal research: an introduction
- 2 Eyewitnesses: key issues and event characteristics
- 3 Eyewitnesses: the perpetrator and interviewing
- 4 Children as witnesses
- 5 The jury
- 6 Sentencing as a human process
- 7 The psychologists as expert witnesses
- 8 Persuasion in the courtroom
- 9 Detecting deception
- 10 Witness recognition procedures
- 11 Psychology and the police
- 12 Conclusions
- Notes
- References
- Author index
- Subject Index
Summary
‘Sentencing cannot be an exact science; indeed, Lady Wootton likened the sentencer to a small boy adding up his sums but with no one to correct his answer.’ (His Honour Judge P.K. Cooke, OBE, 1987:57)
‘Sentencing is part of a very complex system. Many events and agencies influence the decision, and sentencing can cause anything from a ripple to a tidal wave throughout the system. And so sentencing, in common with other stages in the criminal justice process, cannot be viewed in isolation.’ (Morgan et al., 1987:169)
‘Most judges do not read psychology journals or scholarly books; some do not even read law reviews.’ (Wrightsman, 1999:viii)
Introduction
Judges have been termed ‘the gatekeepers of the legal system’ (Wrightsman, 1999:vii). Since the 1970s the judiciary in western countries has undergone unprecedented expansion in both its size and power. The expanding judicial role is evident in the appointment, training and scrutiny of members of the judiciary (Malleson, 1999). At the same time there has been increasing tension between the requirement of judicial independence and accountability created by the changes that have taken place.
In imposing sentences such as terms of imprisonment, judges and magistrates inevitably make policy and can become prison reformers, for example. At the same time, ‘Trial judges like to think of themselves as autonomous decision-makers whom nobody bosses around’, when, in fact, judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers are interdependent (Jacob, 1997:3); furthermore, ‘the constraints flowing from the organisational context in which judges work affect not only their personal careers but also the distribution of cases by trial courts’ (p. 4).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Psychology and LawA Critical Introduction, pp. 163 - 183Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2002