NCJ Number
85075
Journal
British Journal of Criminology Volume: 22 Issue: 3 Dated: (July 1982) Pages: 213-228
Date Published
1982
Length
16 pages
Annotation
The British report on 'Dangerousness and Criminal Justice' advocates a drastic reduction in the permissible maximum penalties for all offenses, providing only for the possibility of putting a small number of offenders out of circulation for a substantial period in the interest of public safety.
Abstract
In determining that protective sentences should be provided for certain 'dangerous' offenders, the working party recognized that distinguishing between 'serious' and other harm caused by criminal behavior cannot be wholly objectified. The report concludes that a protective sentence, which carries the risk that the offender may be unnecessarily incarcerated, should be used only where the victims of the anticipated harm are exposed to the risk of unusual hardship (pain and suffering, shock and fear, injury to health, or beggary). Categories of offenses qualifying for protective sentencing are death, serious bodily injury, serious sexual assault, severe or prolonged pain or mental stress, loss of or damage to property which causes severe personal hardship, damage to the environment which has a severely adverse impact on public health or safety, and serious damage to the security of the state. The report concludes that statutory tests of dangerousness are not feasible, and a broad discretion is called for. Since the sentencer has discretion in determining 'dangerousness,' the report advocates that it be mandatory for the court to consider certain evidence, that the defense be allowed to call its own expert witnesses, that the assessment be contestable, that the court give reasons for the sentence, and that the sentence be referred automatically to the Court of Appeal. Further, a person given a protective sentence should have regular and frequent access to an independent review tribunal of quasi-judicial composition and character.