The Supreme Court offers some answers to both these criticisms but the result is something of an unsatisfying saw off. On the other hand, they are criticized as an intrusive form of net-widening imposed on offenders who would never have gone to prison. They are criticized by some as a slap on the wrist for those who should be punished severely and as a glorified probation order. This is not surprising because conditional sentences are themselves quite Janus-faced. The cases themselves do not answer all the questions and they sometimes point in ambiguous and even contradictory directions. The Supreme Court’s six recent decisions in conditional sentencing cases provide a good opportunity to reflect on conditional sentences as one of the most important and controversial innovations in sentencing in decades. Professor of Law and Criminology, University of Toronto Introduction 3.2 Serious Crimes: Proportionality, Deterrence and Denunciation. Conditional Sentences, Restorative Justice, Net-widening and Aboriginal Offenders The Changing Face of Conditional Sentencingģ.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |