Detention of Young Offenders
| DOI | 10.1177/002201839105500207 |
| Date | 01 May 1991 |
| Published date | 01 May 1991 |
| Subject Matter | Comment |
Journal
of
Criminal
Law
in Savage. R v Roberts (1971) 56 Cr
App
R 95 was widely taken
to have established that the only mens rea required for the section
47offence was that of an assault, and that once that was established,
it had just to be shown that bodily harm was caused by the assault.
No additional mens rea was required in respect of the bodily harm.
Further, the Savage approach seems to reflect the natural meaning
of the words of s 47 better.
As the court in Parmenter observed, it seems 'scarcely credible
that 129 years after the enactment of the Offences against the
Person Act three appeals should come before the Court of Appeal
which revealed the law to be so impenetrable'. The court itself
admitted that the present law would in marginal cases be as
unworkable in practice as it was objectionable in theory. The case
for reform of the law in this area could not be put more clearly.
In the short term, as the Court of Appeal recognised, 'only the
House of Lords could
...
put the subject on an even keel'.
David Cowley
LLB
Senior Lecturer in Law
The Polytechnic
Newcastle upon Tyne
DETENTION OF YOUNG OFFENDERS
The circumstances in which a young offender can be sentenced to
detention in a young offender institution, instead of imprisonment
(to which he cannot be sentenced on conviction if below the age
of 21), are set out in the Criminal Justice Acts 1982 and 1988. The
conditions precedent to a sentence of detention are two. First, the
circumstances (including the nature and gravity of the offence)
must be such that, if the offender were aged 21 or over, the court
would impose a sentence of imprisonment. Secondly, the offender
must also be 'qualified' for a custodial sentence by satisfying at
least one of three criteria laid down by s 1(4A) of the 1982 Act
(as inserted by s 123 of the 1988 Act). Hitherto, the first of these
conditions has been largely a question of fact in which the facts
(the nature of the offence and the offender's record) speak for
themselves. The question whether one of the criteria then applies
has given rise to considerable difficulties, since it is a matter of
220
To continue reading
Request your trial