In Court
| DOI | 10.1177/026455050104800125 |
| Date | 01 March 2001 |
| Published date | 01 March 2001 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
As Thomas notes m
his commentary on
IN COURT
Offen, the decision does not resolve
whether the test of &dquo;sigmficant risk to the
public&dquo; is the same as that which applies
m
determmmg whether to impose a
discretionary life sentence or is governed
Nigel Stone, Senior Lecturer in the
by a different, wider definition of
School of Social Work, University of
dangerousness specific to this form of hfe
East Anglia, reviews recent appeal
sentencmg. He suggests that the criterion
judgements and other judicial
should be the same m
each mstance, the
developments that inform sentencing,
provisions of s109 simply obligmg the
early release and court welfare
judge to consider makmg a life sentence,
practice.
applying the familiar tests laid down in
case law smce Hodgson (1968).
,+ _ ’’i
y_, ,
±,__
~
j~~i£%
z
%.~ . s
lik= (lfl-£’ ==’§w.£j_)
°-
°
&dquo; _
- ° . _ / g&dquo;u £ , /_Q
=_
The problems posed by the provisions ot
Two more illustrations of the approach to
C(S)A 1997 s2 (now PCC(S)A 2000 s109)
offences aggravated by racist language and
that require a court to impose life
conduct:
imprisonment on conviction of a second
In R
v FOSTER [2000] Cnm
LR 1030,
grave offence unless there are exceptional
the offender had been disturbed by a child
circumstances relatmg to either of the
crymg m
a public hbrary, had got into a
offences or the offender, have been noted
dispute with the child’s mother, calling her
in this column (see ’In Court’ September
a &dquo;black bitch&dquo; and swung his fist at her.
2000). The irrational consequences of this
Sentence of two months imprisonment
sentencmg obligation have now been
was upheld for racially motivated common
eased sigmficantly by R v OFFEN [2001]
]
assault.
Cnm
LR 63, in which Lord Woolf CJ took
In R
v JACOBS (2000) The Times 28
a fresh look at the meamng of
December, the offender had been under
&dquo;exceptional circumstances&dquo; m
the light of
arrest at a police station where an Asian
the Human Rights Act and, without
officer was conductmg the usual search
relying on that statute, reached a different,
procedures. She had reacted by tellmg the
less restrictive mterpretation to that
officer that &dquo;I don’t want your grubby Paki
adopted by his predecessor Lord Bmgham.
hands on me&dquo;, makmg similar comments
While the section creates a statutory
when visited m
the cells by the same
assumption that a life sentence should be
officer. Upholdmg a custodial sentence as
imposed, the Court felt that it was clear
correct in principles, even though it was
that the intention of Parliament m
passing
accepted that the offender was not a racist,
this measure was to protect the pubhc. If
the Appeal Court stated that the pohce are
an offender does not pose a sigmficant risk
as entitled to protection from racial abuse
to the pubhc, this amounts to an
as anyone else. However, m
the light of
exceptional circumstance that will justify a
psychiatric evidence, a term of mne
court in not imposmg an mdetermmate
months was reduced to three months.
term. The fact that the two offences were
&dquo;
of a different kind of cnme or that a long
== ~
ri$%_
m_
__ , , . , - _ ~ , j ,
period had elapsed between the offences
~~
~=-
were relevant factors to be considered in
/
=
°* o
.
M = ,
determmmg the degree of nsk posed by
the offender.
In the course ot a violent argument with
64
her intensely jealous and suspicious
properly applied the Home Secretary’s
partner, a mother of two children aged
Directions governmg the recall of
three and under one had stabbed him
ACR/HDC prisoners. THE QUEEN orz the
fatally. Reviewing her sentence of four
application of JOHNSON v HOME
years impnsonment for manslaughter, the
SECRETARY, November 2000 (unreported).
Appeal Court determmed that though this
term was not excessive for this homicide,
@’$Qp#kfi%p .#%%/
gjg$%@wflfl
it was nght to have regard to psychiatric
evidence concerning the effect of her
imprisonment on her three year old son
Magistrates dealing with a guilty plea to
(being cared for by her mother). The effect
possession of cannabis with intent to
of her anticipated separation from her
supply to a detamee at HMYOI Feltham,
mfant daughter when the child reached age
heard defence representations that the
18 months and could no longer remam m
amount of the drug was so small that their
prison with her, should also have been
sentencmg powers were adequate. After
taken into account. A
term of 30 months
retiring, the justices stated that they could
was substituted and the Court expressed
not sentence him that day as they required
the hope that the mfant would be allowed
more information and were ordering a
to remam with the offender in...
To continue reading
Request your trial