Why are there inconsistencies in sentencing levels? Are sentences adequate in cases of violence causing death, and should such cases as ‘murder’ are not reduced to ‘manslaughter.’ Why don’t “lifers” get life?
Offenders, who murder someone and receive a life sentence, can and do serve a life sentence. Offenders, who are not deemed to be safe to release on parole, can be retained in prison until they die. Parliament has decided that people sentenced to life imprisonment have the same right as other prisoners to seek parole at some time during their sentence, and only those deemed not to pose an undue risk to the community are granted parole.
Judges cannot do anything about that. Someone sentenced to life in prison is in effect on lifetime parole and if released on parole, there is the ability to recall them to serve out their sentence. That happens sometimes.
Some are not granted parole, but that happens in only a small number of cases, and it is up to the Parole Board. Those people sentenced to life in prison do not often reoffend when released on parole.
Differences exist
Judges have to achieve a level of consistency for all people sentenced on criminal charges, as set out in the Sentencing Act. There are differences, but these can be for a number of reasons including types of charges laid by the prosecution.
For example, there are a number of different degrees of assault. The Police choose where they think the particular crime fits on the scale and the offender is prosecuted under that charge.
Minor assault carries a maximum term of six months, the next level one year, and on the degree of violence used, up to 14 years.
Dependent factors
Where the sentence fits depends on the charge prosecuted, the number of charges laid; the prisoner’s role in the offending, if there was more than one person involved (some may have lesser role); the nature of the offending; aggravating factors such as the degree of violence, mitigating factors such as whether the offender had been led into it, or personal factors; no previous convictions; the impact of the offending on people including the victim and the community at large, and recommendations made by the Department of Corrections in the probation report (which the Judge does not have to follow, but is weighed in the balance); and, if there is a guilty plea, where it comes in the process. If there is an immediate guilty plea at the beginning of the court process, there is a larger discount of sentence time than someone who pleads guilty 18 months later on the eve of the trial.
With numerous variations for Judges to consider, it is inevitable that there will not be a uniform sentencing; there are not uniform crimes and that have to be reflected in the sentence. But generally, Judges follow the same sentence structure, which makes uniformity more likely.
The above is the response given by the judges of the Auckland District Court at their ‘Community Day’ held at Fickling Convention Centre on September 24, 2012. The Editor of this newspaper was present at the meeting and the responses of the judges to a number of questions are published in a series. The responses are reproduced verbatim, as given by the judges. The first seven parts appeared in our past issues from November 15, 2012.
