Hebenton and Pease Critique

the Hebenton and Pease paper from the Bull and Carson

handbook. Taken into consideration will be how their

work throws light on the sentences passed by judges in

criminal cases. Research in this area is often difficult

because the researcher can quite easily get committed for

an offence. However, research into the attitudes,

beliefs and reasoning of judges does not always give an

accurate picture of the ways in which they pass

sentences. Thus, in a way sentencing is regarded as a

kind of mystery, characterised by a strong formalism

which concerns outward appearance and structure. There

are numerous factors which play an important role in

influencing a judges decision regarding criminal cases.

The aspects which will be discussed here are: two

justifications of punishment; retributivism (wholly

deserved by offender) and reductivism (preventative

consequences of sentences), crime seriousness and

sentence length, two approaches to explain judges

decisions; analytical (attempt to extract factors which

bear upon the case) and synthetic (concerning the

translation of case seriousness into senten

are numerous factors that a judge must take into

factors and adjustment for mitigating factors. The

Some topics in this essay:
Guideline Judgement’, Court Appeal, Hebenton Pease, Bull Carson, Appeal Court, , passed judges, mitigating factors, sentences passed judges, passed judges criminal, aggravating mitigating, seriousness sentence, sentences passed, judges criminal, pass sentences, hebenton pease, synthetic approach, guideline judgement’, seriousness sentence length, hebenton pease 1995, aggravating mitigating factors, Billam Guideline,