Sentencing : a social process : re-thinking research and policy /
Saved in:
| Author / Creator: | Tata, Cyrus. |
|---|---|
| Imprint: | Cham : Palgrave Macmillan, 2020. |
| Description: | 1 online resource (xiii, 177 pages) |
| Language: | English |
| Series: | Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies Palgrave Macmillan socio-legal studies. |
| Subject: | |
| Format: | E-Resource Book |
| URL for this record: | http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/12456281 |
Table of Contents:
- Intro
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process
- Contents
- List of Tables
- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma
- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy?
- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma
- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities
- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive
- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual
- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative
- 3 The Structure of the Book
- References
- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism
- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat
- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition
- Juridification
- Transparency
- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition
- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition
- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions
- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos
- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities
- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites?
- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge?
- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion
- The Self-Possessed Individual
- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge
- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary
- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities?
- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors'
- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors'
- 5 Conclusions and Implications
- References
- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing
- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves
- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts'
- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts'
- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases
- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue
- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making?
- Who Does Sentencing Work?
- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases
- The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach
- 2.5 Offender Characteristics
- Offence Versus Offender?
- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced
- 4 Conclusions and Implications
- References
- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism
- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions
- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension
- 2 Conceptions of Professions
- 2.1 The Trait Model
- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model
- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership
- Professional Ethics and Client Choice
- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions
- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility
- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing
- 4 Conclusions
- References
- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising
- 1 Professional Boundaries
- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work