Sentencing in Ireland : an exploration of the views, rationales, and sentencing practices of district and circuit court judges

Abstract

This thesis reports the findings of an exploratory study on the nature of sentencing in the District and Circuit Courts in Ireland. At the time of this study, two key claims had been made about sentencing in Ireland. Firstly, Irish judges exercise a very broad sentencing discretion, and it has been claimed that this results in widespread inconsistencies. Secondly, it has been claimed that Irish judges use prison excessively, especially for minor offences, and that this is caused by judicial punitiveness and by reluctance to use altematives to prison. The purpose of this thesis was to explore the nature of sentencing in Ireland in the context of these claims. Drawing from the findings of previous research, this thesis was guided by four main research objectives. The first objective was to explore judicial views on crime, sentencing, and punishment. The second and third objectives were to explore the degree of consistency in sentencing and the reasons for inconsistency, if found. The fourth objective was to explore the degree of punitiveness, if any, in Irish sentencing practices. Two research methods traditionally used in sentencing research, semi-structured interviews and sentencing vignettes, were chosen. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the views of District and Circuit Court judges on crime, sentencing, punishment and the role of the courts in combating crime. Sentencing vignettes were used to explore the degree of consistency, the reasons for inconsistency, if found, and the degree of punitiveness, if any, in the sentencing practices of District and Circuit Court judges. More than one quarter of all District and Circuit Court judges participated in this research.