Presentation Principles of Sentencing Misplaced Sympathy

isara solutions, 2019

In this research paper, a discussion will be on analyzing the sentencing policy in India & its implementation. When an accused is declared criminal by court, the confusion of the judge starts. The wide discretionary power is given by penal code to the judges in sentencing the offenders. The researcher will discuss on various views on sentencing policy and aim of sentencing mechanism. Here judges are reckon on that they will utilize their individual optional capacity in awarding sentence. This paper will discuss how this discretion is being ill used in unaccounted cases. In this paper, it is attempted to evolve a standard formula for use of discretion in sentencing which is very difficult task of balancing. In this paper, it is concluded that every judge when he is deciding the cases must balance those factors. There is need to arrange sentence plainly explaining the reason for the framework.

Georgia State University law review, 1994

The Sentence Reform Act of 1994 provides for a minimum sentence of ten years for persons convicted for the first time of serious violent felonies with the sentence to be served in its entirety. Furthermore, the Act provides that when the court orders sentences for first-time conviction of serious violent felonies, even when the sentences are beyond the minimum sentence required, the sentence will be served in its entirety and shall not be reduced by parole or any other sentence-reducing measures. The Act also amends certain Code sections dealing with Crimes and Offenses to provide for a ten year minimum sentence requirement for six serious violent felonies. The Act amends the procedures for sentencing and the imposition of punishment to incorporate the new minimum sentence requirements and the new restrictions on suspension or probation of sentences for persons convicted of serious violent felonies. Furthermore, the Act provides that prison sentences for the conviction of a serious ...

Journal of Law Policy and Globalization, 2013

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the legal and socio-ethical implications of punishment. We have reviewed existing literatures on punishment with a view to establish a synthesis of scholarly opinions on punishment. It is appropriate for civil authorities to be properly educated on the functions of punishment. Public policy on punishment should have social dimension. Punishment should be seen as an aspect of social engineering. The study has strongly recommended that the purpose of punishment should ultimately be the reformation of offenders. WHAT IS PUNISHMENTS? Etymologically, the word punishment is derived from Old French punir, and from two Latin words punire, meaning to punish and poena, which means "penalty". According to Oxford English Dictionary (1976:901), the verb form "punish" means: "…to cause (offender) to suffer for offence, chastise, inflict penalty on (offender); inflict penalty for (offence)". The New Encyclopedia Britannica (1975:281) has defined punishment as: ""... the infliction of some pain, suffering, loss, or social disability as a direct consequence of some action or omission on the part of the person punished. The punishment may consist of death, physical assault, detention, loss of civil and political rights, or banishment". Black's Law Dictionary (1979:1) defines punishment as: "... any fine, penalty, or confinement inflicted upon a person by the authority of the law and the judgment and sentence of a court, for some crime or offense committed by him or for his omission of duty enjoined by law. A deprivation of property or some right". N. S. S. Iwe (1987:246) has identified four essential elements of punishment to be deprivation, contrivance, misdeed or offence and legitimacy. Deprivation means that punishment is characterized by loss of life, liberty or socioeconomic right. Contrivance means that punishment, as a social issue must be viewed perceptively as a direct or indirect consequence of human behaviour. Iwe is of the opinion that this element gives punishment its sociological dimension, for each society defines its own system of punishment to reflect its own level of culture and norms, its own ethos and values. Hence the penal code is usually a reflection and image of its society (1987:246). Misdeed or offence has to do with the occasion and socio-ethical cause of punishment. It must be established prima facie that there is an infringement, or violation of the social order. Iwe writes: "... offence or misdeed must pass the appropriate psycho-moral test before it can qualify for punishment. To pass this test a given misdeed or offence must be truly human act performed with due knowledge, deliberation and voluntariness... The offender must be truly and humanly guilty of an offence before he can be legitimately punished" (1987:246). Legitimacy is a requirement that a competent authority must punish the offender. Such a person, or persons must possess a socio-juristic mandate to mete out punishment to deviants.

VEETHIKA-An International Interdisciplinary Research Journal

The importance of the topic is highlighted, from the very fact that culpability is set according to the level of blameworthiness on the part of accused. This blameworthiness is known as guilty mind or to be more precise a blameworthy state of mind. There are many degrees or kinds of mens rea, with their corresponding levels of culpability like Intention, knowledge, recklessness, negligence, etc. The punishment decreases as the mens rea fall the ladder. The importance of mens rea in criminal jurisprudence is again stressed by the maxim “Actus reus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea” which implies that “The act itself does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty intent". Due to this elusiveness of Mens Rea, there is a disproportionate sentencing by the Courts which gives rise to injustice and violation of basic human rights and dignity of the victim. The paper shall decipher various issues pertaining to mens rea in Vehicular Homicide Cases and shall endeavour to come with s...