header-logo header-logo

26 June 2008 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7327 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Rejecting Carter

Professor Michael Zander assesses the 24 main responses to the Gage working group's consultation paper on sentencing

The Sentencing Working Group, chaired by Lord Justice Gage, is currently considering two main proposals: adoption of an American-style grid system that would drastically restrict judicial discretion and establishment of a Sentencing Commission that could be required to tailor sentencing guidelines to fit the size of the prison estate.

Lord Carter, in his report, Securing the Future-Proposals for the Efficient and Sustainable Use of Custody in England and Wales, December 2007 (see NLJ, 1 February 2008, p 162), recommended that these two ideas be considered by a working party which should report “by summer 2008”. (The working group, on a seriously tight schedule, aims to report early in July.)

The working group's consultation paper issued on 31 March called for responses by 2 June. When the secretariat declared the consultation closed, it was stated that there had been 228 responses. This count is, however, misleading since a high proportion were effectively duplicates. Thus, for instance,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll