19 June 2008 / Michael Zander KC

Issue: 7326 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession

printer

mail-detail

Which way to go?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Michael Zander QC reflects on the negative response to Lord Carter's sentencing proposals

The Carter Report on sentencing must be a contender for the title of “Worst Report of Recent Years”. Lord Carter made two main recommendations: build more prisons; and adopt a Minnesota-style structured sentencing grid system. He did little research or consultation. In particular, he failed even to mention the New Zealand system despite the fact that New Zealand has for the past several years been engaged in a major sentencing reform project.

The consultation paper issued by the Working Group established to pursue Carter's sentencing proposal was plainly driven by Carter's approach—indeed the circuit judges in their response went so far as to say that the questions were carefully worded… “suggestive of a decision already taken”. This no doubt was due to the fact that the leader of the secretariat and several of her team had worked on the Carter report. Incredibly, the consultation paper also failed to consider the New Zealand system.

At the time, one

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

Which way to go?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Michael Zander QC reflects on the negative response to Lord Carter's sentencing proposals

The Carter Report on sentencing must be a contender for the title of “Worst Report of Recent Years”. Lord Carter made two main recommendations: build more prisons; and adopt a Minnesota-style structured sentencing grid system. He did little research or consultation. In particular, he failed even to mention the New Zealand system despite the fact that New Zealand has for the past several years been engaged in a major sentencing reform project.

The consultation paper issued by the Working Group established to pursue Carter's sentencing proposal was plainly driven by Carter's approach—indeed the circuit judges in their response went so far as to say that the questions were carefully worded… “suggestive of a decision already taken”. This no doubt was due to the fact that the leader of the secretariat and several of her team had worked on the Carter report. Incredibly, the consultation paper also failed to consider the New Zealand system.

At the time, one

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS

NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders

Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners

NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do

A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent

Your magistrates’ court needs you!

Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process

NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed

Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’

NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits

A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’

back-to-top-scroll