The framing of judgement by counter
how appraisal analysis of six sentencing remarks provides an insight into judges’ sentencing practices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.40445Keywords:
sentencing remarks, sentencing of murder, appraisal analysis, judicial discretion, audience, statutory starting pointAbstract
Studies on sentencing in England and Wales are dominated by normative studies prescribing how judges should sentence. Few examine how judges actually sentence. This article provides an insight into the empirical reality of judges’ sentencing practices by examining how judges use counter to frame their judgement of offenders and their behaviour in six sentencing remarks. The six sentencing remarks were selected to ensure that variations in sentencing decisions of the six cases were, at least to a large extent, subject to judicial discretion. It finds that the statutory point exercises a binding effect on judicial sentencing despite judges having the discretion to disregard the starting point. The finding leads to the further inference that judges might possibly perceive the Court of Appeal and the public as two important audiences for their sentencing remarks.
References
Ashworth, A. (2015) Sentencing and Criminal Justice (6th edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415270
Ashworth, A., Genders, E., Mansfield, G., Peay, J. and Player, E. (1984) Sentencing in the Crown Court: Report of an Exploratory Study. Oxford: University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research.
Bakhtin, M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin: The University of Texas Press.
Baum, L. (2006) Judges and their Audiences: A Perspective on Judicial Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400827541
Blommaert, J. (2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610295
Brown, G. (2017) Criminal Sentencing as Practical Wisdom. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Bouhours, B. and Daly, K. (2007) Youth sex offenders in court: an analysis of judicial sentencing remarks. Punishment & Society 9(4): 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474507080473
Dai, X. (2020) Legal constraints and judicial discretion in sentencing practice: appraisal analysis of the sentencing remarks for Terri Palmer. Text & Talk 40(3): 269–292. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-2061
Easton, S. and Piper, C. (2016) Sentencing and Punishment: The Quest for Justice (4th edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198744825.001.0001
Fairclough, N. (1989) Language and Power. Harlow: Longman.
Hall, M. (2016) The Lived Sentence: Rethinking Sentencing, Risk and Rehabilitation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45038-4
Heffer, C. (2006) Beyond ‘reasonable doubt’: the criminal standard of proof instruction as communicative act. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(2): 159–188. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v13i2.159
Heffer, C. (2008) Judgement in court: evaluating participants in courtroom discourse. In K. Kredens and S. Go?d?-Roszkowski (eds) Language and the Law: International Outlooks. Lodz Studies in Language series 145–179. New York: Peter Lang.
Huan, C. (2018) Evaluating news actors in Chinese hard news reporting: language patterns and social values. Text & Talk 38(1): 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2017-0029
Hutton, N. (2006) Sentencing as a social practice. In S. Armstrong and L. McAra (eds) Perspectives on Punishment: The Contours of Control 155–174. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hutton, N. (2008) Institutional mechanisms for incorporating the public. In A. Freiberg and K. Gelb (eds) Penal Populism, Sentencing Councils and Sentencing Policy 138–147. Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.
Hutton, N. (2013) The definitive guideline on assault offences: the performance of justice. In A. Ashworth and J. Roberts (eds.) Sentencing Guidelines: Exploring the English Model 86–103. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684571.003.0006
Hutton, N. and Tata, C. (2000) The judicial role in the ‘balance’ between two visions of justice in sentencing. In S. Doran and J. Jackson (eds.) The Judicial Role in Criminal Proceedings 307–322. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Johnston, E. and Smith, T. (2018) Criminal Procedure and Punishment. Salford: Hall and Stott Publishing.
Kritzer, H. (2007) Toward a theorization of craft. Social & Legal Studies 16(3): 321–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663907079762
Lowenstein, M. (2016) Emotive riot sentencing remarks: qualitative analysis of the English judicial perspective. Internet Journal of Criminology (Jan). Available at: www.internetjournalofcriminology.com [Accessed: 20 December 2019]
Malleson, K. (1999) The New Judiciary: The Effects of Expansion and Activism. London: Routledge.
Manson, A. (2011) The search for principles of mitigation: integrating cultural demands. In J. Roberts (ed.) Mitigation and Aggravation at Sentencing 40–59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979170.004
Martin, J. and White, P. (2005) The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mazzi, D. (2010) ‘This argument fails for two reasons …’: a linguistic analysis of judicial evaluation strategies in US Supreme Court judgments. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 23(4): 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-010-9162-0
Miller, D. (2016) On negotiating the hurdles of corpus-assisted appraisal analysis in verbal art. In S. Gardner and S. Alsop (eds) Systemic Functional Linguistics in the Digital Age 211–228. Sheffield: Equinox.
Mitchell, B. and Roberts, J. (2012a) Exploring the Mandatory Life Sentence for Murder. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Mitchell, B. and Roberts, J. (2012b) Sentencing for murder: exploring public knowledge and public opinion in England and Wales. The British Journal of Criminology 52(1): 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azr073
Nelson, S. (2013) Directing jurors in England and Wales: the effect of narrativisation on comprehension. PhD Thesis, Cardiff University, UK.
Padfield, N. (2013) Exploring the success of sentencing guidelines. In A. Ashworth and J. Roberts (eds) Sentencing Guidelines: Exploring the English Model 31–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684571.003.0003
Pina-Sánchez, J., Brunton-Smith, I. and Li, G. (2018) Mind the step: a more insightful and robust analysis of the sentencing process in England and Wales under the new sentencing guidelines. Criminology & Criminal Justice 20(3): 268–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895818811891
Potts, A. and Weare, S. (2018) Mother, monster, Mrs, I: a critical evaluation of gendered naming strategies in English sentencing remarks of women who kill. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 31: 21–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-017-9523-z
Roberts, J. and Hough, M. (2005) Understanding Public Attitudes to Criminal Justice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Roberts, J., Hough, M., Jacobson, J. and Moon, N. (2009) Public attitudes to sentencing purposes and sentencing factors: an empirical analysis. Criminal Law Review, November: 771–782.
Roberts, J., Pina-Sanchez, J. and Marder, I. (2018) Individualisation at sentencing: the effects of guidelines and ‘preferred’ numbers. Criminal Law Review 2: 123–136.
Roberts, J. and Rafferty, A. (2011) Sentencing guidelines in England and Wales: exploring the new format. Criminal Law Review 9: 681–689.
Robinson, P. (2008) Distributive Principles of Criminal Law: Who Should Be Punished How Much. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195365757.001.0001
Shapland, J. (2011) Personal mitigation and assumptions about offending and desistance. In J. Roberts (ed.) Mitigation and Aggravation at Sentencing 60–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511979170.005
Shetreet, S. and Turenne, S. (2013) Judges on Trial: The Independence and Accountability of the English Judiciary (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139005111
Solan, L. and Tiersma, P. (2012) Introduction. In P. Tiersma and L. Solan (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law 1–9. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199572120.001.0001
Tata, C. (2002) Accountability for the sentencing decision process – towards a new understanding. In C. Tata and N. Hutton (eds.) Sentencing and Society 399–428. Farnham: Ashgate.
Tata, C. (2007) Sentencing as craftwork and the binary epistemologies of the discretionary decision process. Social & Legal Studies 16(3): 425–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663907079767
Thomas, D. (2002) The sentencing process. In M. McConville and G. Wilson (eds) The Handbook of the Criminal Justice Process 473–486. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tracy, K. and Parks, R. (2012) ‘Tough questioning’ as enactment of ideology in judicial conduct: marriage law appeals in seven US courts. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 19(1): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v19i1.1
White, P. (2006) Evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse – a new framework for analysis. In I. Lassen, J. Strunck and T. Vestergaard (eds) Mediating Ideology in Text and Image: Ten Critical Studies 37–67. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.18.05whi
Whittle, M. and Hall, G. (2018a) The use of alcohol and/or drugs in intimate partner homicide: themes in judges’ sentencing remarks. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 25(3): 404–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2017.1418145
Whittle, M. and Hall, G. (2018b) Intimate partner homicide: themes in judges’ sentencing remarks. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 25(6): 922–943. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1482571
