Sentencing Review 2006-2007

Confidence in the courts and how to address the populist view that judges are out of touch and sentences are too lenient has become a concern for the judiciary, Sentencing Councils, law reform bodies and academics for some years – even capturing some media attention.1 Attempts have been made to better inform the public about sentencing, to develop new ways of ascertaining public opinion on sentencing issues and to explore ways in which judges can consult with members of the public. The first part of this year’s review will discuss attempts to educate the public about crime and sentencing issues and to explore the claim that judges should be more responsive to public views on these matters. In the second part, the trend to use driving sanctions for fine default is examined, followed by a discussion of the Visy-Amcor cartel case. These seemingly unrelated matters both raise issues about equality of the impact of financial penalties