Sentencing of Convicted Offenders: An Analysis of the Public's View

Abstract

The results of a survey of public attitudes about appropriate length of prison sentences for convicted offenders are reported. Two main questions are addressed: 1) degree of consensus within the population about appropriate sentences for different offenses and 2) the relationship between the desired sentences expressed by the public and the actual time served by offenders in prison. The analysis suggests considerable agreement across various demographic groups on the relative severity of sentences to be imposed for different offenses, but disagreement over the absolute magnitude of these sentences. These results suggest the feasibility of generating consensus on a proportional, just deserts sentencing schedule, but difficulty in establishing the “constant of proportionality.” The sentences desired by the public are found to be consistently more severe than sentences actually imposed, suggesting the need for greater public awareness of current imprisonment practices so that expectations of the determinate sentencing schedules will be realistic and consistent with limited prison capacity.

Third parties: victims and the criminal justice system

“…Some support for the main findings of the above study is found in the research conducted by Blumstein and Cohen (1980) referred to in chapter 5. A sample of residents in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, were asked to select the appropriate sanctions for 23 different offenses.…”

“…Blumstein and Cohen (1980), in the study referred to above, com pared the penalties assigned by different categories of respondent. While they noted a degree of association between sociodemographic characteris tics and the degree of punitiveness of responses, 43 when they compared Perceived Justice Needs respondents who reported victimization experiences with nonvictims, they concluded, "Surprisingly, victimization experience has no effect on the sentences respondents assign" (243).…”

“…Men were more punitive than women, and African Americans more than whites. Income, too, affected the penalty selected, the highest and lowest income brackets being more punitive than the middle range,-but this variation was found to interact with the sex and race variables; see Blumstein and Cohen (1980). 44.…”

Status, emotional displays, and the relationally-based evaluation of criminals and their behavior

“…including the likelihood they will report the behavior to the police (Skogan 1984) and their beliefs about the appropriate penalty (Blumstein and Cohn 1980;Hamilton and Rytina 1980).…”

Pourquoi punir

“…En ceci, les juges ne sont pas différents du commun des mortels. En effet, dans la population en gé-néral, les corrélations entre l'évaluation de la gravité de divers délits et la sévérité des peines proposées pour ces délits est très forte (Blumstein et Cohen, 1980). La relation est si forte que l'on peut penser que, dans l'esprit des gens, la sévérité de la peine est un moyen d'exprimer un jugement sur la gravité du crime.…”