Sentencing: Re-Thinking Research and Policy
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Elektronisch E-Book |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Cham
Springer International Publishing AG
2020
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Beschreibung: | Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources |
| Beschreibung: | 1 online resource (187 pages) |
| ISBN: | 9783030010607 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nmm a2200000zc 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV047693053 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 00000000000000.0 | ||
| 007 | cr|uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220119s2020 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 9783030010607 |9 978-3-030-01060-7 | ||
| 035 | |a (ZDB-30-PQE)EBC6002000 | ||
| 035 | |a (ZDB-30-PAD)EBC6002000 | ||
| 035 | |a (ZDB-89-EBL)EBL6002000 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)1134854355 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV047693053 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 082 | 0 | |a 345.0772 | |
| 084 | |a PH 2260 |0 (DE-625)135982: |2 rvk | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Tata, Cyrus |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Sentencing |b Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| 264 | 1 | |a Cham |b Springer International Publishing AG |c 2020 | |
| 264 | 4 | |c ©2020 | |
| 300 | |a 1 online resource (187 pages) | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies | |
| 500 | |a Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources | ||
| 505 | 8 | |a Intro -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process -- Contents -- List of Tables -- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma -- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy? -- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma -- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities -- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive -- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual -- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative -- 3 The Structure of the Book -- References -- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat -- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition -- Juridification -- Transparency -- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions -- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos -- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities -- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites? -- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge? -- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion -- The Self-Possessed Individual -- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge -- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary -- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities? -- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors' -- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors' -- 5 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing -- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves -- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts' -- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts' -- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases -- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue -- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making? -- Who Does Sentencing Work? -- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases | |
| 505 | 8 | |a The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach -- 2.5 Offender Characteristics -- Offence Versus Offender? -- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced -- 4 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions -- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension -- 2 Conceptions of Professions -- 2.1 The Trait Model -- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model -- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership -- Professional Ethics and Client Choice -- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions -- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility -- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising -- 1 Professional Boundaries -- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work -- 2 Performing Legitimacy: The Cultivation of Ideal Clientele -- 2.1 Humanisation Work Demands Acceptance of Autonomous Individual Responsibility -- The Triple Burden of Duty of Sentencing Professionals -- Seeing and Showing Humanisation Being Done -- How Humanisation Facilitates Efficient Case-Disposal -- How Humanisation Work Aids the Manifestation of the Sincere Acceptance of Punishment -- The Role of Remorse and Legitimacy in Professional Work -- 3 How Inter-professional Disconnections Generate Ideal Clientele -- 3.1 Temporal Separation? -- 3.2 Mutual Blindness -- Sovereign and Disciplinary Powers: A Symbiotic Relationship? -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 6 The Rise of Technology and the Demise of the Sentencing Professions? | |
| 505 | 8 | |a 1 Technology and the Demise of Professional Discretion? -- 2 The Genesis and Development of the Sentencing Information System -- 2.1 Conceiving and Representing Case Similarity -- 2.2 Public Access and Use to Inform Public Knowledge About Sentencing Practices? -- 2.3 User Flexibility -- 2.4 Hand-Over to the Court Service -- 3 What Does Story of the Scottish SIS Signify? -- 3.1 Are Judicial Sentencers Losing Control Sentencing to Techno-Rational Instruments? -- 3.2 A Defensive Political Initiative? -- 3.3 The Indeterminacy of SIS 'Results' -- 3.4 Voluntary Use -- 3.5 Meeting Judicial Demand -- 3.6 Are Technologies Such as the SIS De-Humanising Sentencing? -- Loss of Narrative? -- The Social Construction of Cases -- 3.7 Are Sentencers Now Mere Consumers of Meaning Rather Than the Creators'? -- 4 Mirror Images: The New Penology-Inspired Literature and the Legal-Rational Tradition -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- 7 New Directions for Research and Policy -- 1 Loosening the Grip of Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 2 What Should Sentencing Research and Policy Do Now? -- 2.1 An Interpretive Research Approach to Rules, Facts and Discretion -- What Are the Implications for Guidelines and Rule-Like Instruments? -- Making Sense of Consistency and Disparity -- 2.2 Re-thinking the Meanings of 'Efficiency' -- Is Plea Bargaining Simply a Pragmatic Necessity? -- Action Versus Communication? -- 2.3 Study the Experiences of People Proceeded Against -- Professional Performance -- The 'What Works?' Question and the Re-generation of Offenders -- Focus on the Interfaces and Ancillary Staff -- 2.4 Parsimony and Proportionality' -- Prison as 'the Last Resort' Embeds Prison as the Default -- Two Public Principles -- 3 Conclusions and Further Questions -- References -- Index | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Sentences (Criminal procedure) | |
| 776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Druck-Ausgabe |a Tata, Cyrus |t Sentencing: a Social Process |d Cham : Springer International Publishing AG,c2020 |z 9783030010591 |
| 912 | |a ZDB-30-PQE | ||
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033077046 | ||
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804183179625496576 |
|---|---|
| adam_txt | |
| any_adam_object | |
| any_adam_object_boolean | |
| author | Tata, Cyrus |
| author_facet | Tata, Cyrus |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Tata, Cyrus |
| author_variant | c t ct |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV047693053 |
| classification_rvk | PH 2260 |
| collection | ZDB-30-PQE |
| contents | Intro -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process -- Contents -- List of Tables -- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma -- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy? -- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma -- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities -- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive -- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual -- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative -- 3 The Structure of the Book -- References -- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat -- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition -- Juridification -- Transparency -- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions -- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos -- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities -- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites? -- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge? -- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion -- The Self-Possessed Individual -- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge -- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary -- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities? -- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors' -- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors' -- 5 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing -- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves -- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts' -- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts' -- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases -- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue -- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making? -- Who Does Sentencing Work? -- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach -- 2.5 Offender Characteristics -- Offence Versus Offender? -- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced -- 4 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions -- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension -- 2 Conceptions of Professions -- 2.1 The Trait Model -- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model -- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership -- Professional Ethics and Client Choice -- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions -- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility -- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising -- 1 Professional Boundaries -- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work -- 2 Performing Legitimacy: The Cultivation of Ideal Clientele -- 2.1 Humanisation Work Demands Acceptance of Autonomous Individual Responsibility -- The Triple Burden of Duty of Sentencing Professionals -- Seeing and Showing Humanisation Being Done -- How Humanisation Facilitates Efficient Case-Disposal -- How Humanisation Work Aids the Manifestation of the Sincere Acceptance of Punishment -- The Role of Remorse and Legitimacy in Professional Work -- 3 How Inter-professional Disconnections Generate Ideal Clientele -- 3.1 Temporal Separation? -- 3.2 Mutual Blindness -- Sovereign and Disciplinary Powers: A Symbiotic Relationship? -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 6 The Rise of Technology and the Demise of the Sentencing Professions? 1 Technology and the Demise of Professional Discretion? -- 2 The Genesis and Development of the Sentencing Information System -- 2.1 Conceiving and Representing Case Similarity -- 2.2 Public Access and Use to Inform Public Knowledge About Sentencing Practices? -- 2.3 User Flexibility -- 2.4 Hand-Over to the Court Service -- 3 What Does Story of the Scottish SIS Signify? -- 3.1 Are Judicial Sentencers Losing Control Sentencing to Techno-Rational Instruments? -- 3.2 A Defensive Political Initiative? -- 3.3 The Indeterminacy of SIS 'Results' -- 3.4 Voluntary Use -- 3.5 Meeting Judicial Demand -- 3.6 Are Technologies Such as the SIS De-Humanising Sentencing? -- Loss of Narrative? -- The Social Construction of Cases -- 3.7 Are Sentencers Now Mere Consumers of Meaning Rather Than the Creators'? -- 4 Mirror Images: The New Penology-Inspired Literature and the Legal-Rational Tradition -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- 7 New Directions for Research and Policy -- 1 Loosening the Grip of Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 2 What Should Sentencing Research and Policy Do Now? -- 2.1 An Interpretive Research Approach to Rules, Facts and Discretion -- What Are the Implications for Guidelines and Rule-Like Instruments? -- Making Sense of Consistency and Disparity -- 2.2 Re-thinking the Meanings of 'Efficiency' -- Is Plea Bargaining Simply a Pragmatic Necessity? -- Action Versus Communication? -- 2.3 Study the Experiences of People Proceeded Against -- Professional Performance -- The 'What Works?' Question and the Re-generation of Offenders -- Focus on the Interfaces and Ancillary Staff -- 2.4 Parsimony and Proportionality' -- Prison as 'the Last Resort' Embeds Prison as the Default -- Two Public Principles -- 3 Conclusions and Further Questions -- References -- Index |
| ctrlnum | (ZDB-30-PQE)EBC6002000 (ZDB-30-PAD)EBC6002000 (ZDB-89-EBL)EBL6002000 (OCoLC)1134854355 (DE-599)BVBBV047693053 |
| dewey-full | 345.0772 |
| dewey-hundreds | 300 - Social sciences |
| dewey-ones | 345 - Criminal law |
| dewey-raw | 345.0772 |
| dewey-search | 345.0772 |
| dewey-sort | 3345.0772 |
| dewey-tens | 340 - Law |
| discipline | Rechtswissenschaft |
| discipline_str_mv | Rechtswissenschaft |
| format | Electronic eBook |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>06937nmm a2200409zc 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV047693053</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">00000000000000.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220119s2020 |||| o||u| ||||||eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9783030010607</subfield><subfield code="9">978-3-030-01060-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-30-PQE)EBC6002000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-30-PAD)EBC6002000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ZDB-89-EBL)EBL6002000</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1134854355</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV047693053</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">345.0772</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PH 2260</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)135982:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tata, Cyrus</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Sentencing</subfield><subfield code="b">Re-Thinking Research and Policy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Cham</subfield><subfield code="b">Springer International Publishing AG</subfield><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="c">©2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 online resource (187 pages)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Intro -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process -- Contents -- List of Tables -- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma -- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy? -- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma -- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities -- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive -- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual -- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative -- 3 The Structure of the Book -- References -- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat -- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition -- Juridification -- Transparency -- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions -- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos -- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities -- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites? -- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge? -- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion -- The Self-Possessed Individual -- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge -- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary -- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities? -- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors' -- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors' -- 5 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing -- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves -- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts' -- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts' -- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases -- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue -- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making? -- Who Does Sentencing Work? -- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach -- 2.5 Offender Characteristics -- Offence Versus Offender? -- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced -- 4 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions -- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension -- 2 Conceptions of Professions -- 2.1 The Trait Model -- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model -- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership -- Professional Ethics and Client Choice -- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions -- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility -- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising -- 1 Professional Boundaries -- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work -- 2 Performing Legitimacy: The Cultivation of Ideal Clientele -- 2.1 Humanisation Work Demands Acceptance of Autonomous Individual Responsibility -- The Triple Burden of Duty of Sentencing Professionals -- Seeing and Showing Humanisation Being Done -- How Humanisation Facilitates Efficient Case-Disposal -- How Humanisation Work Aids the Manifestation of the Sincere Acceptance of Punishment -- The Role of Remorse and Legitimacy in Professional Work -- 3 How Inter-professional Disconnections Generate Ideal Clientele -- 3.1 Temporal Separation? -- 3.2 Mutual Blindness -- Sovereign and Disciplinary Powers: A Symbiotic Relationship? -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 6 The Rise of Technology and the Demise of the Sentencing Professions?</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 Technology and the Demise of Professional Discretion? -- 2 The Genesis and Development of the Sentencing Information System -- 2.1 Conceiving and Representing Case Similarity -- 2.2 Public Access and Use to Inform Public Knowledge About Sentencing Practices? -- 2.3 User Flexibility -- 2.4 Hand-Over to the Court Service -- 3 What Does Story of the Scottish SIS Signify? -- 3.1 Are Judicial Sentencers Losing Control Sentencing to Techno-Rational Instruments? -- 3.2 A Defensive Political Initiative? -- 3.3 The Indeterminacy of SIS 'Results' -- 3.4 Voluntary Use -- 3.5 Meeting Judicial Demand -- 3.6 Are Technologies Such as the SIS De-Humanising Sentencing? -- Loss of Narrative? -- The Social Construction of Cases -- 3.7 Are Sentencers Now Mere Consumers of Meaning Rather Than the Creators'? -- 4 Mirror Images: The New Penology-Inspired Literature and the Legal-Rational Tradition -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- 7 New Directions for Research and Policy -- 1 Loosening the Grip of Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 2 What Should Sentencing Research and Policy Do Now? -- 2.1 An Interpretive Research Approach to Rules, Facts and Discretion -- What Are the Implications for Guidelines and Rule-Like Instruments? -- Making Sense of Consistency and Disparity -- 2.2 Re-thinking the Meanings of 'Efficiency' -- Is Plea Bargaining Simply a Pragmatic Necessity? -- Action Versus Communication? -- 2.3 Study the Experiences of People Proceeded Against -- Professional Performance -- The 'What Works?' Question and the Re-generation of Offenders -- Focus on the Interfaces and Ancillary Staff -- 2.4 Parsimony and Proportionality' -- Prison as 'the Last Resort' Embeds Prison as the Default -- Two Public Principles -- 3 Conclusions and Further Questions -- References -- Index</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sentences (Criminal procedure)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Druck-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="a">Tata, Cyrus</subfield><subfield code="t">Sentencing: a Social Process</subfield><subfield code="d">Cham : Springer International Publishing AG,c2020</subfield><subfield code="z">9783030010591</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-30-PQE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033077046</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV047693053 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-03T18:57:25Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T09:19:20Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9783030010607 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033077046 |
| oclc_num | 1134854355 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| physical | 1 online resource (187 pages) |
| psigel | ZDB-30-PQE |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publishDateSearch | 2020 |
| publishDateSort | 2020 |
| publisher | Springer International Publishing AG |
| record_format | marc |
| series2 | Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies |
| spelling | Tata, Cyrus Verfasser aut Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy Cham Springer International Publishing AG 2020 ©2020 1 online resource (187 pages) txt rdacontent c rdamedia cr rdacarrier Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources Intro -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process -- Contents -- List of Tables -- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma -- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy? -- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma -- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities -- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive -- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual -- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative -- 3 The Structure of the Book -- References -- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat -- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition -- Juridification -- Transparency -- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions -- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos -- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities -- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites? -- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge? -- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion -- The Self-Possessed Individual -- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge -- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary -- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities? -- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors' -- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors' -- 5 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing -- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves -- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts' -- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts' -- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases -- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue -- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making? -- Who Does Sentencing Work? -- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach -- 2.5 Offender Characteristics -- Offence Versus Offender? -- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced -- 4 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions -- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension -- 2 Conceptions of Professions -- 2.1 The Trait Model -- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model -- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership -- Professional Ethics and Client Choice -- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions -- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility -- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising -- 1 Professional Boundaries -- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work -- 2 Performing Legitimacy: The Cultivation of Ideal Clientele -- 2.1 Humanisation Work Demands Acceptance of Autonomous Individual Responsibility -- The Triple Burden of Duty of Sentencing Professionals -- Seeing and Showing Humanisation Being Done -- How Humanisation Facilitates Efficient Case-Disposal -- How Humanisation Work Aids the Manifestation of the Sincere Acceptance of Punishment -- The Role of Remorse and Legitimacy in Professional Work -- 3 How Inter-professional Disconnections Generate Ideal Clientele -- 3.1 Temporal Separation? -- 3.2 Mutual Blindness -- Sovereign and Disciplinary Powers: A Symbiotic Relationship? -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 6 The Rise of Technology and the Demise of the Sentencing Professions? 1 Technology and the Demise of Professional Discretion? -- 2 The Genesis and Development of the Sentencing Information System -- 2.1 Conceiving and Representing Case Similarity -- 2.2 Public Access and Use to Inform Public Knowledge About Sentencing Practices? -- 2.3 User Flexibility -- 2.4 Hand-Over to the Court Service -- 3 What Does Story of the Scottish SIS Signify? -- 3.1 Are Judicial Sentencers Losing Control Sentencing to Techno-Rational Instruments? -- 3.2 A Defensive Political Initiative? -- 3.3 The Indeterminacy of SIS 'Results' -- 3.4 Voluntary Use -- 3.5 Meeting Judicial Demand -- 3.6 Are Technologies Such as the SIS De-Humanising Sentencing? -- Loss of Narrative? -- The Social Construction of Cases -- 3.7 Are Sentencers Now Mere Consumers of Meaning Rather Than the Creators'? -- 4 Mirror Images: The New Penology-Inspired Literature and the Legal-Rational Tradition -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- 7 New Directions for Research and Policy -- 1 Loosening the Grip of Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 2 What Should Sentencing Research and Policy Do Now? -- 2.1 An Interpretive Research Approach to Rules, Facts and Discretion -- What Are the Implications for Guidelines and Rule-Like Instruments? -- Making Sense of Consistency and Disparity -- 2.2 Re-thinking the Meanings of 'Efficiency' -- Is Plea Bargaining Simply a Pragmatic Necessity? -- Action Versus Communication? -- 2.3 Study the Experiences of People Proceeded Against -- Professional Performance -- The 'What Works?' Question and the Re-generation of Offenders -- Focus on the Interfaces and Ancillary Staff -- 2.4 Parsimony and Proportionality' -- Prison as 'the Last Resort' Embeds Prison as the Default -- Two Public Principles -- 3 Conclusions and Further Questions -- References -- Index Sentences (Criminal procedure) Erscheint auch als Druck-Ausgabe Tata, Cyrus Sentencing: a Social Process Cham : Springer International Publishing AG,c2020 9783030010591 |
| spellingShingle | Tata, Cyrus Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy Intro -- Preface and Acknowledgements -- Praise for Sentencing: A Social Process -- Contents -- List of Tables -- 1 Sentencing Decision-Making: Unravelling the Enigma -- 1 Why Rethink Sentencing Research and Policy? -- 1.1 An Enduring Enigma -- 2 Sentencing as a Social Process: Three Key Qualities -- 2.1 Sentencing Decision-Making Is Neither Magic Nor Machine, but Interpretive -- 2.2 Sentencing Is Processual -- 2.3 Sentencing Is Performative -- 3 The Structure of the Book -- References -- 2 Sentencing Research and Policy: Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Two Giants of Sentencing Thought in Combat -- 1.1 The Legal-Rational Tradition -- Juridification -- Transparency -- 1.2 The Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- How the New Penology-Inspired Literature Fortifies the Judicial-Defensive Tradition -- 1.3 The Two Traditions Share the Same Assumptions -- 2 Autonomous Individualism and the Sentencing Cosmos -- 2.1 Separate Autonomous Individual Entities -- 3 Law Versus Discretion: Are Legal Rules and Discretion Really Opposites? -- 3.1 Coercion Versus Freedom: The Autonomous Individual Judge? -- An Asocial Conception of Freedom and Coercion -- The Self-Possessed Individual -- Discretion as the Personal Property of the Autonomous Individual Judge -- Gender and the Rule-Discretion Binary -- 4 Case Factors: Autonomous Individual Entities? -- 4.1 The Analysis of 'Factors' -- 4.2 Problematising 'Factors' -- 5 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 3 The Social Production of Sentencing -- 1 How the Discretion-Versus-Rules Binary Dissolves -- 2 The Indivisibility of 'Rules' and 'Facts' -- 2.1 The Devil Is in 'the Facts' -- Case 'Facts' and the Making of Cases -- 2.2 The Devil Is in the Rule-Facts Dialogue -- 2.3 What Does 'Process' Mean in Sentencing Decision-Making? -- Who Does Sentencing Work? -- 2.4 Multi-conviction Cases The Need for Typified Whole Offence Approach -- 2.5 Offender Characteristics -- Offence Versus Offender? -- 3 How Reason-Giving and Accountability Are Socially Produced -- 4 Conclusions and Implications -- References -- 4 The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism -- 1 Constituting the Rules-Facts Dialogue: The Role of the Sentencing Professions -- 1.1 Understanding Professional Work: The Problem of Apprehension -- 2 Conceptions of Professions -- 2.1 The Trait Model -- 2.2 The Proprietorial-Control Model -- The Application of Abstract Knowledge and Professional Ownership -- Professional Ethics and Client Choice -- 3 The Individualising Work of the Sentencing Professions -- 3.1 Autonomous Individualisation in the Discourse of Professional Responsibility -- 3.2 The Autonomous Individualisation of the Subject of Sentencing -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 5 The Humanising Work of the Sentencing Professions: Individualising and Normalising -- 1 Professional Boundaries -- 1.1 Inter-professional Competition and the Division of Sentencing Work -- 2 Performing Legitimacy: The Cultivation of Ideal Clientele -- 2.1 Humanisation Work Demands Acceptance of Autonomous Individual Responsibility -- The Triple Burden of Duty of Sentencing Professionals -- Seeing and Showing Humanisation Being Done -- How Humanisation Facilitates Efficient Case-Disposal -- How Humanisation Work Aids the Manifestation of the Sincere Acceptance of Punishment -- The Role of Remorse and Legitimacy in Professional Work -- 3 How Inter-professional Disconnections Generate Ideal Clientele -- 3.1 Temporal Separation? -- 3.2 Mutual Blindness -- Sovereign and Disciplinary Powers: A Symbiotic Relationship? -- 4 Conclusions -- References -- 6 The Rise of Technology and the Demise of the Sentencing Professions? 1 Technology and the Demise of Professional Discretion? -- 2 The Genesis and Development of the Sentencing Information System -- 2.1 Conceiving and Representing Case Similarity -- 2.2 Public Access and Use to Inform Public Knowledge About Sentencing Practices? -- 2.3 User Flexibility -- 2.4 Hand-Over to the Court Service -- 3 What Does Story of the Scottish SIS Signify? -- 3.1 Are Judicial Sentencers Losing Control Sentencing to Techno-Rational Instruments? -- 3.2 A Defensive Political Initiative? -- 3.3 The Indeterminacy of SIS 'Results' -- 3.4 Voluntary Use -- 3.5 Meeting Judicial Demand -- 3.6 Are Technologies Such as the SIS De-Humanising Sentencing? -- Loss of Narrative? -- The Social Construction of Cases -- 3.7 Are Sentencers Now Mere Consumers of Meaning Rather Than the Creators'? -- 4 Mirror Images: The New Penology-Inspired Literature and the Legal-Rational Tradition -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- 7 New Directions for Research and Policy -- 1 Loosening the Grip of Presumed Autonomous Individualism -- 2 What Should Sentencing Research and Policy Do Now? -- 2.1 An Interpretive Research Approach to Rules, Facts and Discretion -- What Are the Implications for Guidelines and Rule-Like Instruments? -- Making Sense of Consistency and Disparity -- 2.2 Re-thinking the Meanings of 'Efficiency' -- Is Plea Bargaining Simply a Pragmatic Necessity? -- Action Versus Communication? -- 2.3 Study the Experiences of People Proceeded Against -- Professional Performance -- The 'What Works?' Question and the Re-generation of Offenders -- Focus on the Interfaces and Ancillary Staff -- 2.4 Parsimony and Proportionality' -- Prison as 'the Last Resort' Embeds Prison as the Default -- Two Public Principles -- 3 Conclusions and Further Questions -- References -- Index Sentences (Criminal procedure) |
| title | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_auth | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_exact_search | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_full | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_fullStr | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Sentencing Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| title_short | Sentencing |
| title_sort | sentencing re thinking research and policy |
| title_sub | Re-Thinking Research and Policy |
| topic | Sentences (Criminal procedure) |
| topic_facet | Sentences (Criminal procedure) |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tatacyrus sentencingrethinkingresearchandpolicy |