Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAnthony, Thalia
dc.contributor.authorMarchetti, Elena
dc.contributor.authorBehrendt, Larissa
dc.contributor.authorLongman, Craig
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-15T02:05:24Z
dc.date.available2018-10-15T02:05:24Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn1036-7918
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/378227
dc.description.abstractThere is a growing pool of research on court outcomes in sentencing Indigenous people but relatively little research on the information available to sentencing courts to consider Indigenous background. Although Australian courts mostly have discretion to consider Indigenous circumstances, such consideration depends on submissions and reports tendered in court. The High Court in Bugmy v The Queen (2013) stated “it is necessary to point to material tending to establish [the defendant’s deprived] background” if it is to be relevant in sentencing.1 The main repository of court information on defendant background is counsel submissions and, where the defendant is facing imprisonment, Community Corrections’ Presentence Reports. Based on 18 interviews with judicial officers, lawyers and court staff in New South Wales and Victoria, this article identifies the need for more information on relevant Indigenous background factors in sentencing. The introduction of discrete Indigenous community reports that present Indigenous perspectives on the person’s background and rehabilitation was regarded as important for addressing the Bugmy requirement. This article makes reference to the wide-scale experience in Canada of First Nations presentence reports, known as “Gladue Reports”, and the more small-scale Australian experiences of Indigenous cultural reports, to indicate how this material can enhance individualised justice in sentencing Indigenous peoples.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.sponsorshipGriffith University
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherLawbook
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.thomsonreuters.com.au/journal-of-judicial-administration-online/productdetail/97179
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom121
dc.relation.ispartofpageto140
dc.relation.ispartofissue3
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Judicial Administration
dc.relation.ispartofvolume26
dc.relation.urihttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/ARC/FT140100313
dc.relation.grantIDFT140100313
dc.relation.fundersARC
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCourts and Sentencing
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLaw
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode160203
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1801
dc.titleIndividualised Justice through Indigenous Community Reports in Sentencing
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
dc.description.versionPublished
gro.rights.copyright© 2017 Thomson Reuters. This article was first published by Thomson Reuters in the Journal of Judicial Administration and should be cited as Thalia Anthony, Individualised Justice through Indigenous Community Reports in Sentencing, (2017) 26 JJA 121. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorMarchetti, Elena M.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record