Common Law Sentencing of Mentally Impaired Offenders in Australian Courts: A Call for Coherence and Consistency
File version
Author(s)
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Ian Freckelton
Date
Size
208411 bytes
File type(s)
application/pdf
Location
License
Abstract
This article discusses the common law sentencing of mentally impaired offenders in Australian courts. In Part A, the author discusses the significant correlation between mental impairment and crime. In Part B the author considers how courts have used different sentencing purposes (incapacitation, rehabilitation, deterrence, and proportionate retribution) in determining appropriate sentences for this class of offender. The author highlights the inconsistencies that have developed within and between jurisdictions. In Part C the author argues that the inconsistencies have arisen as a result of the theoretically incoherent use of general deterrence, rather than proportionality, as a site for the consideration of diminished offender culpability.
Journal Title
Psychiatry Psychology and Law
Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume
16
Issue
2
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement
© 2009 Routledge. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal website for access to the definitive, published version
Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject
Criminal Law and Procedure
Forensic Psychology
Psychology
Cognitive Sciences
Law