Judges’ perspective on the deterrent effect of the suspended sentence: An empirical study.

• In Event: The Rationales and Goals of Sentencing

Abstract

In the Dutch criminal justice system the judge has the possibility to impose a (partially) suspended sentence. What are the considerations of the judge when deciding to impose a suspended sentence or not? More specifically, in which way do characteristics of the offense and the offender play a role in the decision making process? And which goals of punishment can be achieved by a suspended sentence, according to the judges? In order to answer these questions, two types of data have been collected. First, quantitative data were gathered by studying 1000 court decisions in criminal cases. Subsequently, qualitative data were collected by interviewing 15 judges about the appropriateness of a suspended sentence for fictitious criminal cases. In these interviews, judges were also asked about their perspective on the goals of punishment of the suspended sentence and their knowledge on the effectiveness in reducing the risk of new offenses. It appeared that the judges regard the suspended sentence as an important tool in their effort to prevent recidivism. It provides them possibilities to impose “tailor-made” sentences, that intervene on specific aspects of the offender’s life related to recidivism.

Authors

• Joke Harte, VU University Amsterdam / NSCR

• Marijke Malsch, NSCR

• Doris van Dijk, VU University Amsterdam

• Bas Vergouw, NSCR