Open Access Repository

Aggravating or Mitigating? Comparing Judges’ and Jurors’ Views on Four Ambiguous Sentencing Factors

Warner, Kate, Spiranovic, C ORCID: 0000-0002-5270-8719, Freiberg, A, Davis, J and Bartels, L 2018 , 'Aggravating or Mitigating? Comparing Judges’ and Jurors’ Views on Four Ambiguous Sentencing Factors' , Journal of Judicial Administration, vol. 28, no. 1 , pp. 51-66 .

Full text not available from this repository.


Mental disorder, intellectual disability, intoxication and drug addiction arefactors that are often raised in sentencing hearings, but the effect that thesefour conditions can have on an offender’s sentence is rarely studied. Thisarticle fills two gaps in our understanding of the relevance of these ambiguoussentencing factors: first, by analysing how judges in the County Court ofVictoria responded to these factors in 122 sentencing cases relating to 140sentenced offenders; and second, by comparing the views of the judgeswith those of 426 jurors who had tried those cases and who participatedin the Victorian Jury Sentencing Study. It concludes that lay opinion on therelevance of these factors does not always align with judicial practice anddiscusses the implications of these findings.

Item Type: Article
Authors/Creators:Warner, Kate and Spiranovic, C and Freiberg, A and Davis, J and Bartels, L
Keywords: sentencing factors, aggravating, mitigating
Journal or Publication Title: Journal of Judicial Administration
Publisher: Lawbook Co.
ISSN: 1036-7918
Copyright Information:

Copyright 2018 Thomson Reuters

Related URLs:
Item Statistics: View statistics for this item

Actions (login required)

Item Control Page Item Control Page