CONSULTATION QUESTIONS ON PROPOSED SENTENCING GUIDELINES

THE CONSULTATION QUESTIONS

Please answer as many or as few and at whatever length as suits the reader in the boxes below.




Question Title

* 1. Name

Question Title

* 2. Rank & Organisation

Question Title

* 3. Date

Date / Time

Question Title

* 4. The SAC proposes a scheme of guidelines which start by assessing the seriousness of the offence by consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors and then moving on to consider the offender by reference to personal factors which aggravate or mitigate his position. This follows the Aguillera model from Trinidad & Tobago[1] rather than the England & Wales model, in which culpability is assessed first and then followed by harm factors.



Do you agree with this scheme?

If so, could it be better refined?

If not, what alternative scheme would be preferable, and why?



See Aguillera v the State 2015, as above, or for the E&W guidelines https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/crown-court/.

Question Title

* 5. The SAC has developed a grid system which identifies proportions of maximum sentences, reflected as percentages, to accommodate the different statutory maximum sentences and promote consistency of sentencing approach in the different States.

 
Do you agree with the use of proportions of the maximum sentences?

Question Title

* 6. The SAC has formulated a starting point within a range which requires sentencers to assess the offence and offender before determining the sentence to be imposed. It is expected that the overwhelming majority of sentences will fall within the ranges set down and only in exceptional circumstances should a sentence outside the range be imposed.

Do you agree with the scheme of a starting point within a range?

Question Title

* 7. The SAC has proposed non-exhaustive lists of aggravating and mitigating factors pertaining to the offence and the offender.

 

Do you agree with the lists?

Should other factors be added?

If so, which?

Question Title

* 8. Applying the maximum sentence on the island where you live or practice, do you agree with the sentences contemplated? If not, what sentences would you propose and why?

Question Title

* 9. DRUGS SENTENCING GUIDELINE  Click Here to View

The SAC has drawn up guidelines for sentencing in cases involving cocaine and cannabis only, as these are the drugs most often seized. It is proposed that courts will accommodate any other type of drug within the higher or lower sentence categories.

 

Do you agree with this approach?

If not, which other types of drug require specific identification in the guideline?

Question Title

* 10. The SAC has categorised the seriousness of the offence by a combination of weight or value or purity or strength of the drugs and role played by the offender.

 
Do you agree with this approach?

Are the quantities correct?

If not, what alternative means of assessment would you recommend?

Question Title

* 11. RAPE AND UNLAWFUL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE Click Here to View (Rape) OR Click Here to View (USI)

The SAC has assessed the seriousness of these offences by reference to the harm caused and the culpability of the offender.

 
Do you agree with this approach?

Are the categories correct?

If not, what alternative categories would you recommend?

Question Title

* 12. THEFT AND ROBBERY Click Here to View (Theft) OR Click Here to View (Robbery)

The SAC has assessed the seriousness of these offences by reference to the value of the loss and harm caused and the culpability of the offender.



Do you agree with this approach?

Are the categories correct?

If not, what alternative categories would you recommend?

Question Title

* 13. For theft, the SAC has accommodated sentences for both the High Court and the Magistrates Court in one guideline.

 

If you foresee problems, please say what these might be and how they could be resolved?

Question Title

* 14. Please state any other comments whether general or specific to the guidelines you may have. 

0 of 14 answered
 

T