Casey Prater

31561101
Thursday 10am

ATS 1423 Essay Plan Template

Introduction
- In certain situations, a longer and harsher prison sentence is not the right
approach to reduction of crime and the protection of the community, such as in
Richard’s culpable driving case.
- (Sentencing Advisory Council, 2010)

Body
Paragraph 1
- The first paragraph will cover the first aim of sentencing, that being just
punishment, and how the given statement goes against this first aim.
- Through longer and harsher prison sentences a disconnect becomes apparent,
between the punishment being balanced with the crime committed.
- (Hough, Roberts and Jackson, 2008) The key aspect of the report I’ll be drawing
from is that the public sees ‘careless’ driving as less serious than drunk driving or
disqualified driving and thinks a 5-year maximum sentence is appropriate due to
the unintentional nature.
- (Bagaric, 2014) Taking points from this journal about how sentences should be
about the specific charge and not to make an example of the person.

Paragraph 2
- This paragraph will cover the specific and general deterrence, and more how the
given statement of longer and harsher prison sentences may not deter people
specifically, as a longer sentence may mean that when they are released, there
are no services for them to build a life and some people may be left to return to
crime to survive. It may also mean for general deterrence that the community
may not approve of the stark punishment increase and as a community may
challenge the punishment.
- This paragraph will connect to my argument as it explains how the thoughts of
increasing prison sentences and making them harsher could be more detrimental
to the community and individuals, thereby not protecting the community or
reducing crime at all.
- (Carr, 2014) Addresses how general deterrence should not impact on a specific
criminal sentence.
- (Abrams, 2010) A study about specific deterrence and the impact of how long a
sentence is on the recidivism rate.

Paragraph 3
- This paragraph will discuss how a greater focus on rehabilitation can be the key
to the goals of a reduced crime rate and protection of the community, that the
given statement wants, without creating harsher or longer prison sentences.
 - This paragraph relates to my main argument by supplying an insight to a more
reasonable, person focussed, solution.
- (Ardino, Milani and Di Blasio, 2013) can aid in explanations surrounding the
importance of rehabilitation in the prevention and reduction of re-offending.
- (Ward, Day and Casey, 2006) Gives an insight into the current rehabilitation
practices in prisons in Australasia, as well as areas where rehabilitation can have
a greater focus.
- (Baldry, McDonnell, Maplestone and Peeters, 2006) This journal discusses the
factors surrounding ex-prisoners and homelessness in Australia. This will be used
to explain the importance of a focus on rehabilitation and support services in
ensuring that ex-prisoners do not have to return to crime to survive.

Paragraph 4
- This paragraph will focus on the sentencing aim of denunciation, and how
increasing the length and harshness of prison sentences will clearly condemn the
accused’s actions but may cause public uprise due to the unbalanced nature of
the sentence.
- This will relate to my overall argument as it is a counteractive point towards
protecting the community.
- (Anderson, 2012) This journal will be referenced when discussing denunciation
due to its debate surrounding whether the ultimate sentence of life in prison is
overused and too popular, therefore being an unlevelled, non-person focussed
sentence.
- (Frankel, 1972) This journal will be used to discuss the disconnection between
the main aim of denunciation, being its representation of the community’s voice,
and its presentation of the judge’s plans instead.

Paragraph 5
- The last paragraph will focus on protection of the community, and how through
rehabilitation and other avenues of dealing with criminals, the community can be
protected to a greater degree, rather than through solely locking away criminals
and expecting them to become functioning members of society.
- This paragraph will address the main argument in connection to the given
statement from a wide range of politicians. As it does call for the protection of
the community, but the given proposal of longer and harsher prison sentences is
not an efficient approach.
- (Visher and Travis, 2003) This journal will aid in the explanation of how a longer
sentence could be detrimental towards the outcome of protecting the
community.
- (Richardson and Freiberg, 2004) Legislation introduced that could make
sentencing of accused’s unnecessarily longer due to the focus on protecting the
community.

Conclusion
- The essay will be concluded with a summary of all main points in correlation to
the five aims of sentencing. As well as a summary of Richard’s case in terms of a
better approach to reduction of crime and protection of the community.
References (not included in the page count)
Abrams, D.S. (2010). Building Criminal Capital vs. Specific Deterrence: The Effect of
Incarceration Length on Recidivism. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Anderson, John L. (2012). The label of life imprisonment in Australia: A principled or

populist approach to an ultimate sentence [online]. University of New South Wales
Law Journal, The, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2012: 747-778. Availability:
<https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=074795302645291;res=IELH
SS> ISSN: 0313-0096. [cited 16 Sep 20]

Ardino, V., Milani, L. and Di Blasio, P. (2013). PTSD and re-offending risk: the mediating
role of worry and a negative perception of other people’s support. European Journal
of Psychotraumatology, [online] 4(1), p.21382. Available at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3402/ejpt.v4i0.21382 [Accessed 28 Apr.
2020].

Bagaric, M. (2014). The Punishment Should Fit the Crime-Not the Prior Convictions Of the
Person That Committed the Crime: An Argument for Less Impact Being Accorded to
Previous Convictions in Sentencing. The San Diego Law Review, 51(2).
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1555387167/

Baldry, E, McDonnell, D, Maplestone, P & Peeters, M., (2006), ‘Ex-Prisoners, Homelessness

and the State in Australia’, Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, vol.
39, no. 1, pp. 20–33.

Carr, K. (2014). An argument against using general deterrence as a factor in criminal

sentencing. Cumberland Law Review, 44(2), pp.249–281.

Frankel, M. E., (1972). Lawlessness in Sentencing. University of Cincinnati Law Review,

41(1)

Hough, M., Roberts, J.V. and Jackson, J. (2008). Attitudes to the sentencing of offences
involving death by driving. p.59.

Richardson, E. & Freiberg, A., (2004). Protecting Dangerous Offenders from the
Community: The Application of Protective Sentencing Laws in Victoria. Criminology
and Criminal Justice, 4(1), pp.81–102.

Sentencing Advisory Council (2010). You Be The Judge. [online]

virtualjudge.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au. Available at:
https://virtualjudge.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au.

Visher, C.A. and Travis, J. (2003). Transitions from Prison to Community: Understanding
Individual Pathways. Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), pp.89–113.
Ward, T., Day, A. and Casey, S. (2006). Offender Rehabilitation Down Under. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation, 43(3), pp.73–83.