Lawyers divided over sentence

Stephen Ward
Friday 24 March 1995 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Magistrates are allowed under offical guidelines to give harsher penalties for an "offender in a position of authority".

Under a sentencing sheet supplied by the Magistrates Association, they are told that for common assault they can sentence offenders to anything from community service up to six months in jail.

They are told first to consider the seriousness of the offence, and to be more harsh if it is premeditated, committed while on bail for another offence or on a "particularly vulnerable victim". They should also add weight if it is part of a group attack, is on a public servant including a policeman, or if the offender is in authority.

On the other hand, if the attack is impulsive, or trivial, or provoked, they should regard the offence as less serious.

Having taken such factors into account, magistrates should ask themselves: "Is it serious enough for a community penalty. Is compensation, discharge or a fine appropriate, or is it so serious that only custody is appropriate?"

Magistrates then have to take into account any mitigation, such as a guilty plea, age, mental or physical health, the degree of remorse shown, and whether the defendant has offered any voluntary compensation to his victim. If they fine him, they are reminded to increase or decrease the amount according to the defendant's means.

Senior lawyers were split on the sentence given to Cantona yesterday. At a meeting of the Criminal Law committee of the Law Society yesterday, in a straw poll, half the solicitors believed Cantona's prominence as an idol justified the penalty, while half felt it was harsh.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in