1 Panel 2, Position 6 Jack D. Ripper

2 Article Title: “The Power of Diversion: Intermediate Sanctions and Sentencing Disparity Under Presumptive Guidelines.” Hypotheses: The likelihood of being sentenced to prison, jail or probation rather than an “intermediate punishment” (e.g., community service, house arrest, fine) is greater for males and members of minority groups This likelihood is also greater for persons with serious criminal records and those who commit more serious crimes Were the hypotheses confirmed? Yes, for both

3 Implications  Intermediate punishments are a relatively new “tool.” They are also relatively expensive. Cannot be used, or used as extensively, by poorer jurisdictions. Intermediate punishments may be inherently unsuitable for use in serious crimes and for serious offenders. Intermediate punishments are much less likely to be used for males and minorities. Could “social inequities” be affecting judicial decision-making practices?

4 One way to prevent unnecessary disparities is through sentencing guidelines. Shoplifters might be fined, while vandals could be sentenced to community service. Many jurisdictions lack policies governing the use of intermediate sanctions Use varies greatly from case to case, and between judges. What of importance is there still to learn? Judges have different attitudes and philosophies. Could these affect their decisions to use an intermediate punishment, and what type?

5 How could future studies be improved? Answering all the questions raised requires a much larger study Need more recent data Need to cover a larger variety of jurisdictions. More attention should be paid to judicial decision-making process, and to existing guidelines. Could help answer why males and minorities are less likely to receive an intermediate punishment.