Is it possible for convicted violent offenders to remain unnamed?

YumCha

Really random question (disclaimer: I'm not Irish, so not totally familiar with the system here).

The media over the past year have covered a number of stories where a violent offender got off with no jail time - mostly suspended sentences, and a fine.

However there seems to be a lot of cases which don't get reported on, so I was wondering the following:
- Are the Courts Service required to publish all decisions in all cases in all courts?
- If not, is it possible that a violent offender could be convicted, given a suspended sentence, and walk back into their community with no one none the wiser?

I guess what I'm trying to get at is what happens to these judgments if they're not made public by the media...

Thanks for the help...

ResearchWill

YumCha wrote: »

Really random question (disclaimer: I'm not Irish, so not totally familiar with the system here).

The media over the past year have covered a number of stories where a violent offender got off with no jail time - mostly suspended sentences, and a fine.

However there seems to be a lot of cases which don't get reported on, so I was wondering the following:
- Are the Courts Service required to publish all decisions in all cases in all courts?
- If not, is it possible that a violent offender could be convicted, given a suspended sentence, and walk back into their community with no one none the wiser?

I guess what I'm trying to get at is what happens to these judgments if they're not made public by the media...

Thanks for the help...

Criminal matters in Ireland are heard in public and there is no probation on reporting names, except in cases of rape and sexuality assault, but only if by naming the guilty party the victim can be identified. Example person A rapes his niece, by identifying person A the victim is then know. In all other cases the convicted person will be identified.

YumCha

Thanks for that - when you say "will be identified" though - does that mean that their name is published by the Courts Service?

And if so, where? They only seem to publish a limited amount of judgments on their site.

ResearchWill

YumCha wrote: »

Thanks for that - when you say "will be identified" though - does that mean that their name is published by the Courts Service?

And if so, where? They only seem to publish a limited amount of judgments on their site.

If there is a written judgement then it will be published. Most District court and Circuit court cases do not have written judgements. The vast majority of criminal cases are in the district courts up and down the country with hundreds of cases going on every day. But local papers usually send reporters into ourt to report on cases of interest. It is also possible to sit in any court as a member of the public and watch cases.

YumCha

Thanks again - would be interested to know if this is similar to other Western court systems... Is kind of crazy that someone could be convicted of a serious violent crime, and potentially not receive any jail time, plus not have their name/photo published...

johnnyskeleton

YumCha wrote: »

Thanks again - would be interested to know if this is similar to other Western court systems... Is kind of crazy that someone could be convicted of a serious violent crime, and potentially not receive any jail time, plus not have their name/photo published...

So what would you have? A list containing the hundreds of people convicted each day in every national newspaper?

Pawwed Rig

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So what would you have? A list containing the hundreds of people convicted each day in every national newspaper?

Are there hundreds of people convicted of serious violent crime everyday? OP the worst offences are reported on. Where the offence is serious the persons name and photo will often be printed. Unfortunately even before the person is convicted they may appear named in the newspaper which can be unfair in the event that they are found to be innocent.

YumCha

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So what would you have? A list containing the hundreds of people convicted each day in every national newspaper?

That's not what I'm suggesting - but at the least, I would have thought that this information would be available on the Courts Service website (which is isn't).

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Are there hundreds of people convicted of serious violent crime everyday? OP the worst offences are reported on. Where the offence is serious the persons name and photo will often be printed.

Define worst offences, and can you say with certainty the number of "worst offences" reported vs not reported? What constitutes serious vs not serious?

My point is that the courts service provides very little information - and there definitely isn't hundreds of cases a day, which almost makes it worse that they can't report on it properly.

From their 2011 report, in the Assault category for the Circuit Court, of 1,573 assault offences against 655 defendants, there were 860 sentences (it's unclear how this relates to number of defendants).

Of those 860 sentences:
- 46 got Community Service
- 339 received a Suspended Sentence
- 11 received a fine
- 106 received jail time of up to 2 years
- 290 received jail time of more than 2 years
- 68 received some unknown "other" punishment

That's 46% of sentences which don't result in jail time, and no indication of how this relates to actual numbers of defendants, 'seriousness' of the crime, repeat offenders etc.

My interest in this crosses a few things: accountability for judges for one, are victims of serious assault receiving justice, whether this is enough of a deterrence for prevention, is this having an impact on crime rates, are sentences being driven primarily by other factors (i.e. overcrowding in jails), etc. etc.

I'm also very concerned about the lack of transparency for something which has such a huge impact on the public.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Unfortunately even before the person is convicted they may appear named in the newspaper which can be unfair in the event that they are found to be innocent.

Also I am talking very specifically about publicising judgments - NOT naming people prior to this.

LowKeyReturn

YumCha wrote: »

My interest in this crosses a few things: accountability for judges for one, are victims of serious assault receiving justice, whether this is enough of a deterrence for prevention, is this having an impact on crime rates, are sentences being driven primarily by other factors (i.e. overcrowding in jails), etc. etc.

I'm also very concerned about the lack of transparency for something which has such a huge impact on the public.

The Court system is very transparent here. One of the issues is that the Children's court is held in Camera. Family / Children's court system is actively being looked into. I've had the opportunity to speak to a couple of Supreme Court judges on the subject of TV cameras in court rooms. I don't wish to recount specific answers and perhaps misrepresent what was said but there is no general, unfounded objection. This accusation, lack of transparency, is levelled fairly regularly at the Irish court system without foundation. As is the accusation that Judges are not held accountable.

Sentences in Ireland are not fixed and is a major strength of our criminal justice system. Every case is unique and therefore ever sentence is unique. How many exceptions to a rule do we need to codify before we allow highly qualified, experienced and accountable individuals simply make the decision based on the facts in front of them? However it would be completely misleading to not consider external factors, the biggest one being overcrowding and the lack of provision for adolescent offenders in Ireland.

We've a major issue with over-crowding in the Irish prison system. Billions need to be poured into the system to get it working properly. I know it's harsh but do we give violent offenders shorter sentences or close down hospitals?

The next issue is that prison doesn't do what most people think it does. Look at the correlation between crime rates, recidivism and prison populations. The US, probably one of the harshest prison systems in the western world, simply does not bear out that longer sentences reduce crime. Conditions sees a similar issue - Ghana has terrible prison conditions, people have not magically stopped committing crime. South Africa has appalling punishments doled out by the local community, police and I suspect the prisons are anything but pleasant. If I say Johannesburg to most people they think murder rate.

If you take Japan where sentences are notably short, you see a low crime rate. Looking to the Nordic/Scandinavian countries you see a similarly low prison population, innovation in sentencing and low crime rate. Granted there are cultural and social differences in these countries, but again do we pour billions into a broken prison system or would be be better addressing some key social issues?

YumCha

Transparent in terms of hearings being open and public yes (with the exception of the one you mentioned), but I'm talking about a different kind of transparency in terms of access and availability of information... does that have no foundation?

And I should have clarified that when I was talking about accountability/transparency for judges I meant it in the same vein - that more information should be made public. If anything, I think it would probably be beneficial as people could see the factors in relation to the sentencing. Would you have an objection to that?

I totally agree that the issues of sentencing, prison overcrowding and certainly the effectiveness of prison are incredibly complex - and I don't have any good answers on that front. But my point is that the information isn't really there to be able to formulate an opinion on it.

Your example was a binary choice between putting money into prisons or having hospital cuts - but there surely has to be some tipping point where the cost of crime to the state (i.e. via property damage, hospitals, etc.) becomes a factor. As stated before, I'm not sure where that point is, or what exactly should be done, I'm just uneasy with the amount of suspended sentences/fines handed out with little to no information made public.

LowKeyReturn

YumCha wrote: »

Transparent in terms of hearings being open and public yes (with the exception of the one you mentioned), but I'm talking about a different kind of transparency in terms of access and availability of information... does that have no foundation?

Frankly I believe it does to some degree, we've digital recording in the CCJ I've no idea if it's being used. Frankly I don't see why the digital recordings of every court case, in all their boring glory, shouldn't be available for download. Cases as far back as Roe v Wade in the US are available to listen to. I realise Roe v Wade was a case of importance to the entire common law world but we're 40 years on at this stage - surely we could put DC and CC cases up for the sake of justice being seen to be done. Frankly outside of you OP, fellow law students who are too lazy to read and the odd journalist I'm not sure who is going to listen to them.

What I'm not in favour of is a Daily Mail / Sun name and shame list under www.courts.ie/bolloxes. That said a trial was conducted in a couple of towns in the UK where large photographs and names of anti-social oiks was put up when they were banned from the town centres - main reason against would be the same as the ASBO, it becomes a badge of honour.

YumCha wrote: »

And I should have clarified that when I was talking about accountability/transparency for judges I meant it in the same vein - that more information should be made public. If anything, I think it would probably be beneficial as people could see the factors in relation to the sentencing. Would you have an objection to that?

Again how much do we distil this? I agree with you as I've stated above to some degree, but I don't think it should be summarised beyond the what's already standard procedure.

YumCha wrote: »

I totally agree that the issues of sentencing, prison overcrowding and certainly the effectiveness of prison are incredibly complex - and I don't have any good answers on that front. But my point is that the information isn't really there to be able to formulate an opinion on it.

Your example was a binary choice between putting money into prisons or having hospital cuts - but there surely has to be some tipping point where the cost of crime to the state (i.e. via property damage, hospitals, etc.) becomes a factor. As stated before, I'm not sure where that point is, or what exactly should be done, I'm just uneasy with the amount of suspended sentences/fines handed out with little to no information made public.

The information is there, to a degree, academically. Should the average Joe Soap have to turn up to conferences at the Law Society to get it though - no they shouldn't. You've already alluded to it but I'll be a bit more blunt; the standard of journalism in this country is shockingly bad. That said I do remember Judge Michael Reilly critising lack of statistical information available across a number of areas of the Criminal Justice System.

All in all I think it's more a data collection issue than anything else. It's a rather Irish problem in fact!