Scholarlink

Objective <p>Legal scholars suspect that judges choose longer prison terms when they are going to suspend the sentence. This study examines this so-called sentence inflation in a controlled condition, holding case-related confounds constant.</p> Methods <p>I analyze the differences between suspended and unsuspended prison terms in the data from the Polish judicial exam. Each judge (<i>N</i> = 232) sentenced the same case based on a detailed court file. Judges had high stakes in the exam and spent over 6 h choosing and justifying the sentence.</p> Results <p>Many judges sentenced the offenders to prison. The suspended prison terms were 60 to 168% longer than unsuspended prison terms meted out in the identical case.</p> Conclusions <p>Judges display a tendency to inflate suspended prison terms, perhaps in order to appease the punitive public and strengthen individual deterrence. With high reoffending rates, this well-intentioned practice might backfire, leading to a surge in the prison population.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Damocles effect: judges may inflate the duration of suspended prison terms by over 50%

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月12日

查看全文
  • Andrzej Uhl

摘要

Objective

Legal scholars suspect that judges choose longer prison terms when they are going to suspend the sentence. This study examines this so-called sentence inflation in a controlled condition, holding case-related confounds constant.

Methods

I analyze the differences between suspended and unsuspended prison terms in the data from the Polish judicial exam. Each judge (N = 232) sentenced the same case based on a detailed court file. Judges had high stakes in the exam and spent over 6 h choosing and justifying the sentence.

Results

Many judges sentenced the offenders to prison. The suspended prison terms were 60 to 168% longer than unsuspended prison terms meted out in the identical case.

Conclusions

Judges display a tendency to inflate suspended prison terms, perhaps in order to appease the punitive public and strengthen individual deterrence. With high reoffending rates, this well-intentioned practice might backfire, leading to a surge in the prison population.