Abstract

https://ssrn.com/abstract=2549653
 


 



Sentencing Mentally Disordered Offenders: Conflicting Objectives, Perilous Decisions and Cognitive Insights


Jill Peay


London School of Economics & Political Science (LSE)

March 25, 2015

LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 1/2015

Abstract:     
This paper examines the sentencing of mentally disordered offenders using an analysis of s.45A orders under the Mental Health Act 1983. The paper reviews the legislative context of the orders and the relevant tranche of Court of Appeal decisions, and looks at their use since 1998. It then touches on the literature on the role of heuristics and cognitive errors in decision-making as a vehicle for demonstrating why the courts may find sentencing in these cases peculiarly problematic. The paper concludes that partial culpability may be being used as a mechanism for justifying the imposition of these orders which facilitate the application of more risk-averse thresholds of release and recall; but that partial culpability is such a fluid concept as to introduce elements of incoherence into the disposal of mentally disordered offenders.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 45


Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: March 27, 2015  

Suggested Citation

Peay, Jill, Sentencing Mentally Disordered Offenders: Conflicting Objectives, Perilous Decisions and Cognitive Insights (March 25, 2015). LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 1/2015. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2549653 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2549653

Contact Information

Jill Peay (Contact Author)
London School of Economics & Political Science (LSE) ( email )
Houghton Street
London, WC2A 2AE
United Kingdom
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 535
Downloads: 95
Download Rank: 212,689
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper