Words matter: judges’ value judgments in sentence pronouncements remarks

Author:

de Castro Rodrigues AndreiaORCID,Cunha Olga S.ORCID,de Oliveira Jorge Q.ORCID,Gonçalves Rui A.ORCID,Sacau-Fontenla AnaORCID

Abstract

AbstractThis study examines judges’ value judgments on their remarks during sentence pronouncements. We performed a content analysis of 93 sentence pronouncements from the 13 judges from a Portuguese criminal court. Within these discourses, 299 discourse units were codified as judges’ value judgments, that is, personal contents beyond strict legal issues. From these 299, 107 were recommendations (comprehending advice to change, to not reoffend, to rethink life, and action instructions), and 192 were opinions about the individual, the society, and the judicial system. The existence of value judgments in sentence pronouncements carries important implications for the sentencing process. Namely, these value judgments allow the identification of judges’ personal ideas, and issues particularly vulnerable for simplistic reasonings, as well as subjective considerations. This identification and the discussion on the powerful role of language in the context of sentencing are key features to strengthen judges’ training and, consequently, to improve the implementation of penal justice.

Funder

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia

ISPA – Instituto Universitário

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Law,General Social Sciences,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Reference59 articles.

1. Alfini, J. J., Lubet, S., Shaman, J. M., & Geyh, C. G. (2018). Judicial conduct and ethics. LexisNexis.

2. Aubé, B., Ric, F. (2019). The Sociofunctional model of prejudice: Questioning the role of emotions in the threat-behavior link. International review of Social Psychology, 32(1): 1, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.169.

3. Bandes, S. (2009). Empathetic judging and the rule of law. Cardozo Law Review De Novo, 133, 133–148. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1431230. Accessed 15Sept 2022.

4. Bardin, L. (2009). Análise de conteúdo [Content Analysis]. Edições 70.

5. Baum, L. (1994). What judges want: Judges’ goals and judicial behavior. Political Research Quarterly, 47, 749–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299404700311

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3