1. From time to time the judges might care to see even more specifically how their own sentencing pattern compares with those of their colleagues.
2. We are bypassing the important issue as to whether a record of arrests only should be at all distinguished from no record.
3. See note 4 supra.
4. Here ends our review of the sentencing review procedures in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Our findings are not complete. We have as yet no measure of the sentence disparity in these courts. We would like to know how disparity changes over time, especially whether service on the review board tends to reduce disparity when these judges impose sentence in the trial courts. We would also like to know more about the board's own view of its role and how it goes about making its decisions.
5. David A. Thomas, Principles of Sentencing: The Sentencing Policy of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (London: Heinemann Educational Books, Ltd., 1970).