Probation & After-Care Statistics: England & Wales1979. London, Home Office.
2.
PearceI. & WarehamA. (1977) ‘The Questionable Relevance of Research into Social Enquiry Reports’, Howard Journal Vol 16 No 2 p97.
3.
ThorpeJ. (1979) Social Inquiry Reports: A Survey; Home Office Research Study No 48, London, HMSO.
4.
This problem is not unique to England and Wales. An examination of presentence reports in Wisconsin, USA, showed its importance to decisions made after sentence, and the author expresses concern about the reliability of the information in them as a basis for such decisions. See DickeyW. (1979) ‘The Lawyer and the Accuracy of the Presentence Report’, Federal Probation, Vol 43 No 2 pp28–38.
5.
Pearce & Wareham, Op Cit p105.
6.
RaynorP. (1980) ‘Is there any Sense in Social Inquiry Reports?’Probation Journal, Vol 27 No 2 pp78–84.
7.
PerryF. G. (1974) Information for the Court: A New Look at Social Inquiry Reports; University of Cambridge, Institute of Criminology.
PerryF. G. (1979) Reports for Criminal Courts; Ilkley: Owen Wells.
12.
For example, McwilliamsW. (1968) ‘Presentence Study of Offenders’, CaseConference, Vol 15 pp136–139
13.
THORPEJ. and PEASEK. (1976) ‘The Relationship between Recommendations made to the Court and Sentences Passed’, British Journal of Criminology Vol 16 No 4 pp393–394.
14.
CarterR. M. & WilkinsL. T. (1967) ‘Some Factors in Sentencing Policy’, Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, Vol 58 pp503–514.
15.
MottJ. (1977) ‘Decision Making and Social Inquiry Reports in One Juvenile Court’. British Journal of Social Work. Vol 7 No 4 pp421–432.
16.
HineJ., McWilliamsW. & PeaseK. (1978) ‘Recommendations, Social Information and Sentencing’, Howard Journal, Vol 17 No 2 pp91–100.
17.
MillsC. (1980) Assessing the Effectiveness of Presentence Reports; MSc Dissertation, University of Oxford.
18.
MitraC. (1980) “The Use of Social Inquiry Reports in Committals for Sentence”, Justice of the Peace 8.11.80 Vol. 144, pp657–660.
19.
RobertsJ. & RobertsC. (1981) “Social Enquiry Reports and Sentencing: an Examination of the Role of the Probation Service in Influencing the Use of Custody” Paper as yet unpublished.
20.
ThorpeJ.Op Cit.
21.
MathiesonD. (1977) “Social Inquiry Reports—Time to Plot a New Course”, Justice of the Peace 16.4.77 Vol. 141 pp.224–226.
22.
ThorpeJ.Op Cit.
23.
RobertsJ.Op. Cit.
24.
TrepanierJ. (1980) “Pre-trial Social Inquiry Reports on Defendants Pleading Not Guilty: Are they Acceptable?”Probation Journal, Vol. 27 No 1, pp.9–16.
25.
CurnockK. & HardikerP. (1979) Towards Practice Theory: Skills and Methods in Social Assessments; London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
26.
ParkerH. (Ed) (1979) Social Work and the Courts; London, Edward Arnold.
27.
CarlenP. & PowellM. (1979) “Professionals in the Magistrates' Courts: the Courtroom Lore of Probation Officers and Social Workers” in ParkerH. (Ed) Ibid.
28.
ParkerH. (1979) “Client-Defendant Perceptions of Juvenile and Criminal Justice” in ParkerH. (Ed) Ibid.
29.
HoldenF. (1978) “The Court Experience: Prisoner's Views”Probation Journal Vol 25 No 2 pp.45–50.
30.
DickeyW.Op Cit.
31.
JarvisF. V. (1980) Probation Officer's Manual, Third Edition; London, Butterworths, p.114.