First Time Lucky? Exploring Whether First-Time Offenders Should Be Sentenced More Leniently

Abstract

This article explores the normative position and theoretical justifications for sentencing first-time offenders more leniently than repeat offenders, and examines whether such a practice is defensible. Those justifications include a lack of awareness of the gravity of criminal behaviour, a single lapse, that no censure has previously been communicated by the criminal justice system to that person, adolescent-limited offending, the impact of being in a minority group, and non-uniform impact. It examines whether various sentencing philosophies support sentence reductions for first-time offenders, and whether the justifiability of such practices depends on the theoretical basis and aims of sentencing, for instance the role of proportionality and deterrence.