View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

acquire certain dynamic characteristics. Consequently it maybe erroneous to examine both
sanctions on the basis that theymayhave fixedandimmutable meanings.
Access to judicial understanding of these sanctions as instruments in sentencing was critical
to this study. Without this perspective the study could not have been informed of the
judges’ cognitions and expectations which are repositories of significant information on the
sanctions. The study proceeded with an “external” examination of the sanctions by
reference to their historical emergence, their development over time and a search for the
rationales of each sanction. By allowing for the extra dimension of the judges’ perceptions
of the sanctions, an “internal” examination of the communityservice order and suspended
sentence was possible. This internal perspective has been triangulated with the traditional
or external perspective which allows a much fuller understanding of the workings of both
sanctions. Specifically, issues such as the relationship between the custodial sentence and
either sanction has been explored to discern the extent to which the judges subscribe to
the necessary pre-custodial requirement. Other issues such as the process of selection of
offenders by judges for community service or a suspended sentence have been explored.
While these issues have been subject to enquiry previously (Osborough1981), Walsh &
Sexton (1999)) they are re-examined in light of the quantitative and qualitative data
generatedin the empirical work of this study.
Communityservice appears to be relativelyunderutilised as a sanction in place of custodial
sentences for minor offences while suspended sentences may be applied much more
liberally in respect of offences where a custodial sentence might never be intended. These
features were identified early in the enquiry as crosscutting issues (Kreuger 1998) and
particular attention was given to them, especially as they might assist our understanding as
to why some offenders were excluded from both sanctions. Additionally, in this approach,
some structural issues such as reliance by judges upon external agencies such as the
Probation Service and the Gardai could be identified as significant impediments to the use
of either sanction.
In particular, the judges were critical of what they perceived to be the overuse of
discretionary practices by Probation Officers in the supervision of offenders generally as
well as a reluctance of the Gardai or the Prosecution to seek activation for obvious
breaches of suspended sentences. As a consequence of this, it was possible to identify a
396