1. YOUTH SENTENCING:
PART A: Describe the aims of youth sentencing and the sentencing options for dealing with young
offenders.
STEP ONE: Introduce and discuss the aims of punishment in relation to young offenders –what are the
different aims of sentencing and which aim is the focus of youth sentencing.
There has been in the past two conflicting approaches to sentencing young offenders, welfare and
punishment. Welfare aims at protecting juveniles from the potential stigma of criminal prosecution. It
encourages their welfare to be taken into account. It aims to rehabilitate and only prosecute as a last
resort. However it received a great deal of criticism for being too soft and lacking any deterrent element.
Punishment on the other hand aims to punish the offender for his or her crime regardless of age.
Jack Straw in his ‘No More Excuses’ White Paper recognised the issues of the conflict and aimed to
refocus and prevent crime becoming a life choice for many young people. He sought in the CDA 1998 a
whole range of sentence options for children and juveniles which would represent a mix of the two
approaches. It can be seen as tough on serious, persistent offenders, but providing emphasis on
rehabilitation where thought suitable. Most sentences are now contained in the Powers of Criminal
Courts (Sentencing Act) 2000.
Aims and strategies contained in the White Paper "No More Excuses" (1997). Today's young
offenders can too easily become tomorrow's hardened criminals. As a society we do ourselves no
favours by failing to break the link between juvenile crime and disorder and the serial burglar of the
future. For too long we have assumed that young offenders will grow out of their offending if left to
themselves. The research evidence shows this does not happen.
An excuse culture has developed within the youth justice system. It excuses itself for its inefficiency,
and too often excuses the young offenders before it, implying that they cannot help their behaviour
because of their social circumstances. …..This White Paper seeks to draw a line under the past and sets
out a new approach to tackling youth crime.
All those working in the youth justice system must have a principal aim - to prevent offending. That will
be the statutory aim we set out for them in the new Crime and Disorder Act With Final Warnings
instead of repeat cautions, new action plan, reparation and parenting orders, and a new national
network of Youth Offending Teams providing programmes to stop offending behaviour, we are putting
in place the means of delivering this aim. To give more strategic direction, set standards and measure
performance, the Government will set up a new Youth Justice Board for England and Wales
We are determined to cut out the waste in the present youth justice system as identified by the Audit
Commission last year. Instead we will refocus resources and the talents of professionals on nipping
offending in the bud, to prevent crime from becoming a way of life for so many young people.

2. STEP TWO: SENTENCING OPTIONS
Make it clear that the CDA 1998 Abolished the presumption of doli incapax for 10-13 year olds (Crime
and Disorder Act 1998, s.34). This emphasizes the punishment approach with children becoming
RESONSIBLE and liable for their actions. (This means that 10-13 year olds are criminally responsible). It
also Replaced police cautions with system of reprimands and final warnings: CDA 1998, ss.65 and 66 –
offenders who receive warnings referred to YOT, to take part in rehabilitation programme. Community
intervention programmes will follow for offenders receiving a final warning, to address
offending behaviour and try to turn them away from crime before they end up in court. The
reprimand or warning delivered at conference to discuss reparation for harm caused by offence).
• First Offenders provided not serious, will be given a police reprimand
• Repeat Offender following a reprimand, police will give a final warning or decide to
prosecute.
• Reoffends following a final warning within 2 years the police will prosecute.
It also Established the following custodial & non-custodial sentences for young persons:
Non-criminal orders
There will be a new focus on nipping crime in the bud - stopping children at risk from getting
involved in crime and preventing early criminal behaviour from escalating into persistent or
serious offending. Chapter 5 sets out new local authority, police and court powers to protect
young children from being drawn into criminal and anti-social behaviour - the child safety order
and the local child curfew.
Anti-social behaviour order – age 10 or over – civil order, minimum of 2 years, may be applied for by
police or local authority – breach of terms of the order punishable with custody.
Child safety order (CDA, s.11) – under 10s, made by family court on civil standard of proof, supervision
for 3 months – 12 months.
Local child curfew schemes – CDA 1998, s.14, extended to under – 16s by Criminal Justice and Police Act
2001, s.49 – can be imposed by police or local authority for up to 90 days.
Parenting Order – CDA 1998, ss.8 and 9 – One of the philosophies of the CDA and the CC(S) Act 2000
was to involve parents. It aims to address the link between poor parenting and young offenders - up to
12 months – requires parent of young offender to comply with conditions and attend weekly counselling
sessions for up to 3 months.

3. Community sentences
New generic “community order” under Criminal Justice Act 2003 which can include a range of
requirements for offenders over the age of 16:
• Unpaid work requirement - unpaid work in the community (40-300 hours)
• Supervision requirement - the offender is put under the supervision of a probation officer.
• Drug treatment and testing order – CDA 1998, s.61 – over 16s – 6 months to 3 years – may
include residential treatment requirement.
• Curfew requirement - for a certain number of hours a day the offender has to be in a specific
place. (May include electronic tagging)
• Special community orders for young offenders include:
• Attendance centre orders – 10-24 yr olds
• Action Plan Order (CDA 1998, s.69) – combines punishment, reparation and
rehabilitation.10-17 year olds – 3 months – intensive programme under supervision –
requirements similar to referral order, but shorter.
• Referral order under Part 1 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 –
mandatory for 10-17 year olds who plead guilty and are convicted for the first time –
referral to Youth Offender Panel which draws up a "youth offender contract" (minimum of 3
months and maximum of 12 months) – must include reparation to victim or community;
may include mandatory activities, curfew, avoiding specified places or persons.
• Supervision order 10-17 yrs (supervision of local social services, a probation officer or a
member of the youth offending team.
• Fines – will depend upon the defendant’s age 10-13 max £250, 14-17 max £1000 over 18
same as adult.
• Reparation Order (CDA 1998, ss.67 and 68) – 10-17 year olds – reparation to victim or
community for up to 24 hours – presumption that court will make reparation order where
possible and must give reasons if it does not – views of victims must be sought before order
is made.
Custodial sentences
If community intervention does not work, and for young offenders found guilty of serious
crimes, custodial penalties are necessary to protect the public. Public protection is best
served if punishment is combined with rehabilitation so that young offenders are equipped to
lead law-abiding and useful lives once they are released from custody.
Detention and Training Order (CDA 1998, s.73) – will combine custody and community supervision
to punish and rehabilitate youngsters whose crimes require secure detention. The Government
will also give courts clear powers to remand juveniles to secure accommodation where this is
necessary to protect the public and prevent further offending. It is a single custodial sentence for

4. 10-17 year olds – minimum of 4 and maximum of 24 months – half the sentence served in custody and
half in community under supervision.
• Detention for serious crimes up to the maximum adult sentence for the offence if maximum
sentence is 14 years or over or offence is specified in statute.
• Detention at Her Majesty’s pleasure – for murder 10-17 yrs
• Young Offenders’ Institutions – 18-21 yrs, 21days - maximum for the offence Detention and
training orders – 12-21 yrs usually (younger offenders if no other sentence will protect the
public). Specified periods 4 months – 24 months.
PART B
Do the sentencing options available for dealing with young offenders achieve a satisfactory balance
between punishment and rehabilitation?
Go through the sentences available to young offenders, not just the ones introduced by the CDA 1998.
Next to each, comment on whether the sentence has as its focus punishment, rehabilitation or both and
say why. Then come to a conclusion – is there a satisfactory balance between punishment and
rehabilitation?
OR
Hannah, aged 16, has pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary. She has two previous convictions, one for
theft and one for burglary, both when she was 15 years old. She has previously been given a
supervision order and an attendance centre order.
Discuss the likely sentences which would be considered for Hannah in the light of the above factors.
[9]
Hannah’s plea of guilty would result in a discount in her sentence.
Hannah’s previous convictions would be taken into account and would probably increase her
likely sentence
The fact that the previous sentences had not deterred her from re-offending would persuade the
court to issue a harsher sentence this time.
She could be given a community order with an unpaid work requirement and/or any of the other
requirements such as a curfew with an electronic tag or another supervision order. This is unlikely
on its own but another requirement may be added.
Hannah may be required to make reparation to her victim.
If the facts of the offence were very serious a custodial sentence may be considered.
Credit will be given mention of any other relevant factors or possible sentences.