U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Mitigation Without Definition: Remorse in the Criminal Justice System

NCJ Number
180447
Journal
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology Volume: 32 Issue: 1 Dated: April 1999 Pages: 16-26
Author(s)
Michael J. Proeve; David I. Smith; Diane Mead Niblo
Date Published
April 1999
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This analysis of the influence of remorse as a mitigating factor in sentencing in Australia considers legal and psychological perspectives, with emphasis on relevant statutory and common law and inconsistencies in case law regarding definitions of remorse and contrition.
Abstract
The discussion criticizes the reliance on responses such as pleading guilty to indicate remorse and describes retrospective studies that examine the influence of remorse or contrition on sentencing or on redicivism. The analysis notes that indications exist of an association between remorse or contribution and reduced sentences and better adjustment to probation. However, no data exist to suggest an association between contrition and decreased recidivism. The analysis concludes that clarification of the concept of remorse is necessary to assist research into the influence of remorse on sentencing and on future criminal behavior. Greater understanding of the nature of remorse would also aid the determination of genuine remorse. Analysis of the relationship of remorse to other moral emotions of shame, regret, and guilt should also take place to aid this understanding. Notes and 23 references (Author abstract modified)