skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 200323     Find in a Library
Title: In Denial of Murder: No Parole
Author(s): Alec Samuels
  Editor(s): Frances Crook
  Journal: Howard Journal of Criminal Justice  Volume:42  Issue:2  Dated:May 2003  Pages:176 to 180
Date Published: 05/2003
Page Count: 5
  Annotation: This article briefly reviews the United Kingdom’s Parole Board imposed guidelines and decisions in the release of those sentenced to mandatory life for murder and their denial of guilt or lack of behavioral or attitudinal changes as acceptable factors in the delay or refusal of release and the implication of these factors as solely determining a continued risk to the public.
Abstract: For a convicted murderer sentenced to mandatory life imprisonment in the United Kingdom, at the end of the minimum fixed term, the Parole Board will review the case and consider the protection of the public and order release if the appropriateness has been satisfied. Most offenders on a mandatory life sentence are released at some time. Before the expiration of their minimum term, averaging somewhat less than 14 years, the prisoner has the right to have his case reviewed by the Parole Board. The Parole Board guidelines stipulate that refusal must now be based only on continuing risk to the public. This article specifically addresses the issue of when a mandatory lifer is unable to come to terms with his/her conviction, steadfastly claiming their innocence or becomes hostile, resentful, aggressive, disruptive, or uncooperative. In the absence of any other factors pointing to a real risk of danger to the community, is it right to deny this individual release? Honesty in sentencing is discussed with the recommendation to move to a determinate sentencing system. Thereby, every murderer would be released accordingly, whether or not he/she claimed or persisted in claiming their innocence. If a prisoner due for release was considered a real danger to the public, there would then be a proper judicial procedure in retaining him/her in custody, for the danger reason.
Main Term(s): Probation or parole decisionmaking
Index Term(s): Parole board ; Sentencing/Sanctions ; Indeterminate sentences ; Mandatory Sentencing ; Determinate Sentencing ; Sentencing guidelines ; Parole effectiveness ; Parole eligibility ; United Kingdom
Publisher URL: 
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Country: United Kingdom
Language: English
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.