The papers reflect the perspectives on sentencing of law professors, criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors, psychologists, psychiatrists, criminologists, sociologists, prison administrators, senior police administrators, parole and probation officers, governmental policy planners, legislators, and judges from every level of the courts in Canada. Divided into five topical parts, the volume begins with papers dealing with new sentencing directions in both Canada and the United States. Sentencing reform is the next topic addressed by reformers of sentencing laws, followed by historical considerations, including the capital punishment controversy and new kinds of sentences that seem to be part of the future trend. The sentencing of specific offenders like juveniles and sexual offenders is then considered. The two concluding parts reveal the defense lawyers' and the sentencing judges' viewpoints, respectively. Among the issues raised in these papers is the criticism of the treatment philosophy in sentencing and the accompanying call for deterrence, punishment, and public security instead. In a review of attempts to eliminate wide variations in sentencing, the papers advocate or reject the fixed, mandatory (flat) sentencing alternative, which is based on crime seriousness, specifies confinement length, and makes the role of parole boards superfluous. Contributors also take issue with judicial discretion, sentencing guidelines, the loss of public confidence in the sentencing process, pretrial detention, plea bargaining, the onus of proof, stigmatizing and labeling effects, the sentencing of white-collar criminals, sentencing delays, and discrimination against minorities. Diversion of minor crime cases, community involvement through restitutional sentencing, and judges' participation in sentencing conferences to expand their competence and understanding are some of the positive recommendations made in these essays. Tabular data and notes are provided with individual papers. For separate articles, see NCJ 69396-69410.