Madam, - Kevin Myers (An Irishman's Diary, March 9th), Simon O'Neill (Letters, March 11th) and others have expressed their outrage at the inconsistent and often inexplicably lenient sentences handed out by the courts to those who kill or maim. The sense of a remote and out-of-touch judiciary is widespread.
We need to do something radical to restore the confidence of ordinary citizens in our judicial system. We do not want people taking the law into their own hands, or not even bothering to report minor crimes because "nothing will be done".
It would probably require a constitutional amendment, but would it be worth considering separating the sentencing function of the courts from their primary function of determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant? We could establish an independent sentencing tribunal similar to the independent Office of Public Prosecutions.
A defendant found guilty of various serious crimes would be referred to the tribunal to be sentenced. This sentencing court would have access to victim impact statements and include "lay assessors" such as medical experts, psychologists, and penologists who could take an informed and consistent view of the gravity of the offence, the impact on victims, the likely efficacy of various forms of punishment and rehabilitation and the likelihood of the culprit reoffending. The current pilot system of restorative justice for lesser crimes could be extended, where prison is determined to be an inappropriate or ineffective punishment.
The rights of defendants are well entrenched in our system of justice. We need to do more for the victims of crime and to vindicate the rights of ordinary citizens to be protected from criminal behaviour. - Yours, etc,
FRANK SCHNITTGER, Blessington, Co Wicklow.