THE MALET STREET GAZETTE

EST. 1998

1858-2008

University of London External Programme 150th Birthday Events

Editor

Barrister Desk

MSG Past Articles

Book Reviews

Contact MSG

Home

Earn Your University of London LL.B Degree Online with ICLS

Third Edition (2000) Butterworths

ISBN 0 406 91 490 7

Third Edition by Martin Wasik (1998) Blackstone Press

ISBN 1 85431 681 8

These two books provide handy guides to the many directions in which sentencing has taken itself over the past five years. Many will remember the late Christopher Emmins and his original concept of ‘a practical approach to sentencing’ which is now in its third edition as ‘Emmins on Sentencing’. It’s always a refreshing, almost ‘comfort’ book to read, but I suggest that Ashworth has the greater authority, especially for specific forms of words which can be used in mitigation.

I think Emmins would strongly approve of the changes which Martin Wasik has made to his original work in order to create a definitive manual of pure magic for the newly qualified lawyer as he or she prepares to mitigate for real for the first time. So well done, Martin. It is most helpful to have all the handy hints in one place with detailed case reference points and saves the trouble of going immediately to the loose-leaf reference manuals. But there is a word of warning, cross-refer! If you put the depth of knowledge of both books together, you have your legal research under one roof.

However, I have to say that for pure academic depth and perspective, Professor Andrew Ashworth’s ‘Sentencing and Criminal Justice’ is the heavyweight publication in all senses. I suggest that this is the case because some concepts remain difficult to follow in places, especially when you are faced with advising the client on the likelihood of his possible sentence based on what is clearly a tariff system even though some judges deeply resent this term.

Of course, whilst the current edition of Emmins is the earlier publication (1998), Ashworth has the useful benefit of being able to comment on recent legislative moves by the New Labour government including the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the Youth and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and the important Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Ashworth will always be deep, intellectual and dryly academic to some reader, but that aspect can be used to an advocacy advantage whenever issues such as the elements of proportionality are raised in court at the PSR stage.

I have found it very helpful to be able to weigh issues in the wider criminal justice system, and being able to compare those issues with the key issues in sentencing policy which the client is worried about. The term ‘Proportionality’ itself is as important a word for the lawyer as ‘transparent’ is to a politician today for proportionality is fast becoming the new buzz word for anything European or administrative where a government is in conflict with the citizen who pays the bills.

Chapter 4 of Ashworth covers proportionality extremely well because he merges the theoretical with the practical and dwells on both human rights and European law with a balance of fairness which runs as a consistent stream throughout the book. Emmins takes an altogether different stance with a ‘hands on’, ‘jackets off’ approach which gets down to basics quickly. A most useful ‘quick at a glance’ solution when you might have a number of clients needing your attention for sentence on the same day. So which is the better of the two publications? Dare I make a value judgment here!

Well, I do. Of the two, Ashworth shows the depth and I would be minded to use him to cover much more serious offences where custody is not in doubt. I would probably use him for special types of offence where the mitigation may require an unusual and, possibly, rather detailed approach without too much reference to previous Court of Appeal decisions. After all, there is always the problem of boring the bench to death as their eyes gradually glaze over when you are on your fifth authority. There are some useful new guideline judgments from the Court of Appeal which are discussed in reasonable detail.

But don’t forget or dismiss Emmins as just a PQ +1 starter for the newly qualified. He has strong merits throughout, especially for sentencing in the Magistrates’ Courts. Sentencing has continued its evolution at a rapid pace and the old ‘practical approach’ concept from Blackstone Press still maintains a usefulness for the busy and harrassed criminal practitioner/advocate.

When it comes to the Pre-Sentence Report which one should I use? The typical way out is to say both because the standard of a Probation Officer’s report can be widely different, often depending on the attitude of the subject, (and not the probation team I hasten to add.) Ashworth clearly has an academic use within applied criminology, for postgraduate criminal justice studies (including Bar Vocational Course sentencing topics), and for the practitioner and advocate.

It would be nice to feel that the Magistrates’ Courts and Crown Courts made more reference to both publications although I fear they will not because of the pressure of their tasks. Ashworth’s great benefit is his discussion of the influence of statements made by politicians, public opinion and the mass media. This is quite important point to consider after the perceived public reaction to the ‘get tough on soft drug users’ campaign by certain groups in the autumn of 2000.

To be fair to Emmins, the book was published two years ago so it is bound to miss new developments even though it is written in a clear and reader-friendly fashion. Wasik does concede that it is not always possible to describe and explain the law as clearly as he would like because of the obscurities within the criminal justice system which he rightly says cannot be ignored.

Of particular importance to both publications are the sections dealing with youth crime, and the direction in which the Court of Appeal is traveling at present. Ashworth has a useful piece on the role of the Sentencing Advisory Panel which is well worth reading. So, for a most recent tour around the sentencing system, get Ashworth, but you might find yourself embracing Emmins initially for the quicker solution. In any event, they are both eminently readable and a worthwhile addition to your library. Get them today because they’re worth it!

LAWCARDS (£5.50 each)

and

‘THE QUESTION AND ANSWER SERIES’ (£9.95 each)

http:// www.cavendishpublishing.com

Reviewed by Phillip Taylor

I am often asked which materials I would recommend for revision purposes for my law students when they become increasingly aware of the approaching ‘E’ day - such advice is normally sought around February time when the weather is grim and the prospects seem even grimer as the exam entry forms are completed.

Well for them it will be ‘D’ day (‘D’ being for deliverance) if they use these well-tried and well-tested publications from Cavendish Publishing Ltd. But, make sure you get the most recent edition each time for the new legal developments which have taken place, either by statute or in case-law, in the intervening years between editions.

I do not made these statements lightly because both sets of works are of a high standard which the undergraduate will definitely require to compliment the working textbook and casebook used throughout the year. LawCards give a form of revision notes which it would be hard to match with such notes as are taken by internal students during actual lectures. And, of course, they do provide the instant memory test which is needed to trigger the brain into action as it competes with nerves on exam day. They are not a crutch but merely an aide memoire which starts the memory process off. I like, in particular, the recent case-law references and the comments made about Law Commission recommendations which give the publications extra ‘clout’.

With any ‘Question and Answer’ series of books a more in-depth perspective on how an essay or problem question can be answered is needed, especially with academic references. Cavendish are up to this task and clearly set out the points the examiner wants discussed and they do it in an easily-accessible way. Forget the idea that trick questions are set for there are none - badly drafted questions, however, yes! But not with this professional series of ‘Q & A’s which are of a very high standard throughout.

Again, I’m not suggesting that the student will only use a ‘Q & A’ book and ignore the textbook or casebook because to do this would be a sheer folly and easy to detect once the script is read over. What this series does is to act as a template for an individual head of substantive law (or the ‘A’ level law course) which is being undertaken. The answers given should be treated with respect and for what they are: the wise opinion of one man or woman in his or her expert field. You, however, are the person who is sitting the exam, so it is your work which is on trial.

With both series of books, the structure is the key and you will find it opens the door to a world which is yours to write about. It is your script and your future. However, it is not a copied key that opens the door. It must be the original if you want to obtain a good classification. If you have ever had an additional door key cut, you will always know that it is a copy because the original just has ‘something’ about it. That ‘something’ is normally ‘wear and tear’ as the shiny newness has gone but the dependability is there (we hope). Well, the ‘Q & A’ and LawCards series of notes comprise that ‘dependability’ we hope for. They are the means by which you can create an original with all the attributes that have gone before. Your answers in the exams will focus your mind and that imposter, the irrelevance, will be excluded as they are in these publications.

Also, what I find particularly attractive about the LawCards series is that they do not encourage ‘parroting’ which is the bane of the examiner’s existence. I can say from experience that it is always refreshing to find a script which has some originality about it, mixed with a good understanding of legal principles and case-law. What examiners do not like is the lazy student who has clearly not thought about the subject. Well, with these two sets to act as guides you have the tools and there is no reason why you can’t complete the job…a job very well done indeed if you use these materials.

The subject areas covered include all the substantive law areas in main law degree courses. LawCards are normally around £5.50 each, and the ‘Q & A series’ about £9.95 per subject - investments which are well-worth making. Get them now for your subjects before the revision stage gets to you.

(Fifth Edition) 2000 Butterworths

ISBN 0 406 92182 2

Price £21.95

A commentary by Phillip Taylor

Another edition of this excellent book is with us again. What a surprise after all the recent annual criminal justice bills presented to Parliament! This new edition, written in the way that only Adrian Keane can write such texts, is always pleasant reading after the difficult years fathoming Cross on Evidence and other heavyweight works which I would definitely exclude rather than include in my pilot case.

Our new Dean of the Inns of Court School of Law has triumphed with a most useful selection of evidential reforms created by the Civil Procedure Rules. Keane rightly acknowledges that the CPRs ‘constitute the most radical reform of the ethos of civil litigation since the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875’. He illustrates how the necessary reforms have simplified some very difficult, out-dated concepts for the way in which ‘justice’ must operate in this new, 21^st century. The important statutory and European developments are well covered for the trainee practitioner although I imagine this area will expand further in the coming years. We may even have a section on ‘Internet Law and the Criminal’ as well.

The moaning over ‘disgusting evidence’ (especially similar fact cases) which used to go on at Bar School seems to have diminished with this new edition. When I attended Keane’s lectures years ago, the only way to penetrate what was a somewhat confusing and complex subject was this book (as a first edition). Like many other students, reference to his Bar Manual (which was really only a series of bullet point notes when they first appeared in the late 1980s) needed something else after a hard day’s graft on the BVC. So, with ‘The Modern Law of Evidence’ we had the rules of evidence explained more simply than with any other publication.

It is pleasing to say that edition number 5 is even better than its predecessors, although I hope Keane is not going to have to produce this annually after the General Election…whoever wins that Westminster prize! So please take note Jack Straw, and Ann Widdecombe, if either of you are going to amend PACE do it properly and dispense with the statutory tinkering every few months.

All too often, students make the mistake of being sloppy with evidential issues- it’s a bit like the police, really, when it comes to ‘verballing’ alleged criminals - they don’t pay attention to detail and always ‘over-egg’ the pudding. This is the key to Adrian’s success with this subject. His structure of the way in which a statute is expressed, laid out logically, section and section, makes it at least understandable to over-stretched students without over-doing it all.

It has quite often amazed me how MPs have the cheek to pass some Acts of Parliament involving criminal justice when the statutory phrases used in the final legislation is as ‘empty’ of content as those horses mentioned by a film mogul and used so effectively as David Niven’s biographical title ‘Bring on the Empty Horses’. There is nothing empty about Keane’s book because it is a substantive work.

And, I would add, it is no wonder that Bar students have trouble with these rather silly ‘multiple choice tests’ they sit when the real fun with evidence is arguing the toss with the judge over admissability…and the ‘disgusting evidence’ cases which are brown paper bag reading material to many. That is where the substantive issues are.

So, thank you, Dean Keane! Views from the current crop of Bar students indicate that this important new edition will be a great help to them as they sweat it out with the MCTs. And, I have a further and well-founded suspicion, that this book will be used again later when, as bewigged counsel, ex-pupils have had enough of some of the rather deep and difficult terms found in the main practitioners books - I will, of course, refrain from mentioning who publishes these heavy works. So include it, don’t exclude it (you know it makes sense)- to be precise ‘it’ is the relevant and highly informative ‘The Modern Law of Evidence’ for the year 2000.

Contact for further information: Phillip Taylor 020 8948 4801(UK)

Phillip Taylor MBE is a practising barrister, and head of Richmond Green Chambers. He has also been a law tutor for the past ten years for the LL.B (London) External Programme.

     The Malet Street Gazette, Inc. is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice, and no one should rely on the information contained in the Gazette. The views and posts published on this website and the Malet Street Gazette Discussion Board are not expressions of the Gazette's management or editorial policy and do not necessarily reflect the Gazette's opinion. The Malet Street Gazette, Inc. accepts no responsiblity for the accuracy of any statement made herein, and all readers/visitors are advised to check the facts for themselves and not rely on statements made herein.  The authors and publishers accept no liability in relation thereto. The areas of law discussed are particularly fast-moving, and legal issues develop on a daily basis. The up-to-date position should always therefore be checked. The Malet Street Gazette is not connected nor officially sanctioned by the University of London.

Copyright©1998-2008 The Malet Street Gazette, Inc.