Sentencing frauds: a comparative perspective

Levi, Michael ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2131-2882 2007. Sentencing frauds: a comparative perspective. Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform 90 (2/3) , pp. 158-174.

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

This article examines the sentencing of different types of fraud and the principles that lies behind them. It shows that in the UK, most fraud offenders get off comparatively lightly – even when they have not pleaded guilty – but that offences involving overt damage to individuals are sentenced more toughly, in line with populist »law and order« attitudes, reinforced by media hostility to such frauds. However in the US, the more sensational cases have attracted very heavy sentences, in keeping with the tough guideline sentences revised after Enron. In continental Europe, systematic sentencing data (as in the UK) is difficult to find that relates sentences to specific sorts of frauds and fraud victims, but appears to be closer to the UK than to the US sentencing levels. Finally, the article raises questions about what sentences mean to fraud offenders from different social groups, and what are the social and cultural effects of sanctions, as well as whether such effects should be included in the retributive elements of punishments.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Cardiff Centre for Crime, Law and Justice (CCLJ) Sustainable Places Research Institute (PLACES)
Subjects:	K Law > KD England and Wales
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Economic crime, comparison of international sentencing levels, sentencing criteria, individual, cultural, and social effects of punishment
Additional Information:	Special Issue on Crossing the Borders
Publisher:	Wolters Kluwer
ISSN:	0026-9301
Related URLs:	Publisher
Last Modified:	25 Oct 2022 09:19
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/58065

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item