000			01840 2200277 4500
001			409059
011			_a2059-1098
090			_a409059
100			_a20241204d kkky0pory50 ba
101			_aeng
102			_aGB
200			_aReducing prison Ssntencing through pre-sentence reports? _ewhy the quasi-market logic of ‘selling alternatives to custody’ fails _fCyrus Tata
330			_aA central aim of successive generations of penal reformers and governments has been to reduce the use of imprisonment in relatively less serious cases. In their various guises, pre-sentence reports (PSRs) have been a key vehicle to promote non-custodial ‘alternatives’ to the judicial sentencer. Yet, after decades of pursuing this strategy, a significant reduction in prison sentencing remains elusive. This article suggests that the failure of this policy strategy is, at least in part, rooted in its quasi-market logic. It tends to construct the judicial sentencer as a metaphorical consumer in a penal marketplace, to whom the report writer must convincingly ‘sell alternatives’ to custody. Applying and developing theories of consumption as a cultural practice, it is proposed that, by its very nature, a consumerist model is bound to fail to deliver penal reduction.
461			_cHoward _d2018 _pp.472-494 _tJournal of Crime & Justice _vVol. 57, nº 4
606			_94958 _aPENAS ALTERNATIVAS
606			_95124 _aMEDIDAS ALTERNATIVAS
606			_91638 _aPRISÃO PREVENTIVA
606			_95300 _aRELATÓRIO PRÉ-SENTENCIAL
606			_95123 _aPROBATION
606			_9414904 _aSENTENÇA
675			_9420646 _a343.8
700			_9422909 _aTata _bCyrus _c Senior Lecturer in Law, Centre for Sentencing Research, Law School, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, Scotland,
801			_aPT _gRPC
852			_j343.8TAT