Judges “will not be influenced by public reaction” when it comes to sentencing.
This is the view of Supreme Court judge Mr Justice Peter Charleton, director of the judicial studies programme run by the judiciary for the judiciary, despite the views of victims’ groups that claim that some sentences handed down can be lenient.
“It’s basic: you have taken an oath to try and give a just verdict, not a verdict that might be lauded in a newspaper,” he said.
He dismissed the influence of social media, saying: “I doubt if any judge is going to be reading social media. You would be mad to.”
“The whole notion of the process is not to make people happy or unhappy. The judge is objective, experienced and tries to give the right result,” said Charleton. “Can it ever be a perfect result?”
People must remember the system is “self-correcting” through appeals against severity or undue leniency of sentences.
“Not everyone has to be sent to jail. In the District Court and Circuit Courts, offending is at a lower level, you are trying to divert people away from overcrowded jails, looking at, say, community sanctions,” said the judge.
“Obviously, if a crime falls into a very high level of seriousness, what can you do? That is just the way it is. The guidelines are there.”
Court of Appeal judge Ms Justice Nuala Butler, chair of the Judicial Council‘s judicial studies committee (JSC), which oversees the education and training of judges, said judges accepted that their decisions were open to scrutiny.
“Justice has to be administered in public – your decisions are going to be in public and dissected by the public. That comes with the territory,” she said.
Judicial training and education in the State was informal until it was placed on a statutory footing for the first time under the Judicial Council Act 2019.
The JSC was established in early 2020 by the Judicial Council and a director of judicial studies was appointed in July that year. In October 2023, Charleton succeeded Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty as director. He has placed a strong focus on sentencing training.
Both Charleton and Butler said they could not discuss particular sentencing decisions or controversies. Those include the outcry over a three-year suspended sentence imposed on former soldier Cathal Crotty for a brutal physical assault on Natasha O’Brien in May 2022 in Limerick.
The DPP successfully appealed the sentence as unduly lenient and a two-year jail term was imposed last January on 22-year-old Crotty, from Parkroe Heights, Ardnacrusha.
Earlier this month, the family of nine-year-old Ronan Wilson, from Kildress, Co Tyrone, who died after being struck by a car in a hit-and-run incident in Bundoran, Co Donegal, urged the DPP to appeal the “truly pathetic” five-year prison sentence imposed on Sergee Kelly (24), of Upper Mullaghmore, Co Sligo, who admitted dangerous driving causing death. Kelly was also disqualified from driving for 20 years.
The pattern of sentencing has changed since the Supreme Court’s 2007 judgment in the case of “WD”, Charleton said. That case involved a man convicted of raping a third-level student. The decision addressed rape sentencing bands and sentencing precedents and has since been taken up in many cases.
Since WD, the prosecution has to set out the sentencing band into which it considers a particular offence falls and the defence will also set out its view, said the judge. The superior courts, particularly the Supreme Court, have restated the general principles of sentencing in several cases “so that nobody is going to make a mistake”.
“A crisis occurs very occasionally and the rest of it tends to get a little bit ignored – how people are happy with the outcome,” said Butler.
Several victims, particularly of sexual offences, “waive their anonymity and talk about how pleased they are that the accused got a particular sentence and that they wanted to, and did, address the court”.
Judges are more conscious of the language they use when sentencing, she said. “Judges are much more careful now to explain that they are required to take account of the fact the accused pleaded guilty and has no previous convictions, as opposed to language used a decade ago which victims found difficult, that the accused was being ‘credited’.”
A 500-page sentencing guide is a new and valuable sentencing tool. Prepared by Charleton and a judicial researcher for the exclusive use of judges, it sets out potential sentences for a wide range of offences, what the superior courts have said about sentences and the precedents to inform sentencing decisions.
Asked where all this leaves judicial discretion, both judges agreed there is much less discretion. A sentencing decision is not a discretionary decision “in the round”; the process involves going through stages, including identifying the appropriate headline sentence and what to deduct for mitigation, said Butler.
In many cases involving serious offending, “maybe the time for chances has passed”, she adds.
Where there is public concern about a decision, the system has “a built-in correction”, with appeals at every level, she said.
Charleton said a High Court colleague had told him that judging “has become much easier because no matter what the point is, there will be a decision of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal on it; you just follow that.”
In addition to written guidance, training involves exercises including where judges are asked to decide the sentence in a sexual violence case and have their responses assessed by appeal court judges.
Judges sitting in the criminal courts generally have “a good grasp” of what is required and the structure through which the decision is made, said Butler.
The judicial studies action plan for 2025 has three key elements: the first – “judgecraft” – includes management of the court and the framing and writing of judgments.
“Striving for clarity is the main principle of judgment writing,” said Butler.
You are trying continuously to be conscious of the fact that other people’s perspectives and experiences can be so vastly different to, not just your own, but what you think more broadly is Irish society
— Ms Justice Nuala Butler
The second – “black letter law” – involves seminars and lectures on sentencing decisions, the content and application of important judgments, and what the personal injury guidelines mean.
The third – “our society” – is about making judges aware of the rights and experience of atypical court users. This has included online presentations from representative groups, including Travellers, the LGBTQ community, the Association of Africans in Ireland and the Muslim community.
The judicial studies committee is also considering how to manage court users who are neurodivergent or have developmental or mental health issues, said Butler.
“Being a judge is probably more complex these days. There is a much wider range of court users. You are trying continuously to be conscious of the fact that other people’s perspectives and experiences can be so vastly different to, not just your own, but what you think more broadly is Irish society,” she said.
Other training initiatives include the preparation of a judge’s “model” charge to the jury concerning offences including murder, manslaughter, rape and theft.
The idea is to provide judges with a template they can use, although they are not obliged to, said Charleton.
He regards route to verdict (RTV) documents, which have begun to be provided to juries in some serious criminal trials, including the trial of law professor Diarmuid Phelan who was acquitted last January of the murder of a trespasser on his farm, as a positive development.
An RTV is a written aid containing questions, focusing on the law, issues and evidence in the case, aimed at leading the jury to a legally justified verdict. A presentation on how RTVs can assist juries was part of the judges’ training.
Participation in training events is “generally satisfactory”, although a “systemic” problem, particularly for judges in the District and Circuit Courts, is getting time to attend training sessions, said Butler.
All newly appointed judges have two days of compulsory training, including workshops on topics including ethics, courtroom management and awareness of victims. They also shadow and are mentored by more senior colleagues.
Turning up for training and listening inspires confidence in judges and the administration of justice “because it means you are taking your job seriously”, Charleton said.
“If you are not rising and falling on whatever storm is going around, if you are forging ahead and doing what you ought to be doing based on what you hear, that inspires confidence.”
