You Be The Judge has public sentencing 'criminals', as part of Tasmanian Supreme Court workshop series

It is often said, usually on social media, that the sentences given to criminals are "too soft" — so, if given the chance, what would the public impose in the way of punishment?

How hard would you go? Months or years in prison, to set an example? 

Or would the personal circumstances of the offender sway you towards a lesser punishment, in the hope of rehabilitation?

That scenario has played as part of Law Week in Tasmania, with the You Be The Judge workshops hosted by the Supreme Court of Tasmania in Launceston and Hobart.

In Hobart on Tuesday night, three groups of people heard the story of 22-year-old Cherie Ann Brown, a made-up person, and put forward the punishment they thought fit the crime.

Before that, they heard from Tasmania's Chief Justice Chris Shanahan who explained sentencing law and purposes, including sentencing principles and the factors considered in determining the sentence.

Sentencing was a "poorly understood process", he said, with "misapprehension" it was "just about punishment".

With the explanation out of the way, the "sentencing" began — the prosecution stated the facts of the case and the defence lawyer explained the mitigating circumstances.

The Brown case was modelled on similar real cases.

Here is what the participants heard on Tuesday. Read the following and consider what your choice of punishment would be.

Then see how it compares with what the participants decided, and what the Chief Justice handed down.

The 'crime'

Crown Prosecutor Edward Burrows-Cheng said late on Saturday night in June 2023, a male employee was working at a newsagency when a female wearing a balaclava entered, holding a blood-filled syringe, and demanded money from the till, telling the employee "If you don't give me the money right now, I will stick this into you".

Fearing he would be harmed, the employee "emptied the contents of the till into a brown paper bag and gave it to the female who ran out of the building".

The male employee called the police, who "soon located the woman with $600 she could not account for". 

Brown later admitted the crime and told police she "needed the money for drugs" and new shoes for her 6-year-old son.

She said she had "no intention of harming anyone with the syringe" but considered it a good weapon because "people are real scared of being infected." 

All but $10 of the $600 was recovered, Mr Burrows-Cheng said.

Brown was charged and bailed to live with her mum.

Mr Burrows-Cheng noted Brown's prior offences, which included "stealing, drink driving, possession of a prohibited substance, and a conviction for stealing".

The offender's story

Defence counsel Rochelle Mainwaring told the participants about Brown's difficult "history", which included being abandoned by her alcoholic father and being put into foster care at age 10 by her mother.

"She had 12 different foster homes and four different schools between the age of 10 and 16," Ms Mainwaring said. 

"She has never been employed. She has had several relationships over the years. Her son was born when she was living with a known criminal, who is currently in prison for wounding." 

Ms Mainwaring said Brown was living with her son in a "housing commission home".

The victim's impact statement

The "judges" also heard Mr Burrows-Cheng read the impact statement from the "victim", Gary Black .

"She threatened to stick the needle into me if I didn't hurry. I put all the money in a brown paper bag and gave it to her. She left the shop. I was so frightened, I couldn't stand up, and my legs just wouldn't hold me."

Mr Black said his workmate came from the back of the newsagency and found him "as white as a sheet".

Mr Black told of "nightmares" and time off work. When he did return, he could not be in the shop by himself for fear of another robbery.

"I don't know if the blood in the syringe was HIV positive, but I have nightmares that the blood was splattered all over me and I died a long and painful death. None of this was my fault, I was just doing my job and earning some money to keep my family."

Mr Black also said the robbery had seriously affected his family life.

"I have two little girls. I won't let them go anywhere unless either my wife or I are with them. I won't answer the front door at home. My wife has had the hardest time, I yell at her when I can't cope. 

Before you decide on the sentence

Chief Justice Shanhan explained the maximum available sentence for armed robbery in Tasmania is 21 years.

The "judges" were also told the range of punishments available included the following:

•    Imprisonment

•    Drug treatment order

•    Suspended term of imprisonment (partially or wholly suspended)

•    Home detention (with electronic monitoring)

•    Community correction order

•    Fine, compensation order, or restitution order

•   Deferred sentencing order

•    Adjournment with undertakings (with or without a conviction)

•    Record a conviction and discharge the offender

•    Dismiss the charge without conviction

So, what would you decide as punishment, after carefully considering the seriousness of the crime, the impact on the victim and the circumstances of the offender? 

Make a note of yours to see how it compares with what the group of "judges" handed down.

The 'judges' sentence

The three groups of "judges" at the workshop all decided on no prison time for Brown, although there was some disagreement.

One said Brown not being imprisoned was "too lenient".

Another asked about "restorative justice", a process that aims to repair the harm done and may include supervised meetings between the victim and offender, alongside other punishments.

Others described the sentences arrived at by their groups as "reasonable", "appropriate" and "correct", although one "judge" said she only "mostly agreed" with her group's sentence decision.

The Chief Justice's sentence

Chief Justice Shanahan told the "judges" he would, in this hypothetical case, impose a 9-month suspended prison sentence with a 2-year community corrections order. 

Brown would also be subject to regular drug testing, regular reporting to a probation officer and undergo a program of treatment for alcohol dependence.

He explained the need to consider the welfare of Brown's son, an innocent party in this.

So, would You Be The Judge?

Did this square with what you would do? Too lenient, or about right?

As Chief Justice Shanahan explained, sentencing is not just about punishment, it is also about "rehabilitation of offenders" and "deterrence".

Jail time, he told the participants, was also a "very expensive" last resort.

The final in the 2025 series of You Be The Judge workshops for Law Week is happening tonight in Hobart, between 5pm and 7pm. 

Bookings are essential.