Ministry of Justice, New Zealand

3.1 Introduction

This chapter examines patterns in sentencing for all cases resulting in conviction over the period 1990 to 1999. The following types of sentence are examined: custodial sentences, periodic detention, community service, community programme (formerly named community care), supervision, monetary penalties (fines or reparation), deferred sentences (to come up for sentence if called upon or suspended prison sentences), and "other" sentences (e.g. a driving disqualification or an order under s.118 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 for treatment of the offender in a psychiatric hospital). Data are also available on cases convicted and discharged under Section 20 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985.

The custodial sentences are: life imprisonment, preventive detention, imprisonment, and corrective training. Life imprisonment and preventive detention are both indeterminate sentences where the offender is not eligible for parole until he or she has served 10 years in custody. For both sentences, a minimum non-parole period longer than 10 years can be imposed, and for a life imprisonment sentence imposed for murder involving home invasion, a non-parole period of at least 13 years must be imposed. Life imprisonment is the mandatory sentence for both murder and treason, and the maximum penalty (although rarely used) for a small number of other offences. Preventive detention is available for repeat sexual and violent offenders. Imprisonment sentences are determinate sentences that can be imposed at the discretion of the court up to a maximum period expressed in legislation. Corrective training is a three month custodial sentence with a rigorous regime for young people aged 16 to 19.

The community-based sentences are: periodic detention, community service, community programme, and supervision. Periodic detention involves an offender reporting to a work centre for at least one day a week for up to 10 hours. A periodic detention warden supervises the offender in unpaid work. Periodic detention can be imposed for a period not exceeding 12 months. Community service involves an offender doing between 20 and 200 hours unpaid work for a community group. A sponsor from the community group supervises the offender. Community care was renamed community programme from 1 September 1993 by the Criminal Justice Amendment Act 1993 and involves an offender being placed in the care of an appropriate group or individual, and participating in a programme for a period not exceeding 12 months. Supervision can be imposed for a period of between six months and two years. The offender is under the supervision of a probation officer and must report to the probation officer, as and when required to do so. Additional restrictions may be imposed on the offender by the court. These restrictions typically relate to the offender's work, education or training, residence, or associates.

The monetary sentences considered in this report are fines [3] and reparation. Fines can be imposed for nearly every offence. Reparation can be imposed whenever an offender caused any loss of, or damage to, any property of another person, or where a victim suffered emotional harm. (See chapter 6 for detailed information on the use of fines and reparation.)

Section 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 allows the court, instead of passing sentence, to order the offender to appear for sentence if called to do so within a period of up to one year from the date of conviction. The Criminal Justice Amendment Act 1993 introduced the suspended prison sentence into the range of penalties available to the courts from 1 September 1993. Where a court sentences an offender to a term of imprisonment of between six months and two years, it may make an order suspending the sentence for a period of up to two years. If the offender is convicted of a further imprisonable offence within the term of the suspension, he or she will be required to serve the prison sentence which was suspended, unless the Court is of the opinion that this would be unjust. For detailed information on the use of suspended prison sentences in New Zealand see chapters 8 and 9 of Spier (1998).

The information presented in this chapter is case-based. Charges were combined to form a "case" if they had either the same first court hearing date or the same final court hearing date. Two charges without a first or a final court hearing date in common can, however, belong to the same case. This can occur if there exists another charge with which one of the charges has the first court hearing date in common and the other charge has the final court hearing date in common, or where a charge is not proved (usually withdrawn) on the same day that proceedings for another charge are commenced in court. For a case involving more than one charge, the charge taken to represent the case is the one that resulted in the most serious penalty. If two or more charges result in the same type and length/amount of penalty, then the charge taken to represent the case is the one where the type of offence committed has the highest seriousness score using the scale described in section 2.4.

This chapter only presents information on the most serious sentence imposed in a case. For example, if in one case an offender was sentenced to periodic detention and reparation for one charge and supervision for another charge, the offender would appear in the statistics in this chapter as having been sentenced to periodic detention for that case, as this sentence has the highest ranking of these three sentences in terms of their "seriousness". (This sentence ranking was determined from factors such as the level of restrictions and requirements placed on the offender.) Choosing only one type of sentence to represent the sentencing of a case has the most effect on the number of supervision, suspended, and monetary sentences, as these sentences are the ones most frequently combined with more serious sentences.

It should be noted that from a legal point of view, suspended prison sentences would fall in the sentencing hierarchy between prison and periodic detention. However, Ministry of Justice research has indicated that the majority of suspended sentences appear to be imposed on offenders who would not have received a prison sentence if the power to suspend such sentences did not exist (see chapter 8 of Spier (1998) for further details). Therefore, so as to not misrepresent the number of prison sentences that would have been imposed if the power to suspend prison sentences did not exist, suspended sentences were placed in the sentence ranking below all other sentence types. For this reason, suspended sentences do not show up in the case-based data as the most serious sentence for a very high proportion of cases. Therefore, cases where a suspended sentence was the most serious sentence imposed were included in the "deferred" sentence category together with "orders to come up for sentence if called upon".

Offenders who default in the payment of their fine or reparation sentence can be re-sentenced by a judge to imprisonment, corrective training, periodic detention or community service. Offenders sentenced to a community-based sentence can, under certain circumstances, have their sentence reviewed, sometimes resulting in some other (possibly more serious) sentence being imposed. Also, people who have a suspended sentence of imprisonment imposed can have the sentence activated because of a subsequent conviction.[4]  All of these types of re-sentencing are not usually recorded in the data used for this report. Therefore, the actual number of offenders awarded a custodial or community-based sentence in each year is greater than the figures shown in this report.

3.2 Sentencing for all cases

This section presents information on the sentencing for all convicted cases over the period 1990 to 1999. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 show the number and percentage respectively of cases that resulted in each type of sentence for each of the years 1990 to 1999. Figure 3.1 graphs the information displayed in Table 3.2.

Throughout the 1990s, 7% to 8% of people convicted each year have received a custodial sentence. The number of cases resulting in a custodial sentence has been higher in the last two years than in earlier years in the decade. In 1999, 8,211 cases resulted in a custodial sentence, slightly less than the number imposed in the previous year, but still 9% more than the number in 1990 (7,504). (Table 4.3, later in the report, presents information on the lengths of the custodial sentences imposed over the decade.)

Since 1991, between 32% and 36% of all convictions each year have resulted in the imposition of a community-based sentence.

In terms of principal sentences imposed, periodic detention is the second most commonly imposed sentence behind the fine (and third most commonly imposed sentence in total behind fines and driving disqualifications). In 1999, there were 20,518 periodic detention sentences imposed - 21% of all sentences imposed. The proportion of cases resulting in periodic detention fluctuated between 18% and 22% over the decade with no clear pattern.

Table 3.1 Total number of cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999(1) [Text file]

Table 3.2 Percentage of cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

The community programme sentence continues to be used less and less by the courts. In 1999, only 287 such sentences were imposed - 0.3% of all sentences imposed.

The proportion of convicted cases resulting in community service doubled between 1990 and 1992 from 5% to 10%, before decreasing to 8% in 1995. The proportion has remained at this level since then.

Figure 3.1 Percentage of cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999

The proportion of cases resulting in supervision as the most serious sentence increased from 2.8% to 4.8% between 1991 and 1994. Since then, the proportion has been fairly steady at around 5%.

There was a marked decrease in the use of monetary penalties (in particular, fines) as the most serious sentence between 1990 and 1992 (from 59% of cases to 48% of cases). However, the proportion of cases resulting in a monetary penalty increased a little in the next four years to reach 52% in 1996. In the last three years, the proportion has been between 47% and 49%.

Part of the decrease in monetary penalties between 1990 and 1991 was due to a dropping off in the number of people convicted for driving without a licence as the synthetic paper lifetime licence system bedded down. There were about 2,000 fewer fines imposed in 1991 than in 1990 for this offence. The slightly lower proportion of cases resulting in monetary penalties in the period 1997 to 1999 was partly due to the offence of failing to register a dog becoming an infringement offence, with the result that there were more than 4,000 fewer convicted cases involving this offence resulting in a monetary penalty in each of these years.

Another factor contributing to the decrease in the use of monetary penalties in the early 1990s is likely to be the expansion of the police adult diversion scheme. A number of the less serious cases, which would most likely have had a monetary penalty imposed, were diverted from a conviction, with the result that the remaining cases were more serious on average. More serious cases tend to attract more serious sentences. (The next table examines changes in the seriousness of cases over time.)

Throughout the decade 3% to 4% of convicted cases have resulted in deferred sentences (to come up for sentence if called upon or suspended prison sentences) as the most serious sentence.[5]  (See Spier (1998) for detailed information on the use of suspended sentences in New Zealand.)

There has generally been a slowly increasing trend over the decade in the proportion of cases in which the person was convicted and discharged. In 5% of cases in 1999 the person was convicted and discharged.

Table 3.3 presents the average seriousness of cases that resulted in each sentence, and the average seriousness of all convicted cases. The seriousness scale used is described in section 2.4.

Table 3.3 Average seriousness of cases resulting in each type of sentence, and average seriousness of all cases resulting in conviction, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

As would be expected, the average seriousness of offences resulting in a custodial sentence is much greater than for any other type of sentence. The average seriousness of the offences in cases resulting in a custodial sentence increased between 1990 and 1995 (from 193 to 234), but has decreased since then to 208 in 1999.

Next in terms of average offence seriousness are community programmes. The average seriousness of cases resulting in community programme sentences has increased over the decade. This coincides with a decrease in the number of cases resulting in a community programme.

Cases resulting in periodic detention have been a little more serious, on average, in the last five years compared with earlier years in the decade.

The average seriousness of the cases resulting in community service increased a little between 1993 and 1996, and has remained relatively stable since then at the higher level.

The average seriousness of the offences committed by the people sentenced to supervision as the most serious sentence was generally higher in the second half of the decade compared with the first half.

Monetary penalties are imposed for much less serious cases, on average, than custodial or community-based sentences. The average seriousness of the offences resulting in a monetary penalty has not changed very much over the decade.

The average seriousness of cases resulting in a deferred sentence has been a little higher since 1994 compared to earlier years in the decade. This may be due to the inclusion in this category of cases resulting in a suspended prison sentence as the most serious sentence in these years. Such cases are likely to have a higher average seriousness than cases where the offender has to "come up for sentence if called upon".

Table 3.3 shows that the average seriousness of all convicted cases increased from 25 in 1990 to 33 in 1997. In the last two years the average seriousness has decreased a little to 31 in 1999. Part of the increase in the early 1990s may have been due to an expansion of police diversion, with a large number of less serious offences not resulting in conviction. There was also an increase in the number of convictions for more serious offences in the early part of the decade, as well as a decrease in prosecution rates for less serious offences. The resulting increase in the seriousness of convicted cases may be one factor associated with the increase in the use of community-based sentences, and the decrease in the use of monetary penalties in the early 1990s.

3.3 Sentencing for violent offences

This section presents information on the sentencing of cases involving all violent offences as a group, then presents further information on the use of custodial sentences for individual violent offences.

Tables 3.4 and 3.5 show the number and percentage respectively of cases involving violent offences resulting in each sentence from 1990 to 1999. Figure 3.2 graphs the information displayed in Table 3.5.

Table 3.4 Number of cases involving violent offences resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

The proportion of violent offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence has been lower in the last six years compared with earlier years in the decade. Some violent offenders having their prison sentences suspended (from 1 September 1993) is likely to have contributed to this trend. Trends in the seriousness of violent offences resulting in conviction over the ten year period may also have contributed to changes in the proportion of cases involving violent offences that received a custodial sentence. Changes in the seriousness of violent offending are examined in Table 3.6 later in this section.

Table 3.5 Percentage of cases resulting in each type of sentence for all violent offences, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Figure 3.2 Percentage of cases involving violent offences resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999

The use of community-based sentences for cases involving violent offences increased between 1990 and 1994 (from 40% to 52% of cases), dropped a little in the next two years to 49% of cases, then stayed at this level in subsequent years.

The use of periodic detention for cases involving violent offences decreased a little between 1991 and 1997 (from 28% to 24% of cases), but has increased a little in the last two years to 26% of cases in 1999. Community programme sentences were imposed on 3% of violent offences between 1991 and 1995, but the proportion decreased in subsequent years to 0.8% by 1999. In the last five years, 6% of violent offence cases have resulted in community service. Between 1990 and 1995, the proportion of violent offence cases resulting in supervision as the most serious sentence increased from 7% to 17%. This greater use of supervision for violent offences has generally been maintained since then. The increase in the early to mid 1990s was due, at least in part, to very large increases in convictions for male assaults female (mostly domestic assaults), which result in supervision sentences more frequently than other violent offences.

There has been relatively little change in the use of monetary penalties for violent offences since 1991, with between 18% and 20% of such cases being so sentenced each year.

Table 3.6 shows the number of cases involving violent offences with each level of offence seriousness and the average seriousness of violent offences for each of the years 1990 to 1999. (The seriousness score groupings in the table have little inherent meaning, but are merely a useful way of categorising offences - see section 2.4 for a description of the way these seriousness scores are calculated.)

Table 3.6 Number of cases involving violent offences with each level of offence seriousness and average seriousness of violent offences, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

The average seriousness of violent offences has been lower in the last six years than in earlier years in the 1990s. The lower average seriousness of violent offences in this period may have contributed to a slightly lower proportion of violent offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence in this period compared with earlier years in the decade.

The number of cases involving the most serious violent offences (with seriousness scores of more than 500) increased considerably between 1990 and 1995, but has generally levelled off since then. Trends in the number of cases with seriousness scores of >10 to 50 were influenced by trends in convictions for male assaults female, as discussed in section 2.5.

Tables 3.8 and 3.9 deal with the custodial sentencing of a number of specific violent offences. Table 3.7 shows the actual number of cases on which Table 3.8 is based.

Table 3.7 Number of cases involving each violent offence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.8 shows that the proportions of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for indecent assault, aggravated robbery, "grievous" and "serious" assault, male assaults female, and assault on a child have been a little lower since 1994 compared with earlier years in the decade. Part of the reason for the lower figures in recent years may be due to the suspension of some sentences of imprisonment.

In 1999, 78% of the cases involving aggravated burglary resulted in a custodial sentence - the highest figure recorded in the decade.

The proportion of cases involving indecent assault and threatening to kill or do grievous bodily harm that resulted in a custodial sentence in 1999 (43% and 24% respectively) were the highest recorded since 1993, while the 1999 figures for aggravated robbery and "grievous" assault (79% and 46% respectively) were the highest recorded since 1994.

Table 3.8 Percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of violent offence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.9 shows the average length (in months) of the custodial sentences imposed for each of the violent offences, as well as the average length of custodial sentences for all violent offences. Violent offenders imprisoned in 1999 received sentences six months longer, on average, than violent offenders imprisoned in 1990.

From 1 September 1993, the maximum penalty for sexual violation (rape and unlawful sexual connection) increased from 14 years to 20 years imprisonment. In addition, legislation was enacted from 2 July 1999 that increased the maximum penalty for sexual violation to 25 years if the offence involved home invasion.

Since the 1993 legislative change, the average length of the custodial sentences imposed for rape has continued to increase, reaching 97.2 months (8 years 1 month) in 1999, the highest figure in the decade. In the period 1991 to 1993, rapists had sentences imposed of 70.5 months (5 years 11 months), on average.

After remaining reasonably constant between 1994 and 1998 (at an average of 52.3 months or 4 years 4 months), custodial sentences imposed for unlawful sexual connection increased in length by a little under a year in 1999 to 62.7 months (5 years 3 months), the highest figure in the decade.

Table 3.9 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of violent offence, 1990 to 1999(1) [Text file]

The Crimes Act 1961 was amended from 1 July 1999 so as from 17 July the maximum penalties increased by three years or five years for a number of serious violent and sexual offences if the offence involved home invasion. All of the categories in Table 3.9 except serious assault, male assaults female, assault on a child, minor assault, and cruelty to a child were affected by this legislative change. For manslaughter, the maximum penalty was already life imprisonment, so the legislative change was worded in terms of regarding home invasion as a factor that justifies the imposition of a longer sentence than might otherwise be appropriate.

The average length of the custodial sentences imposed for manslaughter in 1999 was 71.4 months (or nearly six years) - the highest figure recorded in the decade.

Sentences imposed for indecent assault had been stable between 1994 and 1998 at 20.0 months, on average, but increased to 21.4 months in 1999, the highest figure in the decade.

The average length of the custodial sentences imposed for aggravated robbery increased considerably between 1990 and 1992 from 33.4 months to 41.4 months. Custodial sentences for aggravated robbery remained at an average of about 40.0 months for the next six years, before increasing to 44.7 months in 1999, the highest figure in the decade.

The lengths of sentences imposed on people convicted of robbery tend to fluctuate from year to year, but have been longer in the last two years than in earlier years in the decade.

Custodial sentences imposed for "grievous" assault have increased in length, on average, since 1992, and peaked at 22.8 months in 1998. The 1999 figure (21.9 months) was only a little shorter than this, and was the second highest figure recorded in the decade.

Custodial sentences for "minor" assault have decreased a little in recent years with the 1998 and 1999 figures (both 2.2 months) being the shortest sentences, on average, imposed in the decade.

3.4 Sentencing for other offences against the person

This section presents information on the sentencing of all offences against the person other than violent offences, then presents further information on the use of custodial sentences for some of the individual offences included in this category. Nearly two-thirds of these offences in 1999 involved obstructing or resisting a police officer or other official.

Tables 3.10 and 3.11 show the number and percentage respectively of cases involving other offences against the person resulting in each sentence from 1990 to 1999.

Table 3.10 Number of cases involving other offences against the person resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.11 Percentage of cases resulting in each type of sentence for other offences against the person, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

The proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for an offence against the person other than violence has decreased significantly since 1992. The proportion has more than halved from 13% in 1992 to 6% in 1999. Part of this change will be due to changes in the number of convictions for the different offences included in this category (see Table 3.12).

Periodic detention and community service have been used a little less often for other offences against the person in the last four or five years compared with earlier in the 1990s. In contrast, supervision has been used a little more often for other offences against the person since 1995 compared with earlier years in the decade.

The proportion of such cases resulting in a monetary penalty has fluctuated around an average of about 40% in the last five years. This is a little higher than the level in the period 1992 to 1994, but lower than the figure in 1990 (48%).

There has generally been an upward trend over the decade in the proportion of other offences against the person that have had the sentencing deferred, or which were convicted and discharged. In 1999, 12% of such cases had the sentencing deferred compared with 8% in 1990, while 11% of cases in 1999 were convicted and discharged compared with 4% in 1990.

Tables 3.13 and 3.14 deal with the custodial sentencing of offences against the person other than violence. Table 3.12 shows the actual number of cases on which Table 3.13 is based.

Although fluctuating from year to year, the proportion of "other sex" offences (not included in the violent offences category) resulting in a custodial sentence has been lower in the period 1994 to 1999 compared with earlier years in the decade. (Note that "other sex" offences are mainly unlawful sexual intercourse or doing an indecent act with or upon another person.)

Table 3.12 Number of cases involving each other offence against the person, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.13 Percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of other offence against the person, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.14 shows that the average length of the custodial sentences awarded for offences against the person other than violence has been shorter in the last three years than in other years in the decade.

Table 3.14 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of other offence against the person, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

3.5 Sentencing for property offences

Tables 3.15 and 3.16 show the number and percentage respectively of cases involving property offences resulting in each sentence from 1990 to 1999.

Table 3.15 Number of cases involving property offences resulting in each type of sentence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.16 Percentage of cases resulting in each type of sentence for all property offences, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 requires that persons convicted of an offence against property, punishable by imprisonment for a term of seven years or less, should not serve a custodial sentence, unless special circumstances are involved. However, some property offences have maximum penalties of more than seven years (e.g. burglary and arson) so Section 6 does not apply to such offences.

In 1999, 13% of property offenders were imprisoned. The proportion of property offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence has been a little higher in the last three years than in the six previous years, but is similar to the level in 1990.

In general, just under half the property offences resulting in conviction in the last five years have resulted in a community-based sentence. This is a slightly lower level than in the period 1991 to 1993 when 52% to 53% of such cases were so sentenced. The use of periodic detention for property offences has fluctuated a little from year to year, but has been lower since 1994 compared with earlier years in the 1990s. Between 1991 and 1998, 12% to 13% of property offence cases resulted in community service. In 1999, the proportion was slightly higher at just over 14%. In contrast, the use of supervision has dropped a little in recent years from 8% of property cases in 1996 to 6% of cases in 1999.

The proportion of cases involving property offences resulting in a monetary penalty has fluctuated between 26% and 30% since 1991 with no clear pattern.

Conviction and discharges have been used slightly more often for property cases since 1994 compared with earlier years in the decade.

The number of cases involving property offences with each level of offence seriousness and the average seriousness of property offences are presented in Table 3.17.

The average seriousness of all property offences has not changed very much over the decade. The number of convictions for the most serious property offences (with scores >100) was lower in 1999 than in any previous year in the 1990s.

Table 3.17 Number of cases involving property offences with each level of offence seriousness and average seriousness of property offences, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Tables 3.19 and 3.20 deal with the custodial sentencing of some of the property offences. Table 3.18 shows the actual number of cases on which Table 3.19 is based.

As noted earlier, burglary and arson are two property offences to which Section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act does not apply, as the maximum penalties for these offences are 10 years and 14 years imprisonment respectively. Table 3.19 shows that the proportion of cases involving burglary offences resulting in a custodial sentence has been a little higher in the last four years compared with earlier years in the decade, with the 1999 figure (36%) being the highest recorded in the decade. The proportion of arson cases resulting in a custodial sentence has fluctuated significantly over the decade, with the 1999 figure (53%) being the highest recorded in the decade. (The fluctuation in the proportion of arson cases that are imprisoned is not really surprising given that this offence can involve a wide range of seriousness in terms of damage to property and danger to life.) 

Table 3.18 Number of cases involving each property offence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

Table 3.19 Percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of property offence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

For the property offences other than burglary and arson, the proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is quite a bit lower. For theft, there has been a very small upward trend in the proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence over the decade. For receiving stolen good offences and motor vehicle conversion offences there has been an increase in the proportion of people imprisoned in recent years, with the 1999 figures being the highest recorded in the decade.

Table 3.20 shows that the average length of the custodial sentences imposed for property offences as a group remained stable at just over eight months between 1990 and 1993, then increased in the next six years to be just under 11 months in 1999.

Table 3.20 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of property offence, 1990 to 1999 [Text file]

The length of the custodial sentences awarded for burglary increased over the ten year period, with burglars being imprisoned for a little over four months longer, on average, in 1999 than in 1990.

Offenders imprisoned for motor vehicle conversion in 1999 received sentences of just under eight months, on average. This is a longer period than in previous years in the 1990s.

Custodial sentences awarded for fraud offences have been a little longer, on average, in the last four years compared with earlier years in the decade.

Continued

Footnotes

2. It should be noted that conviction and sentencing information for traffic and non-traffic offending has been combined in this report. Also, a significant change has been made to the way charges are formed into cases. This means that case-based figures presented in this report are generally not comparable with case-based figures presented in previous Conviction and Sentencing reports. See section 1.3 for further details.

3. Only court imposed fines are included in this report. That is, fines resulting from the issue of an infringement notice (for speeding or parking offences etc.) are not included in the data.

4. While the activation of prison sentences is not usually recorded in the data used for this report, the person is often at the same time imprisoned for the reconviction offence, which is recorded in the data.

5. See section 3.1 for a discussion of the reason why suspended sentences were included in the "deferred" sentence category.