“However reports that the Council proposes that provisional sentences could only be reduced, not increased are concerning,” Mr Smith said.

“The delay in final sentencing would give courts the opportunity to assess whether they are maturing, what is their likelihood of rehabilitation or whether they are dangerous and would likely be a risk to the community if released,” he said.

“The problem is that a small number of young killers remain dangerous. This possibility was recognised by Justice Wood when he sentenced a youth who had abducted and murdered an infant girl at the age of 13.”

There he stated:

  “The cases I have in mind are those involving juveniles who are convicted of offences attracting a possible maximum sentence of 25 years or more, who are aged less than 15 years at the time of the offence, and where the information available at the time of sentencing does not permit the Court to make a proper assessment as to the presence or likely development of a serious personality or psychiatric disorder, and/or propensity for future dangerousness. In such a case it would be desirable, in my view, if the Court could sentence the offender initially to be detained at her Majesty’s pleasure, with provision for review and resentencing at a later date, for example at the age of 21 years, or after say 5 years in custody.”*

Mr Smith said if it appears from the young prisoner’s behaviour in custody that he or she continues to pose a danger to prison officers and fellow inmates, the Court should have the power to increase a sentence or extend the period of close supervision, for the protection of the community.

“Whilst with young offenders the Courts and Justice system must encourage rehabilitation, protection of the community is and must remain the most important factor in sentencing, particularly where it appears the prisoner remains dangerous.” Mr Smith said.