By Tess Bartlett - Rethinking Crime and Punishment

treatment of ‘violent offenders’ (a category of offenders whose crimes include‘graffiti, car conversion, sexual offences, rape and murder’, according to McVicar)(McVicar, 2002b: 1). The goals set out by the Trust include: the requirement of lifein prison to ‘mean life’ for all violent offenders; the enactment of legislation whichensures that parole is only granted to offenders in exceptional circumstances; theassurance that serious violent offenders receive maximum penalties; the assurancethat victims of violent crime and their families have more of an input into courtproceedings; the allowance of juries to recommend sentencing to judges; thepromotion of cumulative sentences for repeat offenders (Sensible Sentencing Trust,2008a: Par. 2­6); and the representation of the victim or their family at sentencingand parole board hearings as of right (Sensible Sentencing Trust, 2003). To realisethese objectives, the Trust also recognises that the power of criminal justice elites todetermine policy must be significantly reduced.The Sensible Sentencing Trust and grass­roots lobbyingIn a bid to gain penal power, the Sensible Sentencing Trust use a variety of grassrootsinitiatives to promote their ideas: by distributing newsletters and mediareleases, making contributions on talkback radio, and by holding public meetingsand conferences (McVicar, 2002a). Ippolito and Walker (1980: 333) note that ifgroups are able to move citizens to ‘write individual, rational letters to governmentofficeholders in large numbers’, they are likely to be effective. The SensibleSentencing Trust encourages its members to take action, prompting readers of itsnewsletter to ‘[w]rite letters to the paper. Write or phone your local Member ofParliament … Hold them accountable’ (Pedler, 2002: Section 2, emphasis added).However, the letters that the Trust encourages are likely to invoke a differentrationality – not objective social scientific reasoning, but emotive accounts ofvictimisation or denunciation of the supposed gentle approach to punishment in thiscountry. Further, McVicar (2002b: Section 1) tells readers of the Trust’s newsletterthat he is ‘convinced it is up to ordinary people like you and I to take ownership ofthis situation, to step out of our comfort zone and stand up to be counted!’ After thelaw and order referendum, speaking out against the government through letters andsubmissions was another way ‘ordinary’ citizens could take part in the politicalprocess. The referendum had demonstrated what power the public now had, andgrass­roots lobbying then allowed the Trust to apply strong public pressure on48