This article draws on biographical narrative accounts of retired Scottish judges to provide insight about the operation of judicial independence in the routine practice of criminal justice. This oblique and often reified legal concept is given new meanings and understandings through the lived experiences of retired judicial actors, demonstrating its role as the 'master narrative' of the judiciary in their routine sentencing work. This research points to some of the adaptive judicial strategies necessary for the maintenance and reinforcement of the concept in the context of the everyday challenges of sentencing practice. It is argued that although judicial independence represents an aspirational conception of judicial work, this symbolic value also carries important meanings and has material effects in sentencing practice. Moreover, the boundaries of the judicial role in daily criminal practice may be less sharply defined than strong 'Olympian' interpretations of judicial independence would otherwise suggest.

No abstract

No abstract

We were delighted to be asked to respond to Richard Spark's paper. We are encouraged by the themes and issues highlighted, and feel passionately about many of the areas of future research identified in the piece. Indeed, many of the areas of scholarship (such as research with the Global South, practices and experiences of crime and punishment, violence in all its forms, crime and technology, socio-legal research, and political discourses around crime) are areas with which we-as a collective group of early career researchers (ECRs)-are currently engaged, often in collaboration with other ECRs within and outwith the UK. We commend both Prof. Sparks and the ESRC for this important and timely reflection on the direction and possible futures of criminology. We also highly commend the editors of CCJ who have sought a contribution from a group of academics who are at risk of being marginalised within the discipline