ABSTRACT
That the presence or absence of remorse is central to sentencing is now well established. Most scholarship has focused on normative questions of whether and how remorse ought to influence sentencing decisions. More recently, research is exposing the difficulties and dangers faced by judicial sentencers seeking to evaluate the authenticity of expressions of remorse. Distinctively, this chapter asks why, despite its irrationality, judges and lawyers seem compelled to focus on the attitude of the person to be sentenced. Illustrated by recent research into sentencing and guilty pleas, we reveal how a sensibility of gamesmanship pervades the practices court professionals feel obliged to pursue.
