ABSTRACT
This “obvious” lack of remorse would be referred to by the court in its pronouncement of sentence. Here, It can see how the attribution of remorse serves to attach or detach the perpetrator from the deed and to qualify or disqualify the doer as a member of the moral community. It is a central premise of this work that the public occasions, in which there is both communal interest and communal reaction to a purported wrongdoer’s remorse or absence of remorse, are significant events in the moral regulation of social life. It is in the third usage of remorse that the separation between act and being is concretized as the offender sheds the self that perpetrated the transgressive act by embarking on a project of self-transformation. However, even in cases that fit so fully into the typology of acknowledgment, suffering, and self-transformation, the attribution of remorse is fraught with ambiguity.
