Search

Background: Early and accurate diagnosis is critical as disease‐modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) become available and clinical trials are moving increasingly into early disease stages. The Learning ratio (LR) has demonstrated the highest sensitivity towards changes in memory, relative to other learning slope metrics. The current study examines the performance of LR within the ADNI cognitively normal population. Method: Our analyses included 672 participants aged 55 to 90 years, diagnosed in ADNI as cognitively intact. After applying Jak/Bondi actuarial diagnostic criteria to the sample1, 2, 56 participants met actuarial criteria for MCI (actuarial‐MCI), 253 had normal cognition with subjective memory complaints (actuarial‐SMC), and 363 were cognitively normal without subjective complaints (actuarial‐CN). We compared LR derived from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)3 and the Word Recall subtest of the ADAS‐Cog4 between the diagnostic groups, and studied the effects of LR, diagnosis, and the interaction between LR and diagnosis on bilateral hippocampal volume and β‐amyloid pathology. Result: Actuarial‐MCI performances on RAVLT LR and Word Recall LR were significantly worse than actuarial‐SMC and actuarial‐CN (ps<.005). No differences were seen between LRs for actuarial‐CN and actuarial‐SMC (ps>.05). The association between Word Recall LR and hippocampal volume was strongest in actuarial‐MCI followed by actuarial‐SMC, both of which displayed a positive relationship between the two variables, while actuarial‐CN displayed a negative relationship (R2=.209, p<.001, Figure 1A). Adding the interaction term improved model performance (R2 change =.007 p =.013). Similar trends were observed between RAVLT LR and diagnostic group predicting hippocampal volume, though the interaction was not significant (R2 =.208, p<.001, Figure 1B; R2 change =.001 p =.28). No main or interaction effects were observed between LR measures, diagnostic groups, and amyloid status (ps>.05, Figure 2). Conclusion: A subset of ADNI cognitively intact participants displayed MCI after applying Jak/Bondi actuarial norms, suggesting that ADNI diagnostic criteria may have under‐pathologized memory loss in a subset of patients. The actuarial‐MCI group displayed worse learning slopes and stronger relationships with hippocampal volume than CN participants with and without SMC. Applying the actuarial criteria to AD clinical trials – in conjunction with LR – may yield greater sensitivity in detecting those in the early stages of AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Only a small percentage of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) participants are known to carry autosomal dominant pathogenic variants in the amyloid beta precursor protein (APP) gene or in presenilin 1 or 2 (PSEN1/2); more research is needed to identify additional causative genetic variants. This study presents results of the initial genetic analyses in the Longitudinal Early Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) and planned next steps. Methods: Whole exome sequencing (WES) is being performed for all cognitively impaired participants, including individuals with EOAD or frontotemporal dementia. Sequencing data is processed using GATK best practices and all variants for APP, PSEN1/2, progranulin (GRN), and microtubule associated protein tau (MAPT) are reviewed for previously reported pathogenic variants. C9ORF72 is also assessed for pathogenic repeat expansions. WES was analyzed with CANOES and CoNIFER for copy number variants (CNVs). WES data has been reviewed for reported pathogenic variants in other neurodegenerative disease‐associated genes. Gene burden testing is being done for the LEADS cases and age‐matched controls from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative for rare variants in these genes. Results: To date, WES has been generated for 301 cases, and GWAS for 384 participants (290 cases, 89 controls). Reported pathogenic variants or repeat expansions in C9ORF72, PSEN1, GRN, and MAPT were identified in 2% of cases for the six screened genes. No CNVs were detected in APP, PSEN1/2, GRN, or MAPT. Review also identified individuals with pathogenic variants or CNVs in genes linked with diseases including Parkinson's disease and Niemann‐Pick disease, including reported or predicted pathogenic variants in GBA, LRRK2, and SMPD1. Surprisingly, results do not show enrichment of functional TREM2 variants compared to population frequency. Conclusions: Initial results indicate that LEADS is strongly enriched for novel genetic risk and/or causative factors, as only 2% have a reported pathogenic variant or repeat expansion in APP, PSEN1/2, GRN, MAPT, or C9ORF72. Review of reported pathogenic variants in other neurodegenerative disease‐associated genes indicates that while a small portion of disease etiology may be explained by these variants, more research is needed to identify additional causative and risk factors contributing to EOAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In light of recent government proposals to reform sentencing, this article looks back to reforms introduced to sentencing for murder. Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 created starting points to assist courts in determining the minimum sentence for offenders convicted of murder. The authors argue that the cursory review of the Schedule, and the failure to consider its impact has led to several adverse consequences. First, since the starting points in the Schedule were not the product of a careful proportionality analysis, they do not conform to the requirements of ordinal proportionality. The guidance offered by Sch.21 has compromised rather than promoted proportional sentencing for murder. Second, Sch.21 has also resulted in minimum terms the severity ofwhich cannot be justified on grounds of desert or deterrence. The authors propose some remedial reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights developments in the principles of sentencing in Wales and England including topics on the consistency of judgments made by the Court of Appeal, the Sentencing Code of the Law Commission, and the sentencing guidelines in Scotland.

In 2018 the Law Commission published its Sentencing Code, the final product of a project originating in 2015. The aim of the project was to create a single sentencing statute to bring together all of the existing legislation governing sentencing procedure within a single enactment. This commentary recognises the importance of the Commission's initiative and advocates a more ambitious reform based upon the Code. The authors see the Code as constituting a platform for future reforms; the consolidation was a necessary first step towards more principled and consistent sentencing. In this respect, it constitutes a dynamic structure which should facilitate further enhancements to the sentencing process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Criminal Law Review is the property of Carswell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines recent judgments which govern the way that the Parole Board of England and Wales takes decisions to release prisoners. The point of departure for the discussion is the recent decision by the Divisional Court in Worboys. The article explores two key challenges for the Board. First, the article explores the complex environment in which the Board operates. Thus the Board must exercise an inquisitorial function while operating within an adversarial system of justice. There are also important material constraints upon the Board's inquiries. Second, the article discusses the test for release in light of recent judgments. The authors argue that greater clarity is required regarding the test, and greater recognition of the limits on the Board's ability to conduct investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over a decade after the introduction of sentencing guidelines in England and Wales, little is known about their effects on consistency and individualisation. Limited research has addressed the issue of consistency, and no research has explored another key concept, namely individualisation. This is regrettable since one criticism of guidelines is that they undermine the principle of individualisation at sentencing, and this critique is examined here. The article explores two potential threats to individualisation, using sentence length data from the Crown Court Sentencing Survey. One threat may arise if a guideline constrains judges to sentence within a restricted range, leading to a less individualised approach to sentencing. The second is more fundamental, and consists of the tendency to favour some sentence lengths over others--a preference for certain "round" numbers. The article reports an analysis of custodial sentences for assault offences. Results indicate that sentence lengths for assault offences are affected by a preference for certain numbers--a tendency first observed by Francis Gallon in the 19th century. On a more positive note, we find no evidence that the sentencing guidelines for assault and burglary introduced in 2011 have diminished the degree of individualisation in sentencing. We also find that courts report taking a larger number of sentencing factors into account under the new guidelines, further evidence that the guidelines have not undermined individualisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hospitals and Emergency departments in England and Wales are over-burdened and underresourced. In fact, they are overburdened because they have been under-resourced -- relative to the funding necessary to accommodate current patient caseloads. In response, NHS trusts have implemented a range of remedial measures, most of which are diversionary in nature. The objective has been to reduce the volume of patients admitted by screening out those who can be effectively treated in community-based facilities. The measures reflect recognition that hospital and emergency ward treatment is being compromised by over-crowding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most offenders appearing for sentencing have a criminal record. Despite the prevalence of previous convictions, little is known about their impact on sentence outcomes, and in particular the decision to imprison. How should previous convictions affect sentence outcomes? Competing theoretical models exist. Previous convictions may simply disentitle repeat offenders to first offender mitigation and then fail to aggravate (progressive loss of mitigation). Alternatively, prior convictions may be used to continuously increase the severity of sentence (cumulative sentencing). Until now, due to limitations of the sentencing statistics, it has been impossible to determine which model underpins sentencing practices. The Crown Court Sentencing Survey (CCSS) provides a more adequate source of data. Sentencers complete a return noting the factors taken into account at sentencing, including the number of prior convictions. This article reports new data from the CCCS which demonstrate that for most offences, courts continue to apply the principle of the progressive loss of mitigation. Once this mitigation is lost, there is little further increase in severity as measured by the custody rate, although some variation in the effect of previous convictions does emerge between offences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Criminal Law Review is the property of Carswell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines an under-explored area of sentencing law in England and Wales: sentencing outside the definitive guidelines. The issue has come to the fore as a result of judgments arising from the serious public disorder of last summer. Sentencing outside the definitive sentencing guidelines is of course not restricted to riot-related offending; other circumstances will inevitably arise which impel courts to depart from the guidelines ranges. Accordingly, it is worth exploring the ways in which courts might sentence offenders for criminal acts unforeseen by the guidelines authority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Criminal Law Review is the property of Carswell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article examines amendments to the sentencing guidelines in England and Wales in 2011. Two sets of guidelines will be used by sentencers as a result of the expected delay in the replacement of all guidelines. The three categories of seriousness of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) are discussed. The significance of the new guide lies in the fact that it corrects structural and conceptual weaknesses in its predecessor and it creates a model for future guidance.

The authors comment on an article by Austin Lovegrove about the role of personal mitigation under the sentencing guidelines set by the government of Great Britain. The authors explain some of the important flaws they identified from the analysis of Lovegrove and offer correction to misconceptions about the role of mitigation. They also examine the interpretation of Lovegrove on public attitudes in Wales and England.

The article focuses on the debate on the role and impact of victim impact statements (VIS) and family impact statements which continues in most common law jurisdictions. It argues that the main goal of ancillary harm should be to inform the courts on how serious the crime is to facilitate the determination of a more balanced sentence. It talks on the effect of VIS on sentence severity, restitution which is a particular sanction based on the concept of reparation, and limits to ancillary harm as aggravating factor. It explains reasonable foreseeability and inclination against cross-examination in accordance with the American law.

The article presents a study which attempts to develop a new approach for maximizing downhole fluid analysis (DFA) data based on the equation of state (EOS) approach. It states that the EOS approach has the advantage of providing themodynamically consistent characterization of reservoir-fluid properties. It concludes that the EOS approach provides a useful tool for DFA data interpretation which can be used for DFA data quality assurance or quality control.

Copyright of Canadian Criminal Law Review is the property of Carswell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article reports findings from empirical research upon public attitudes to sentencing purposes and sentencing factors. The results demonstrate high levels of support for the use of previous convictions at sentencing. As well, there was significant public support for a range of mitigating factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports findings from empirical research upon public attitudes to the sentencing of culpable driving offences resulting in death. With the exception of one offence, the results indicated greater tolerance for current and recommended sentencing practices than is generally supposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on aggravating and mitigating factors at sentencing. According to it, the role of mitigating and aggravating factors under most U.S. sentencing guideline schemes is to justify the imposition of a sentence that is outside the range prescribed by the guidelines. It presents the benefits of a comprehensive sentencing guidance system for the exercise of discretion with respect to sentencing factors including the clarification of the different standard of proof for contested claims for mitigation and aggravation.

The article considers the current state of sentencing in South Africa, based on the judgment by the Supreme Court of Appeal in S v Ferretra, a case that attracted considerable media attention. Having explained the principles on which the various sentences in this case are based, two considerations are identified which, although not immediately evident, nevertheless prevent sentencing in South Africa from being more principled and less intuitive. The first consideration is the role of the sentencing discretion, and the problems that our courts experience in separating the fact-finding phase from the decision-making phase. The second consideration is that most role players in the criminal justice system have been schooled in the adversarial trial system, and have difficulty dealing with the more inquisitorial procedure required during sentencing. These considerations clearly impacted upon this judgment as well. Finally, certain recommendations are made as to how the basic principles of sentencing could be utilised to ensure more principled sentencing outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of the victim in the sentencing process continues to generate controversy among scholars and practitioners across many jurisdictions. The debate has focused on the propriety of allowing victims input into the sentencing process in an adversarial legal system, as well as the specific ways in which this input should be structured. In the adversarial legal systems of some countries, such as the United States, victims were given the right to provide input into the sentencing process as early as the 1980s, when most jurisdictions introduced Victim Impact Statements at sentencing.

Discusses developments in conditional sentencing in Canada. Conditional sentence for an offender who poses a risk to the community; Combination of a conditional sentence with a term of custody; Supervision of offenders serving conditional sentences; Empirical research on conditional sentencing; Politics of sentencing reform.

Discusses the evolution of conditional sentencing in Canada. Nature of a conditional sentence; Changes to the practice of conditional sentencing; Relationship between duration, conditions and response to unjustified breach; Impact of the R. v. Proulx judgment on the number of conditioned sentences imposed; Conditional sentencing and public opinion; Transforming the penal landscape.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to two articles "Simply Harsh to Fairly Simple: Joint Enterprise Reform" and "Joint Enterprise: The Implications of an Unfair and Unclear Law" published in previous issues of the periodical is presented.

The authors described victim impact statements (VIS) involved in a legal no man's land wherein the attributed relevance and weight is subject to divided jurisprudence. Noted by the authors upon reflecting the case, R. c. Cook, victim impact statements may put an end to the concept and legal limbo as the case affirms the use of the impact statements as an aggravating factor on sentence. Moreover, the judgment gives rise to the undoubted impact on VIS as a form of evidence.