Blog

• Blog

Courts Tribunals & Sentencing

April 2, 2025April 2, 2025

Pre-sentence reports work: why is the government blocking them?

Imagine standing in court, facing the prospect of prison, and no one has asked about your mental health, your housing situation, or whether you were exploited. For many of our lived experience members at Revolving Doors, this isn’t hypothetical. It’s their story. 

Pre-Sentence Reports (PSRs) are meant to offer a holistic picture of a person before sentencing, giving an opportunity for the court to understand the context behind the crime. But for far too many people, especially Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) individuals, that opportunity is missed. Some of our members never had a PSR at all. Others were handed shallow, checkbox-style assessments that failed to tell their story. And the consequences can be devastating. 

The impact of a decline in PSRs 

“You would have thought they might have looked at something possibly about my childhood or my life or certain things but now there was nothing like that.” 

Revolving Doors has long argued that the decline in the use of Pre-Sentence Reports has had hugely negative outcomes for the justice system overall and is a major contributory factor to the rise in the use of prison sentences over community orders. 

In 2014, there were 32,523 standard delivery PSRs, involving thorough interviews and detailed assessments. By 2023, that number had fallen to just 4,374. This decline coincided with a shift towards fast delivery and oral reports, often based on rushed, under-30-minute interviews conducted in court. 

For those trapped in the revolving door of the criminal justice system, this has been catastrophic. Without full context, sentencers are more likely to default to custodial sentences, leading to the rise in prison numbers we see today. 

Disparity in sentencing is real 

The Lammy Review found that for every 100 white women sentenced to custody for drug offences, 227 Black women were sent to prison. Among men, the numbers are equally stark: for every 100 white men imprisoned, 141 Black men received a custodial sentence for the same offence. 

Whilst the racial element of the new guidelines has caught the headlines, it should be noted that they also emphasised the importance of pre-sentence reports for women—particularly those who are pregnant or postnatal and survivors of domestic abuse.  Women too, suffer disparity in the justice system.  Most women entering prison to serve a sentence (60%) have committed a non-violent offence.  63% of surveyed women in prison serving less than 12 months said they needed help with previous or ongoing trauma, including domestic violence.  This is likely to be hugely relevant to their offending – but without a PSR a sentencer will likely not know about it. The new guidelines were aimed at addressing this.   

What should a PSR do? 

Some of our members have told us they felt invisible in court, reduced to a file number. Others spoke of short PSRs that didn’t mention their homelessness or misrepresented their willingness to change. When you’re seen as a risk to be managed rather than a person to be understood, the outcome is all too often a prison cell. 

In England and Wales, we have the framework for PSRs, but we’re failing on delivery. Under-resourced probation services, rushed court timetables, and a lack of cultural awareness mean that PSRs too often reinforce, rather than reduce, disparities. 

A tool for change 

“If you are Black you are often seen as angry and dangerous. In Court we are not treated fairly.” 

PSRs aren’t just paperwork. They’re a crucial moment to interrupt cycles of disadvantage. But they need to be done properly. That means: 

• Making PSRs mandatory in all but the most exceptional cases. 

• Investing in probation to allow for in-depth, trauma-informed assessments. 

• Embedding cultural competence and anti-racist practice in report writing. 

• Listening to people with lived experience when designing and evaluating PSR processes. 

Last year, we responded to the Sentencing Council’s consultation on the imposition of community and custodial sentences, advocating for the necessity of PSRs for groups including young adults, those at risk of their first custodial sentence, those from ethnic or cultural minority backgrounds, pregnant women, and primary caregivers. 

We welcomed the Sentencing Council’s guidelines, which recognised the need for greater weight to be given to personal circumstances, including experiences of trauma, poverty, and systemic inequality. These guidelines, if implemented, would have helped courts take a more informed and compassionate approach, one that reflects the real lives behind the offences. 

But now, the Lord Chancellor has blocked their implementation, a deeply concerning move that undermines efforts to bring fairness and humanity into sentencing decisions. This move completely ignores the reality that our justice system is already influenced by race. 

If we want a justice system that delivers justice for everyone we first need recognition that a 2-tier system already operates – with people of colour paying the price.  

The Sentencing Council’s recommendations provided a clear path toward a more just and effective system. By blocking them, the government is sending a message that it is willing to ignore evidence, expert opinion, and the voices of those directly affected by these decisions. In light of this we will be calling for the Lord Chancellor to mandate full, high quality PSRs for anyone who is potentially facing a custodial sentence.