Sentencing in the Garden of Eden

The Biblical story of Adam and Eve is symbolic of the first breach of the law; the first criminal prosecution; the first sentencing decision; and of the earliest known act of clemency. The death penalty threatened for the offence in question was not imposed - another penalty was substituted. It involved lifelong banishment under harsh conditions. This paper explores whether the sanctions imposed on Adam and Eve would be considered free of error by a modern Court of Appeal applying the sentencing principles which have evolved in this jurisdiction since that classic case. By examining the adequacy of the procedural steps taken in arriving at the sentence, the paper uses the case to illustrate present day disputes regarding the appropriate methodology of sentencing. The substantive sentences imposed on the parties are then examined to test whether they are proportional to the wrongdoing and satisfy the principle of parsimony, namely that a sentence should not be 'more severe than that which is necessary to achieve the purpose or purposes for which the sentence is imposed'. On this test, the sentences are found wanting as being excessive, both in their duration and in the inclusion of conditions, particularly in respect of Eve, that are unrelated to the original offence, cruel in their scope and unusual in their reach to third parties.