This article reviews the findings of the Tasmanian jury sentencing study that are relevant to the debate about directly involving juries in sentencing outcomes, a debate that has been revived by a proposal to allow juries in Victoria to recommend a minimum non-parole period. The results support the conclusion of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission that proposals to involve juries directly in sentencing decisions would encounter considerable practical and procedural problems and would raise concerns about the fairness of the process.