Yes, that was my question: there could be other factors, including smart judges. Okay.
By the way, I'm also shocked at the U.S. incarceration rates. They're right off the end of the chart.
One of the two things I noticed, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the conditional sentencing regime appears to have induced a whole lot of guilty pleas. I don't know whether that data is there or not, but the fact that there was conditional sentencing available seems to have induced people to plead guilty. I may have misdrawn this conclusion. That's the first question.
The second one is that a conditional sentence regime appears to have allowed the assignment of more robust sentence conditions—bells and whistles such as restraint of contact, counselling, abstention from alcohol or drugs, curfew, community service. The conditional sentencing regime seems to have allowed more robust, more creative conditions.
Would I be wrong in reaching either of those two conclusions?