Dangerousness Essay

productive citizen to society. The report suggested the best way for this to be carried out was through making the programmes ‘offender oriented’, to

The purpose of risk assessment is not to remove risks, but to take reasonable steps to reduce them. The process involves looking at the risk, and considering what can be done to make it less likely that the risk will develop into a reality. This can be done through implementing policies and codes of practice, acting in individual’s best interests, fostering culture of openness and support being consistent, maintaining professional boundaries and following systems for raising concerns.

Talking about making our communities safer, judges have increasing sentences to the offenders and over 90 per cent of offenders who fail to comply are now returned to court for tougher punishment. Re-offending rates are down. There has been a major reduction in the number of re-offences committed by both adults and juveniles a 22.9 per cent fall for adults and an 18.7 per cent fall for juvenile. Public confidence in the criminal justice system has risen in recent years, although corrections still need to do more to demonstrate to communities that the system is on their side in delivering justice. Personally, there is still too wide a gap between the reality about crime and the public’s perception.

There are nine key sections to an Oasys Risk Management Plan (RMP). The RNR Model can be applied to this context as each plan should address these concepts specifically to create a proportionate and defendable strategy (Andrews and Bonta, 2007). An effective RMP should strike a balance between public protection and the rehabilitation needs of the individual, enabling a more holistic approach towards offender management. Maurutto and Hannah-Moffat (2006) suggests the concept of risk now governs modern professional practice. Therefore, Risk Management Strategies are often open to professional scrutiny and as such, need to withstand scrutiny for this reason they should be evidence based, individualised and defendable to prevent risk management failures.

The second supporting argument that Parliament imposes the judiciary to place too much emphasis on incarceration is characterized by the reduction of credit for pre-sentence custody credit. Fortunately, this was amended in 2014. The Truth in Sentencing Act, one of the government’s early “tough on crime” laws was passed in 2009, but became operative on Feb. 22, 2010. This Act contributed to the changes regarding the credit offenders received for pre-sentence detention or “dead-time,” that does not count towards any parole or early release eligibility. This curbed judge’s ability to give a break on sentencing when a convicted offender has spent lengthy time in pre-trial jail custody. This discount in sentencing had evolved to recognize that

The increase in violent rapes and murders being committed by paroled prisoners in Victoria, such as those committed by Adrian Bailey in 2012, and Sean Price in 2015, have led to the tightening of parole laws, removal of suspended sentences, and introduction of new mandatory sentencing laws. However, while these laws can be an effective way of reducing crime, reducing reoffending by 17-20 percent (Helland and Tabarrok, 2007), they also are a departure from the doctrine of the separation of powers (Solonec, 2015). The purpose of this essay will be to assess how detrimental the removal of objective sentencing will be to society, through the implementation of policies such as mandatory sentencing, stricter parole laws, and the removal of

In 2009 nearly three quarters of a million offenders were released from prisons and jails in the United States, and it is estimated that roughly half of them will reoffend within three years of being released and will return to prison (Katel 1005). Most of these individuals, who are non-violent, low-level offenders, have little education, job experience, limited social skills and a drug or alcohol dependence (May and Pitts 21). That coupled with the fact they have a criminal record, reduces their chances of finding suitable housing or a decent job. Like it or not this affects all of us in one way or another. As taxpayers, we pay the costs of the justice system, incarceration, and there is the issue of public safety. This problem is not

‘What point is there in sending people to prison, we are asked? It just makes them more professional criminals and leads to reoffending as soon as they are released. They are stigmatised and will never get back into mainstream society. Incarceration is so inhumane, it should have no place in a modern, caring society’ (Robert Whelan, The Telegraph).

The crime control model is the “perspective that emphasizes the efficient arrest and conviction of criminal offenders” (Schmalleger, 2015, p. 22). A few of the underlying ideas of this model are keeping public order, preventing future crimes, and controlling unacceptable

I recently read the article on risk assessment and how Pennsylvania is expected to be using this tool to determine prison sentencing based on how likely a person would reoffend. All together I think it is outrageous that this tool is even an idea. Number one: we can not based likelihood on race. The color of one’s skin has nothing to do with the crimes they commit, that’s stereotyping. Number two: age should not be a fact, just as race shouldn’t. I understand there are crimes certain ages groups tend to commit, but to me a crime is a crime.

The RNR model, the dominant evidence-based risk determination model, is based on the three principles of risk, need, and responsivity (reviewed by Polaschek, 2012). The term 'risk' in this model refers to the likelihood that an offender will re-offend based on 'static' factors. These static factors include the severity of crimes committed, how many, whether violence was involved, and incarceration history. This information can typically be derived from the offender's criminal record and is used to calculate whether an offender has a high or low risk of recidivism. Static risk scores are used to determine whether an offender can largely be left alone (low-risk) in the

Prison numbers and overcrowding are at an all-time high, courts are over-subscribed, the police are over-stretched, and the public unconfident in either the efficiency or justice of the penal system. Re-offending rates remain high, with 2/3rds of prisoners re-offending within two years of release, a figure that goes up to 74.8% for men aged between 18-21. Though the amount of crime reported to the British Crime Survey has declined by 42% since 1995, few academic commentators attribute much of this reduction to a greater use of imprisonment. In any case, most people still believe that crime is rising, and fear of crime is relatively high, suggesting that we need to look beyond the facts to understand public opinion about crime and punishment (Bosworth,

A crime is a crime and know crime is too small but determining the small-time offenders from the serious offenders like should not only be separation by a cell with metal bars or merely a floor level. Over the years there has been doubt as to whether the punishments for the crimes committed are suitable or just completely irrational, crimes need to be assessed no matter the time delays. “Prison is an improbable place for rehabilitation, in part because it focuses exclusively on the offender rather than the offender in relationship to a society of which he or she is a troubled part”. Baird, David, Rough justice, 2013, Print. Prison can cause isolation from society and limit social norms and values to a society. Restorative justice

Within this there are four domains; family, community, school and personal or individual factors. The family of the offenders can be handlers, the community is where the offender resides may increase their likelihood of committing a crime. Applying this to the problem facing the Chelsea River Town Council, all the offender’s parents and elder siblings were recorded by the QPS to be on welfare and having alcohol and or drug addictions which would not make them effective controllers for the offenders. Families that are under duress can have a negative impact on their children which can lead them to committing crime. Additionally, it is quite clear that there is poor parental supervision and discipline. Further, all of the offenders live in the low income Council Flat Estate where a majority of the population fall under the lower socio-economic bracket. The lower socio- economic status of the area makes committing crime a lot more likely.

Once there has been a risk management assessment, we can know exactly what to expect and what can be done to prevent any type of risk. We will also know how to deal with any risk while it is happening to contain it.