Factors Affecting The Criminal Justice System

It is believed that punishment works to protect people from their criminals as it used to be seen as a fear in people’s mind to avoid inappropriate behaviour against other people, harming other people in certain ways and breaking the laws set by society or government. Punishment is a common view of human beings and they choose to behave appropriately towards their duty to follow rules set out by government laws to avoid fines or sentences. Sentencing is categorised n various degrees depending on the type and severity of crime committed, and imprisonment is considered as most common way to protect communities from its offenders and deterrent to re-offending all over the world. As Murray (1997) claims that punishment reduces crime

The realities and everyday necessities in Indigenous communities seem concealed and compromised in the enduring Indigenous criminal law discourse which is framed by issues throughout history, jurisdictions, prisons, courts and the criminal justice system. Whilst today’s intergeneration effects of poverty and the loss of autonomy fuel Indigenous disadvantage, the criminal law institution is another contributor which vividly displays disadvantages and barriers which preclude Indigenous Australians from sufficiently accessing justice. However, the pursuit for justice is more multifaceted than a return to Indigenous tradition and retainment of the dominant criminal justice system. The following essay will highlight this

However, research carried out in the 1990’s as part of ‘what works’ movement identified that the most successful sentences were those that attempted to change, not only the offender’s behaviour but also their attitude towards their offending (Hollin, 2007). This catalysed the push towards cognitive-behavioural approaches and by 1999 one especially important development was the establishment of the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, which ‘quality assured’ probation and prison programmes for rehabilitating offending. This technique brought an emphasis of individual responsibility of an offender (Mair,2004). A criticism of this was the lack of attention of sociological factors that can influence criminal behaviour.

The ongoing role of prison within the UK Criminal Justice System is becoming increasingly unclear. On the one hand in the 21st century, it is considered to be a “state strategy for crime control, a deterrent for those contemplating crime and punitive response for those who have broken laws”McAvinchey (2011 pg.10). On the other hand, it is also supposed to have a rehabilitative purpose, the intended role of a prison is to rehabilitate the offender so that when they have completed their prison sentence, they can be successfully rehabilitated back into the community and live a crime free fulfilled life. Yet, when examining the vital statistics that underline an increase in prisoner population, it is clearly apparent that the system neither

Discuss whether or not the criminal justice system could operate without the existence of privileges to evidence. Within this answer discuss why privileges exist and argue for or against the end for privileges and societies interest in these rules of evidence. Discuss a minimum of two different privileges within your answer.

Across the United States, city and county governments seek to gain revenue through the illegitimate jailing of indigent defendants who cannot afford to pay the large and cumbersome fines that accompany committing (seemingly petty) crimes— such as missing court dates, a requirement for classes such as anger management, the list goes on. Indeed, the practice of debtor’s prison has long been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court within the United States, yet a contemporary form of debtor’s prison has begun to take form which targets vulnerable populations. When an individual commits a crime, they are to be justly punished. If this punishment consists of a fine, that fine is expected to be paid accordingly; if the fined individual simply does not have the time or money to pay these steep fines, however, they are sent to jail indefinitely. This rise of financial burden imposed upon the liberty of low income citizens through the fining, issuing of fees, and jail time sanctioned by the criminal justice system has resulted in new, illegitimate, and ostensibly unconstitutional forms of debtor’s prisons that permeate contemporary U.S. society. Jeopardizing the liberty of vulnerable populations, based upon material inequality and extraction of necessary resources, only does one thing within a society: continue the cycle of poverty and increase the poor’s dependence upon the rich for their liberty, equality and most importantly, survival.

What is the expectation when someone commits a crime? Many would say that offenders require strict punishment including harsh sentencing moreover that rehabilitation is without value. Two conflicting views are being examined from Eugene H. Methvin, who is a supporter of mandatory sentencing as well as ‘three strikes’ sentencing that can result in life sentences being mandatory for repeat offenders even if they are non-violent crimes. On the other hand, is David Shichor, who supports sentencing that is efficient and fair especially since harsh sentencing does not reduce crime. Two works are reviewed, Eugene Methvin is his paper Mugged by Reality and David Shichor in his Three Strikes as a Public Policy.

The criminal justice system is the set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. The system is not one single criminal justice system in the United States but nevertheless many similar, individual systems. How every particular system works in each area depends on who is in charge of the city, county, state, or federal. Different authorities have different laws, agencies, and ways of managing criminal justice processes. There are two primary systems which are, state, criminal justice systems handle crimes committed within their state boundaries and the federal, criminal justice system handles crimes committed on federal property or in more than one state. Most criminal

The Deterrence theory is a key element in the Criminal Justice System. It’s principles about justice appeal to us because it adapts to our ideas of what we identify as fairness. Punish the sinful and the ones who break the law, swiftly, to the extent that pain will dissuade them from committing a crime ever again. Its sole purpose, to instill fear. Fear of breaking the law because of its punishments. We not only use this theory to punish criminals, but it is a basis in which we raise our kids and pets on, that breaking the rules can lead to consequences. The deterrence theory says that people obey the law because they are scared of getting caught and being punished. It is said that people do not commit crimes because they are afraid of getting caught, instead they are being motivated by some other deep need. In my paper, I will address the two theorists who re-conceptualized the deterrence theory, the principles and two types of deterrence as well as give short insight into my own opinions on the deterrence theory.

The main introduction to a ‘just deserts’ philosophy began in the 1991 Criminal Justice Act. This act formally established retributivism and condemnation as the primary aims of sentencing and advocated proportionality and consistency within sentencing practice. Unfortunately, penal policy in the UK did not match up to the notion of ‘just deserts. In reality: ‘…the 1980s had witnessed a growing emphasis on a punitive law and order ideology, and consequently the 1991 act also ensured that violent or sexual offenders would go to prison for long periods, which in some cases might be greater than their offense might warrant. This practice of “incapacitating” particular offenders was completely inconsistent with a true justice model.’

To what extent has the media shaped your understanding of crime and the criminal justice system?

There are many aspects of the criminal justice system that must be considered when determining the most important. Each area of the criminal justice system has its place and plays an important role in the process. For example, an arrest cannot be made without the police, the case cannot be reviewed or adjudicated without the courts, and the convicted individual cannot be placed into supervised confinement without corrections. However, the courts are the most important aspect of the criminal justice system because the decisions made in and outside the court system can serve as a guide for the other areas of the criminal justice system to follow. More specifically, judges and prosecutors hold tremendous power and can shape how laws are enforced,

It is through the Criminal Justice System’s close collaborations with like-minded agencies such as the Police, Prison and Courts Services, that the public’s concerns and worries are resolved, in order to bring about justice in our communities (Cavadino and Dignan, 2007 as cited in Fox, 2014). With that in mind and out of the way, this essay will aim to explore some of the strengths and weaknesses, which are prominent within the Criminal Justice System. To do this successfully, the Police and the Courts Service will be the key agencies that will be explored in relation to the key Models that shape the whole Criminal Justice System. These Models were founded by Herbert L. Packer (1968) and Michael King (1981).

In classical theory, the main objective of study is the offence and the nature of the offender is a rational, free-willed, calculating and normal individual (Aker, 2012). However, it became apparent that some were more motivated to commit crime than others, regardless of deterrence. Therefore, the classical doctrine cannot account for re-offending. Based on empirical research done on convicted offenders, the notion of deterrence was rarely given thought of (Burke, 2013). Initially, most offenders give a lot of thought to the notion of punishment; however, in the process of committing the offence, offenders give little consideration to deterrence and consequences. As a result, this defies whether the purpose of deterrence is, in fact, achieving what it is meant to (Burke, 2013). The model is idealistic, that individuals could be controlled by the threat of punishment- by the likelihood of arrest, prosecution and

It can be argued that imprisonment has been widely found to have failed to achieve its stated goals. Rehabilitation as perceived within the prison context is a myth. The predominant objective of control has developed in such a manner as to exclude the successful operation of any rehabilitation process. In looking at the nature and operation of the New South Wales prison system, for example, one is confronted by a system preoccupied with notions of control and security. A very disturbing feature of the system is that the availability of such prison accommodation helps to define the nature of the offender rather than the offender being defined by the nature of his offence (Wilkinson, 1972).