The Magistrate And The Threatening Mob

This is a case where consequentialism does not have enough empirical evidence to make a proper decision. Nielsen’s example here was the classic case of whether a justice system should frame and execute an innocent person in order to appease threatening rioters that are upset about a crime for which the actual perpetrator cannot be found. Although the classic consequentialist viewpoint may say that framing an innocent person is acceptable because the mob will cause greater loss of life, Nielsen contends that in such a situation the overall consequences from framing an innocent person are usually unpredictable and therefore an innocent person should not be framed. In such a situation, appeasing the mob by finding a scapegoat could backfire: people might learn of the miscarriage of justice and riot again, or respect for the justice system might be undermined, which would lead to rampant crime in the future. Such uncertainty is a consequentialist reason to follow the deontological principle of not harming the innocent instead of making what looks like a shortsighted consequentialist move.

The problems surrounding the criminal justice system range from a variety of issues in different areas of the system. But i believe they are all connected back to a societal problem, that has to do with a outdated philosophical notion “redemptive violence”. I will break down each aspect, which i find most troubling. I will cover problems between policing and peacekeeping, corrections options, and the issue of redemptive violence which is a major issue in the philosophy of the criminal justice system. These issues represent problems that have always been key topics when discussing problems of ethics in criminal justice. Policing and Peacekeeping are roles that have long been debated in usefulness to stopping crime. Corrections comes with the reality of incarceration having little chance of success but more likely a higher rate of recidivism. I well also touch on briefly the issues of attorney discretion. While the issue of redemptive violence ties them all in, As i well show this philosophy is the “root of all evil” in the issues facing the criminal justice system.

‘A Peacemaking Approach to Criminology’ was written by Louis J. Gesualdi, and published in 2013. It contains a review of different writings, which relate to criminology. The main argument of Gesualdi lies in promoting a humane way of handling crime and deviants. The book proposes a peaceable way of dealing with offenders in a manner that accords respect to human rights. Further, Gesualdi notes that the criminal justice system is concentrated on inflicting harm on the offenders by punishing them. He argues that the system is fixated on the notion of reacting to crime rather than prevention. Hence, the book proposes an approach where restorative justice and prevention of crime can be accommodated in the criminal justice system. The main

We discussed the recent mob uprising and the state of unrest in the community. It was the judgment of all present that the life of the defendant, even if the wrong man, could not be saved; that an appeal would so inflame the public that the jail would be attacked and perhaps other prisoners executed by violence. In the opinion of all of us a case was presented where the defendant, now that he had been convicted by a jury, must die by the judgment of the law, or else, if his case were appealed, he would die by the act of the uprising of the people (Pfeifer, “United”).

Michael Fay, caned for vandalism and was beaten in Singapore. This incident sparked a debate whether it was right or wrong. “Tough Justice” and “ Time to Assert American Values” was two articles that express their thoughts about the Michael Fay incident. After carefully analyzing the two texts, the reader realizes that the article “Rough Justice” has the most relevant and sufficient article to support it because the way the author uses logical appeals and facts.

This dueling document, “Two Sides of Haymarket,” includes the two view. Which explains on the topic presented by a verdict of a murder and a judge who gives their own opinion about the laws that the people need to follow. In this article there is a clear explanation of the accident, which led to arrest and conviction of eight people for the murder of police officer Mathias J. Degan. Who died as a result of the explosion of a pipe bomb at a labor rally organized by anarchists in the Haymarket Square in Chicago on May 04,1886.

Every crime has a correlation with a theory in criminology. These theories explain why crime happens and some even go to the extent to come up with a solution to prevent or stop crime. This paper will explore how certain theories of criminology connect with the riots that happened in Ferguson, Missouri. Facts from different articles will be used to back up the theory. The theories will explain why rioters committed the crimes did. The paper will take the actions of the protestors and explain why they did what they did.

The Role and Powers of Lay Magistrates in Criminal Cases 1a) Describe the role and powers of lay magistrates in criminal cases. b) Consider whether lay magistrates are adequately trained for their work. 1a) Describe the role and powers of lay magistrates in criminal cases. For centuries the criminal justice system has allowed lay people; people who are not legally qualified to administer justice to the civilian population.

According to Act Utilitarianism, the act that makes the greatest happiness to the group will be morally permissible. In fact, a person who is criminal will be judged by his ability to hurt other or committing a crime. The consequence of arresting the potential murderer will help to maximize victim and their family’s utility. Otherwise, if we choosing to refraining from arresting, murderer will be happy; and the victims

At first glance, Utilitarian moral theories may seem to support the idea of torturing this innocent man. If we look at this situation we see that there is a dilemma of hurting one man, or having to bear the death of many. We may say that since the basis of Utilitarianism is

With time violence may become such a commonplace that even seemingly sane people will see no problem murdering a store clerk, opening fire on someone that cut them off on the highway, or killing a disobedient child. "A society that chooses violent death as a solution to a social problem gives official sanction to a climate of violence." (Prejean, 57)

In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.

This paper is on the Classical School theory that emerged in the eighteenth century; two writes of this period were Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Among the major ideas that descend from this theory are the concepts of humans as free-willed, rational beings, utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number), civil rights and due process of law, rules of evidence and testimony, determinate sentencing, and deterrence. The writes during this period examined not only human nature but also social conditions as well. The Classical School, gave us a humanistic conception of how law and criminal justice system should be constructed. Law was to protect the rights of both society and individual, and its chief purpose was to deter criminal behavior, the law emphasized moral responsibility and the duty of citizens to consider full the consequences of behavior before they acted. This thinking required humans possessing free will and a rations nature.

as he attempts to maneuver the bureaucratic system.  In vain, much as many people try to find meaning and justice out of court, Josef K.'s efforts to discover why he is accused and must suffer are in vain.  Yet, his character and his sins are conventional, and he has no bold or threatening ambitions.  All he can do is ask questions, but he receives no answers that would clarify the bureaucratic system into which he has been thrust.  Just like existential awareness undermines the entire rational structure of Divine justice, so, too, the alternative hypotheses, the multiple explanations, the different interpretations, and the uncertainty Josef K. experiences, serve to undermine the whole rational structure of the justice system.  Josef K. comes to understand the socially constructed, arbitrary, and absurd nature of the justice system, and, justice itself "The truth allegedly resides above the realms of justice and injustice."iii This literary analysis will focus on how Josef K.'s experiences in The Trial demonstrate not only the corrupt justice system of the era but also the absurd and futile attempt to seek an arbitrary concept like justice in an existential realm.

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.