The ‘just desserts’ theory of sentencing is a form of Retributivism, which is a late eighteenth-

The criminal justice system plays a fundamental role in achieving justice, as the system aims to protect all members of the community fairly and equally. However, in the criminal case of R v Loveridge, it is evident that the justice system fails to apply the law to equally balance the needs of the victims and the community. In this case, the offender Kieran Loveridge pleaded guilty to five counts of offences; three charges of common assault, one charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and one charge of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act, the victim being Thomas Kelly, Loveridge received 4 years’ non-parole for manslaughter, Loveridge’s total effective sentence therefore is 7 years and 2 months with an effective

This essay will critically analyse and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of retributivism. Throughout history the term “retributivism” has had a diverse though correlated meanings. The most significant meaning of retributivism is righting or rebalancing the scale of justice, through the use of mechanisms such as punishment e.g. punishing criminals in order to achieve justice for the offence they have committed. Retributivism also looks back at the offence, since the offender has committed a wrongful offence which needs to be punished. One of the core reasons why offenders should be punished is that they need to ‘pay back’ for the offence they have committed; the theory that is associated with retributivism is the just deserts theory. A theory is a concept that is based upon a hypothesis that can be supported with evidence. The just desert theory is used to justify retributivism punishment. Unlike other theories of punishment that mainly concentrates on preventing future crime, such as rehabilitation, deterrence and reductivism. The retributivist theory primarily concentrates on punishing past crimes. Although others would disagree with this for the reason that they think punishment should be used to ‘reduce’ and ‘prevent future crimes’ (Carlsmith et al., 2002 p284). The essay will take into account the views of various theories; theorist and philosophers so that the strengths and weaknesses of

Bentham, J. (1789). Punishment and deterrence. In A. von Hirsch & A. Ashworth (Eds., 1998), Principled sentencing: readings on theory and policy (2nd ed.). 53-57. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

The society generally has established customs and moral imperative to guide the conduct of each member of that particular society. These norms designating certain ways in which people ought to live in the society exist in societal laws and moral prescription. The justifications for the ideal practices in the society have been found in the desire to maintain peaceful coexistence in the society. The extent of freedom of an individual is therefore often curtailed for the greater good of the society. These utilitarian considerations have been discussed amidst the concept and rationale of punishment. John Stuart Mill, Michel Foucault and Kantian ethics have been used to justify or refute the notion and rationale of punishment in our society. These ethical perspectives provide useful insight into understanding punishment and its justifications or otherwise. Punishment is necessary as a social control tool and must be exerted with reasonableness and with due regard for the aim for which it is exerted.

REFERENCESAustralian Law Reform Commission (1980), Sentencing of Federal Offenders, Discussion Paper No. 15Law Reform Commission NSW (2001), Discussion Paper 33(1996)-Sentencing, (Chapter 7. Parole), Lawlink New South Wales, Online. Available. http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/DP33CHP7 3.4.2006No Author (2006), Sensible Sentencing NZ Justice: Why Parole?, Safe NZ, Online. Available. http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/paole.htm 3.4.2006Travis, L.F. (1995). Introduction to criminal justice (pp307

The legal definition of crime is “an act of violation of a criminal law for which a punishment is prescribed; the person committing it must have intended to do so and must have done so without legally acceptable defence or justification” (Walsh & Hemmens 2008:2). Alternatively, deviance is any social behaviour which departs from that regarded as ‘normal’ or socially acceptable within a society or social context (Jary & Jary 1991:160). The underlining focus of my essay is The Criminal Justice System in England and Wales which is a key public service consisting of various bodies and individuals including: the Police, Crown Prosecution Service, Her Majesty’s Court Service, National Offender Management Services (Probation and Prisons) and Youth Justice Board.

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

Whilst it is generally accepted that the community broadly welcomes such imposing and punitive legislation, it is imperative that our disgust for these offences/offenders does not prevent us from finding the injustice on an ethical and moral basis (Wortley and Smallbone, 2003).

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

The administration of criminal justice and the operation of criminal process play an important role in our ever-changing society. The current structure of the New South Wales criminal justice system, as described by leading critic Doreen McBarnet as the ‘two tiers of justice’, has attracted many critiques namely the ideology of triviality, summary offence punishment and other legal notions such as technocratic justice. I have applied the above concepts during the course of my observation to Local, District and Supreme Courts of New South Wales in April 2016. The following report will assess the validity of the above concepts at a practical level in light with my observation and research, drawing intrinsic links between two tiers of justice and technocratic justice, and concluding with the two tiers of justice as a necessary framework in our modern criminal justice system.

"Any court dealing with an offender in respect of his offense must have regard to the following purposes of sentencing" retribution, denunciation, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and reparation which will all be discussed in this essay.

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

The serious crime bill looks at different types of organised crimes that occur within societies and how they can be prevented from changing laws to ensure that crimes are punished accordingly through theories such as utilitarianism or retribution. This essay will be looking at and evaluating two different initiatives that have been provided by the serious crime bill and how changing the initiatives will affect the offenders and the victims and society.

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).

The retribution punishment theory is associated with the philosopher Immanuel Kant from as far back as the eighteenth century known as the “justice model”. The concept of retributive punishment is "just deserts," used as a means of getting even with the offender, allowing the victim to feel a sense of justification by imposing the same measure of pain to the offender according to the crime committed; this will allow the victim to feel a sense of satisfaction. Though retribution is not a law of retaliation, the Mosaic laws of the Bible idealized it as “an eye for an eye” phenomenon.