Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The roles of sentencing
Role of courts in our justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984” The article, “The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984” (2015), written by Eric Girault, persuades the audience that the enactment of the law did not reduce crime in societies, but was misappropriated, which caused a negative impact on families and their communities. Girault describes this by sharing his personal anecdote on receiving a harsh prison sentence for a non-violent crime as a first time offender. He uses trustworthy resources in order to substantiate his claim. Girault’s intended audience for this piece of writing is the general public, specifically those that lack knowledge of the law and its due process.
In Herbert Packer's criminal justice scale we get two extremes that come together to form what we know today as the American criminal justice system. The Due Process model is founded upon the presumption of innocence and operates on more than just factual guilt but judicial guilt as well. On the other hand we have the Crime Control model which is essentially the exact opposite of due process in that its founding principle is the presumption of guilt. The primary focus of the crime control model is just that, crime prevention, rather than actual justice for the accused/accuser. Proponents of the crime control model feel that if police officers have spent the time to investigate and arrest a suspect for a crime and the prosecutor has charged
As we know, there are many ways criminals can be punished. When sentencing happens, the defendant is usually sentenced to the following punishments, listed from minor to extreme: Fines Community service Diversion programs Probation GPS monitoring Jail Prison Death penalty (Rio Salado, 2022). Most of these punishments can be listed under either the utilitarian or retributive theory of punishment. The utilitarian theory seeks to punish offenders to 'deter' future wrongdoings.
Describe the limitations associated with criminal justice policy making. In an ideal world law enforcement, policy makers and policing agencies are equally aligned with the forces behind criminal activity. They collect information, follow the clues and make arrest, when dealing with computer crimes there a few immediate factors that limit not only fighting the crime but knowing for certain whether it is a crime or not. Many law enforcement officers that handle computer crimes only understand basic computer language and cyber criminal terminology because it is constantly evolved, that not only limits they knowledge of what is criminal but they are also limited to how the law is applied to the crime.
The Criminal Justice system is one of the most important vessels within society due to its role in ensuring that society is abiding by its laws and holding those who transgress these laws to account. Despite its crucial role in society, it has also been under some scrutiny in regards to how effective it actually is, which results in arguments that it doesn’t properly fulfil its job as a carrier of justice. A focus on the criminal justice system is a subject of interest because it helps us understand the tension within society between individual rights and freedoms. (Schmalleger, F. and Koppel, T, 1999) Thus, this essay will be arguing that the criminal justice system is indeed broken.
Defined as a public policy that imposes an outlined amount of prison time based on the crime committed and the defendant’s criminal history, these sentences dictate that a judge must enact a statutory fixed penalty on individuals convicted of certain crimes, regardless of extenuating circumstances. Such laws have removed discretionary sentencing power from judges, instead focusing on severe punishments in line with national drug and crime concerns. While the original goal of mandatory minimum sentences was to deter potential criminals, reduce drug use, control judicial prudence, the policy has had extreme consequences such as sentencing imbalances and
Deterrence and the Death Penalty: The Views of the Experts. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1143970 This article was written by Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L. Akers. They both consulted experts on criminology and criminal behaviour to evaluate the effectiveness of the Death Penalty.
In addition to greatly affecting the otherwise unlikely citizens of America, Tough on Crime policies have greatly affected minority groups in America; perhaps more so than of any other group of citizens. To begin, from the 1980 on through the year 1995, the incarceration rates among drug offenders increased by more than 1000 percent. Notably, by the year 1995 one out of every four inmates in any given correctional facility was a drug offender. In addition of that 1000 percent increase, drug offenders accounted for more than 80 percent of the total growth in the federal inmate population and 50 percent of the growth of the state prison population from 1985 to 1995 (Stith, web). In addition, once in the system, the probability of receiving harsher
The criminal justice system is responsible for delivering punishment to breakers of the law, and according to Professor Colin S Diver, the criminal justice system derives its authority with a reliable “moral credibility” (Diver 5). However, the Norsefire methodology of delivering justice is not one that exhibits a
theory of human capital in Chapter 9 and the problem of criminality and delinquency in chapter 10. In terms of human capital, this area was not actively studied and not considered as an economic field before neo-liberals. Labor, one part of the classic political economics, was not analyzed thoroughly. For Ricardo, labor was just the quantitative change of workers.
Society has different definitions for the word justice. Some believe that justice is fair treatment for someone who commits a crime, while others believe that justice is a corrupted system that purposely finds ways to ruin someone’s life. In law enforcement is justice actually helping society stay structured or is justice causing more strife between the people and the judicial system? First let us define what justice actually means. Justice is the process or result of using laws to fairly judge and punish crimes and criminals.
The first normative model is called the crime control model. The crime control model is often associated and linked with ideas regarding utilitarianism, which is where actions should be evaluated on the basis of what their consequences would be, and in turn, helps to promote the largest amount of good, for the largest amount of people, (Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1832), and in regards to criminal justice, this means that most people who are accused of committing a crime, should be tried and found guilty, in an efficient way, and that the punishment that these offenders are receiving needs to be harsher and have a higher severity level in order to try and deter people from making the same choices. According to Case et al (2017, p.91), there is a high level of acquittals in the criminal justice system, that are unfair, and should have resulted in a guilty verdict, and that regarding the collective conscious, are often thought of in utilitarianism, that these offenders simply ‘got away with it’. This model shows that the victims’ rights, and the effects the crime could have on society as a whole, are be considered as one of the most important things in a trial, but that police officers and law related and criminal justice related institutions, have found ways to manipulate the criminal justice system to get certain
The Crime Control Model is a model of the criminal justice system that assumes freedom is so important that every effort must be made to repress the crime (Ortmeier, 2006). It emphasizes efficiency and the capacity to catch, try, high majorities of defenders, due to the high rate of crime and the limited resources of law enforcement speed and finality play a key role in this model.(Ortmeier, 2006) The crime control model is looked at by many as an assembly line where police and prosecutors decide from the beginning who is likely to be convicted, and if a person is unlikely to be convicted, person exits from system (Ortmeier, 2006). This allows for plea bargaining between the prosecutor and the accused to come into play. The Due process Model
A criminal offence may lead to the panicky or the chaos of the society. For instance, terrorism, murder, burglary and so on. The target of the criminal law is to decide if the person breaks the law. The person who committed a crime could be said that he or she has offended against the state and the person should be prosecuted as the state has the rights when the person has broken the queen’s peace of the society. Furthermore, the punishment of the criminal offence could be prison, fines, community sentence and so on.
Safety of our citizens is of utmost importance in creating a robust society. Building sustainable communities that are inclusive, secure and sensitive to needs of the citizens will continue to be of national priority. However, over the years, crime has stymied this endeavour. There must be a commitment to ensuring safety, security and justice for all citizens, which are seen as moral rights and intrinsic to development. Good policing, targeted social interventions and an efficient judicial system are needed to help our nation thrive.