Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Punishments in modern society
Punishments in modern society
Punishment and sentencing in the criminal justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Punishments in modern society
Punishment for crimes committed has been the focus of much public debate for many years with individuals seeing different objectives with the public preferring a more punitive objective of punishment and deterrence from crime (Hough, Roberts, Jacobson, Moon and Steel, 2009). From this and through research completed by Lord Ashcroft (2011), it can be deduced that the general public are in favour of custodial sentences rather than a rehabilitative disposal. In developing sentencing guidelines, a consultation is undertaken with criminal justice professionals and the wider public over a 12 week period before the final sentencing guidelines are produced and implemented. This essay will go on to examine the sentencing passed for two case studies and link in with the philosophies of punishment, the aggravating and mitigating factors in each case and the proportionality of the sentence passed.
The philosophy of punishment can be defined under five headings. Deterrence which is linked in to individual’s fear of apprehension or punishment; incapacitation; reform which is the idea that punishment can assist the offender in desisting from offending in the future which can also be linked into the rehabilitation and reintegration of the individual, and finally, denunciation which is linked to the public’s detestation of crime. (Cavadino and Dignan, 2007).
Both case studies that will be discussed within this paper relate to offences of assault. In moving forward, it is important to identify what is meant by assault. Whilst there is no official definition of assault within UK law, it can be defined within the Cambridge Dictionary as “a threat to injure someone followed by a violent attack on them”. Expanding on this, the threat can...
... middle of paper ...
...me in Maguire, M, Morgan, R and Reiner, R (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 5th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Hough, M., Roberts, J., Jacobson, J., Moon, N., and Steel, N. (2009). Public Attitudes to the Principles of Sentencing (Research Report 6). London: Sentencing Advisory Panel.
Prison Reform Trust, (2013). Why focus on reducing women’s imprisonment. Retrieved from: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Why%20focus%20on%20women%20in%20prison%20-%20Oct%202013.pdf?dm_i=47L,1X4PH,7MIJ3Q,6W4KY,1
Womeninprison.org, (2013). Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.womeninprison.org.uk/statistics.php
York Press, (2014, January 5th). Man assaults police officer after urinating on pub carpets. York Press. Retrieved from http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/10915071.Man_assaults_police_officer_after_urinating_on_pub_carpets/
Criminology. The. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print. The. Shakur, Sanyika.
The Punishment Imperative, a book based on the transition from a time when punishment was thought to be necessarily harsh to a time where reform in the prion system is needed, explains the reasons why the grand social experiment of severe punishment did not work. The authors of the book, Todd R. Clear and Natasha A. Frost, strongly argue that the previous mindset of harsh punishment has been replaced due to political shifts, firsthand evidence, and spending issues within the government. Clear and Frost successfully assert their argument throughout the book using quantitative and qualitative information spanning from government policies to the reintegration of previous convicts into society.
As some criminologists have debated, the methods and approaches to crime control have failed miserably. They are of the opinion that the criminal justice system fails in achieving its aims in rehabilitating criminal offenders. For example, a report made in the U.K claimed that 58 per cent of the prisoners released in 1997 were convicted of another crime (SEU, 2000). Some argue that it seems for the criminal justice system there is only one answer to crime control, a prison sentence. Nevertheless, some question how accurate this method is for some crimes in society. That is to say, that for certain crimes, taking the consumption of marijuana as an example, a prison sentence is not the solution, rehabilitating individuals should be the main priority and in certain cases if not the only
In a modern Western society where there is significant amount of research done of rehabilitation and criminal justice reform, the practice of sentencing JLWOP (Juvenile Life Without Parole) seems outdated and primitive. There are a number of prominent human rights groups that advocate for the banning of the LWOP sentence for juvenile offenders. In his 2010 article for the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation titled ‘Extinguishing All Hope: Life-Without-Parole for Juveniles,’ Frank Butler breaks down the ethical arguments against the sentence from a social policy perspective. He uses a number of pertinent facts and dates to support and enhance his argument, but retains a clear and concise presentation style, making the document easy to read and comprehend on an analytical level. It is clear from his title that it is not an objective piece, but his opinion is supporte...
...lacks, and men. Furthermore, the competing paradigms influence public policy. Those that maintain acts as voluntary are more inclined to punish the individual or group, however those that are seen to act under determined forces, judge treatment to be more suitable. Even though these theories contrast, they still contain similarities which are shared in the new penology. Aspects are taken from all to create a new perspective on crime that centres on the management of offenders.
Punishment, when speaking on serious terms, is socially valuable because it deters criminals from repeating their crimes and may keep others from repeating the same acts. If in fact the deterring effect misses its point, it is the fault of the justice system the all the red tape found behind it. At its current standing, the system is viewed as a joke because no authority is taken, no one believes, let alone fears, the system. Both the lengthy time and the high expense result from innumerable appeals, including many technicalities which have little nothing to do with the question of guilt or innocence. If these wasteless amount of appeals were eliminated or at least controlled, then the procedure would be much shorter, less expensive and more
According to the National Institute of Justice truth in sentencing refers to a range of sentencing practices that aim to reduce the uncertainty about the length of time that offenders must serve in prison. Throughout the United States, there has been much legislative activity related to truth in sentencing. “The Truth in Sentencing movement began in 1984 during the extreme overcrowding crises that plagued America during the 1980s and 1990s” (Timothy S. Carr 2008). There were a few discrepancies between the sentence imposed by the judge and the amount of time the offender served in prison. TIS was put in affect to seek the disagreement. States were encourage by the federal government to increase the use of incarceration. If states decided to increase their incarceration they were funded a federal grant to construct, develop, expand, or improve correctional facilities in order to ensure that prison cell space was available for confinement of offenders. There were federal efforts to motivate prisons to increase their incarceration to earn the federally funded grant through two programs called The Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-sentencing (TIS). To receive VOI funding, States needed to give assurance that it will implement policies that guaranteed that violent offender serve majority of their sentences and also guarantee that the time serve was respectively related to the offender’s status and to keep the public safe.
Society has long since operated on a system of reward and punishment. That is, when good deeds are done or a person behaves in a desired way they SP are rewarded, or conversely punished when behaviour does not meet the societal norms. Those who defy these norms and commit crime are often punished by organized governmental justice systems through the use of penitentiaries, where prisoners carry out their sentences. The main goals of sentencing include deterrence, safety of the public, retribution, rehabilitation, punishment and respect for the law (Government of Canada, 2013). However, the type of justice system in place within a state or country greatly influences the aims and mandates of prisons and in turn targets different aspects of sentencing goals. Justice systems commonly focus on either rehabilitative or retributive measures.
The study found that within three years two thirds of those prisoners were rearrested. Punitive is inflicting or intended as punishment but this punishment should not be compared to or identified as punishment that occurs prior to disciplinary actions carried out by a parent. It can also describe the unpleasant result of an action on a large scale, like the punitive effects higher taxes will have on the middle class. This paper will focus in depth on the prejudices of the recidivism and punitive action against minorities. To begin to understand what is meant by recidivism and its complexities we have to first examine the components of crimes and there complex consequences. We cannot have a comprehensive explanation for the occurrence of prisionization and recidivism until we consider the crimes and persons involved. After they have served out their sentences, the treatment among criminals is a controversial subject which is then swayed by personal opinions of the appropriate treatment for the specific crime. The biggest complication here is providing an adequate amount of substantial evidence that proves a person has been reconvicted by their own faults, not based on the opportunities that society provides them
Community-based corrections offer a viable alternative to imprisonment. As an alternative, a community-based correction save on cost, reduces prison populations, is an effective form of rehabilitation, is humane, and supported by public opinion. However, despite the potential for community-based correction for reducing prison population, this has not been the case. Judges are reluctant to hand community sanctions, and sentencing philosophy does not support it as an alternative mechanism for punishing offenders (Mackenzie, 2001).
...T., Reiner, R. (2012) ‘Policing the Police’ in The Official Handbook of Criminology. Ed. By Maguire, M., Morgan, R., Reiner, R. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 806- 838
This essay has identified sanctions imposed on offenders including imprisonment and community corrections. Described how punishment is justified with the just desert and deterrence theory. Discussing the rate of individuals being imprison comparted to community, provided rates for assault which shows crime being maintained and community member feel safe enough to allow for this to
Hodgson, Jacqueline. "Adding Injury to Injustice: The Suspect at the Police Station." Journal of Law and Society Mar. 1994: 85-101. Academic OneFile. Web. 15 Feb. 2015.
Explain sentencing and the theories behind it. Include the sentencing models and how they are supposed to work.
Offenders are protected today by both the rule of law, ensuring that all offenders are treated equally, regardless of their age, sex or position in the community, and due process, which ensures that all offenders are given a fair trial with the opportunity to defend themselves and be heard (Williams, 2012). Beccaria’s emphasis on punishment being humane and non-violent has also carried through to modern day corrections. It is still the case today that offenders must only receive punishment that is proportionate to the crime they have committed and the punishment is determined by the law. The power of the judges and the magistrates to make decisions on punishment is guided by the legislation and they do not have the power to change the law (Ferrajoli,