This is a question that could easily be debated in either direction depending on how one looks at it. This paper will be focusing on the British Justice in the early modern period that would appear to show favor with the criminal. In order to make such determination, one must delve into the both sides of the system and see which weighs heaviest on the scales.
In some ways the system appears very similar to today’s idea of innocent until proven guilty; even if in fact that’s not what it was. One of the most important facts of early British justice system is that a victim who wanted the criminal who wronged him charged or convicted was expected to pay for the expenses and even possibly have to find and provide the evidence or proof himself. Meaning that all responsibility to prosecute a criminal resided with the victim who was also frequently the prosecutor and it was on the victim’s shoulders to file charges with the resident judge/magistrate and his burden to present the evidence. (Herrup 26, 88-89) The victim of course did not have to prosecute if he did not choose to; it was up to his discretion. (Taylor 109-110) The victim did have some options; a constable would in fact collect evidence for the prosecution/victim if he would be reimbursed for his time and expenditures. A constable usually only acted when called upon because they were unpaid and usually had another fulltime job to consider.(Gaskill chapter 7) There are exceptions to this, for example, a constable could receive rewards for captured criminals.
One must also consider that almost all the constable’s powers were derivative; because of this it was a bit more difficult to handle crimes where there was no real victim; which is in favor of the criminal( Crime and ...
... middle of paper ...
... Crime and Society in England 1750-1900. 4th Edition. Harlow: Longman, 2010.
Gaskill, Malcolm. Crime and Mentalities in Early Modern England. Paperback Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Godfrey, Barry and Paul Lawrence. Crime and Justice 1750-1950. Cullompton, UK: William Publishing, 2005.
Herrup, Cynthia. The Common Peace: Participation and the Criminal Law in Seventeenth-Century England. Paperback Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Mclynn, Frank. Crime & Punishment: In Eighteenth-Century England. London: Routledge, 1989.
Taylor, David. Crime, Policing and Punishment in England, 1750-1914. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 1998.
Sharpe, J.A. Judicial Punishment in England. London: Faber and Faber, 1990.
Sharpe, J.A. Crime in Early Modern Europe 1550-1750. 2nd Edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 1999.
There was very little structure to the justice system and due to it being so punitive, juries were reluctant to find people guilty of offences (Bentley, 1998). This period of time became known as ‘The Bloody Code’. Throughout The Bloody Code policing was entirely a local initiative, there was not a centralised police force. Constables, Watchmen and Amateur Justices were tasked with crime prevention, crime detection, and general public safety (Reiner, 2000). However, the Watchmen were branded ineffective and there was little to no public confidence in their use, they were ‘scarcely removed from idiotism’ (Critchley, 1978: 18) this view would makeweight of the orthodox perspective suggesting that the New Police were to bring competency and professionalism, attributes which clearly lacked within the private system. Another major issue that affected the public opinion of the private system was the employment of thief-takers. For example, Jonathan Wild, a private detective who was extremely corrupt. Wild stole items from individuals, and then took it upon himself to return these items for a large reward. The revisionist view is that corruption was not an
The word felon comes from the Saxon, or Old-English, language. The word is a compound of the words fell as in wrong-doing and one. So, when the world felon is broken apart, it can be translated to mean the evil or wicked one (Chapter XVII: Of Sundry Kinds of Punishment Appointed For Offenders). Felons are a common problem now and always have been. However, the way said criminals were treated was very different at the time of the Elizabethan Era, from 1558-1603. As Linda Alchin stated, Elizabethan England and Elizabethan Crime and Punishment- not a happy subject. Violent times,” (Alchin). During the Elizabethan Era, criminals were severely and brutally punished for even minor crimes such as theft and even as little as begging. During the time of Queen Elizabeth I rule, crimes and punishments were taken to a whole new level.
Since the Jack the Ripper case, solving crimes has changed a lot. Jack the Ripper was the biggest crime London had encountered(1).Due to the lack of proper police reinforcement Jacks murders were easy to get away with compared to how it is now(2). In this essay I will analyse how much impact the Jack the Ripper case had on investigative policing.
Today some people can get away with just about any small crime with no punishments, but in the Elizabethan era you'd think twice before committing a crime. For stealing fruit in the Elizabethan era you can lose your hand. Today you would get community service or some other small punishment. The punishment you were given had to do with the crime, your wealth, and who you were connected to.
Between the years of 1714 and 1799 the rate of theft in London increased for many reasons. The method of research use to prove this hypothesis was Old Bailey online. Old Bailey is a court in the city of London in the county of Middlesex. The court is held eight times a year for the trial of prisoners; the crimes tried in this court are high and petty treason, petty larceny, murder, felony, burglary, etc. The goal of this paper is to prove that not only did theft increase, but also why it increased. My preliminary findings suggest that overall theft did increase, and that the main causes for this were: political, economical, and social problems.
The principle of bail is basic to our system of justice and its practice as old as English law itself. When the administration of criminal justice was in its infancy, arrest for serious crime meant imprisonment without preliminary hearing and long periods of time could occur between apprehension and the arrival of the King's Justices to hold court. It was therefore a matter of utmost importance to a person under arrest to be able to obtain a provisional release from custody until his case was called. This was also the desideratum of the medieval sheriff, the representative of the Crown in criminal matters,
This account of Mary Brown provides historians with insight into the social and legal practices of the 18th century. This case identifies the social unrest and anxiety regarding the popularity of theft, and in this case shoplifting. This case reiterates this units themes, including, the gendering of crime. London society believed shoplifter most often to be women. The Old Bailey records, reaffirm the notion of gendered crime, and that women were more often than men accused and convicted of shoplifting. However,
In history, crimes have been dealt with by the justice system according to its severity as well as the offender: if the crime committed was not very serious and the offender was deemed “non-delinquent”, or “free of any real criminal disposition”, they would be cautioned or fined. However, were the crime a more serious one and the offender appeared to have a “criminal character”, they would receive more severe and more deterrent punishment (Garland, 2001: 42).
Crime is something that needs to be punished but during the Middle Ages the punishments were meant to reflect the crimes that were committed. Because the punishments were very effective but were not very reasonable todays world had to change those extreme punishments. Crime should not be taken lightly but it should not be punished as harshly as it was during the Medieval Times. So, because the punishments were very effective but weren’t very reasonable today’s world had to change those extreme punishments. People of the Middle Ages were convicted of anything.
Muncie, J., and Mclaughin, E. (1996) The Problem of Crime. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publication Ltd.
Morrison, W. (2009) 'What is crime? Contrasting definitions and perspectives', in C. Hale, K. Hayward, A. Wahadin and E. Wincup, (eds), Criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Conscious efforts to critique existing approaches to questions of crime and justice, demystify concepts and issues that are laden with political and ideological baggage, situate debates about crime control within a socio-historical context, and facilitate the imagination and exploration of alternative ways of thinking and acting in relation to crime and justice. (p. 3).
Crime and Punishment and Notes from the Underground Fyodor Dostoyevsky's stories are stories of a sort of rebirth. He weaves a tale of severe human suffering and how each character attempts to escape from this misery. In the novel Crime and Punishment, he tells the story of Raskolnikov, a former student who murders an old pawnbroker as an attempt to prove a theory. In Notes from the Underground, we are given a chance to explore Dostoyevsky's opinion of human beings.
With their appeal to an efficiently and an instrumental logic (protecting the innocent and punish-ing the guilty) these statements offer a picture of criminal justice as being in the business of crime control. The challenge is one of effeteness.
The incarceration rate in the United States has continued to climb over the past twenty years making it one of the highest in the world. Police officers have been going to work trying to put away people who are breaking the law, but why do criminals continue to do so when they know they have a good chance of getting caught? Crime has been around since societies have evolved and every society has had their own way of dealing with criminal behavior. From early tribal times where the thinking was an eye for an eye, to medieval times when people who stole a loaf of bread would be put to death by being hung, and today with a court system that decides the fate of a criminal. Throughout history the ways of punishing people have changed pretty dramatically and the theories of how punishment should be handed out has had an influence on the way we run our system today. There have been many thoughts on the root of the crime problem, some believe that there is a criminal gene and some believe its all learned behavior, but it still seems today that even the threat of being put to death for a crime doesn’t stop people from committing them. In today’s society the ends outweigh the means and people will go to extreme measures to have a piece of the pie, so we must continue to try and deter these criminals through the threat of punishment.