Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
THEORIES OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
sentencing in the criminal justice system
deterrence theory of sentencing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: THEORIES OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
Explain sentencing and the theories behind it. Include the sentencing models and how they are supposed to work. The main purpose of sentencing is to punish the offender and to set a precedent to deter others from doing the same. The five main purposes of sentencing are the deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and restorative justice. The sentencing model states that judges and juries evaluate the guilt of the offender. To being with, sentencing has to be fair and cannot discriminate on factors of race, gender. Or religion. Deterrence is the first rule of sentencing as it is based on a principle that punishment would prevent the offender from recommitting the offense another time. The theory behind deterrence is the idea …show more content…
A common focus of rehabilitation states that “criminality is a disease that can be cured”. The theory states that many offenders who are let into rehabilitation are usually treated with medical or drug treatments. The rehabilitation sentencing theory is mainly only given to children and or first-time offenders and not repeat offenders because they obviously have not learned from their past mistakes and have no hope left. The mentality is to find people who are capable of being cured and are able to get another chance in life. Finally, restorative justice is the theory of rehabilitating the victims and not the offenders. While rehabilitation mainly focuses on the offender, restorative justice focuses on getting the offender and victim together to be able to change and address the damage that was done. The goal is to remove the harm done to the victim by having them work together in the hope of …show more content…
Firstly, indeterminate sentencing gives a great variety for the judge on how long he can sentence a criminal. In many cases “prison authorities, not the judge, who determined the term of the sentence to be served”. This model worked by giving major power to the officials in power. They are supposed to work with discretion and ability to change the length of the sentence with please, but can result in intentional and unintentional discrimination to the offender. The structured sentencing models were created in order to remove the faults of indeterminate sentencing. Determinate sentencing is a fixed set of incarceration dates for judges to decide upon. The judge uses fixed terms based upon the crime that was committed. The set term to serve can be reduced by help of parole or good behavior. Unlike indeterminate sentencing, in determinate, the offender actually knows when he or she will be released from jail. This sentencing mandate was made to ensure that all offenders receive an equal sentence and are not judged. The judge cannot give a random amount of time just as he pleases, so this helps make trails fair and equal. Secondly, mandatory sentencing is where the judge cannot alter the incarceration time for an offender and mainly it is because they have been drug or firearm charges. A fixed sentence is imposed and guarantees a fair trial that can’t be altered at the judge’s discretion. Under no circumstances can an
Mandatory sentencing refers to the practice of parliament setting a fixed penalty for the commission of a criminal offence. Mandatory sentencing was mainly introduced in Australia to: prevent crime, to incapacitate the offenders, to deter offenders so they don’t offend again, to create a stronger retribution and to eliminate inconsistency. There is a firm belief that the imposition of Mandatory sentencing for an offence will have a deterrent effect on the individual and will send a forcible message to the offenders. Those in favour argue that it will bring consistency in sentencing and conciliate public concern about crime and punishment.
The criminal justice system has been in place the United States for centuries. The system has endured many changes throughout the ages. The need for a checks and balances system has been a priority for just as long. Federal sentencing guidelines were created to help create equal punishments among offenders. Judges are given the power of sentencing and they are not immune to opinions, bias, and feelings. These guidelines are set in place to allow the judge to keep their power but keep them within a control group of equality. Although there are a lot of pros to sentencing guidelines there are also a lot of cons. Research has shown that sentencing guidelines have allowed the power to shift from judges to prosecutors and led to sentencing disparity based on sex, race, and social class.
74). This model is based on the classical notion that all those convicted of the same crime receive a fixed sentence, but not necessarily the same sentence. A factor that affects the sentence received is whether the person convicted is a first time or repeat offender; repeat offenders often receive harsher sentences than first time offenders. Sentencing guidelines are used to mitigate sentencing disparity, and give judges a guideline to use besides their biased opinions of the convicted persons and the crime they committed. The sentencing guidelines use a numerical system for computing sentences that fit the crime(s) committed (Stohr, Walsh,
Arguably, there are many reasons for punishment, including: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, restoration, and rehabilitation. The main aim of criminal law is to punish anybody who does wrong to the society; however, it is clear that there are different goals and forms of punishment as listen above. Notably, these differences exist because of the severity of the crime and its punishment. A murderer can be sentenced to die but a shoplifter cannot face the same sentence. The first type of punishment, retribution, punishes the crime doer because the system believes that it is right and fair. Therefore, it looks back at the crime and matches it with the best possible punishment (Schmalleger, 2013). The second type, incapacitation, is forward
The primary principle of sentencing is stated under section 718.1 of the Criminal Code, “a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.” In other words the sentence must be fair to the offender while holding them responsible under mens rea; having a guilty mind. This idea holds that punishment has to be appropriate based on crime committed.
There are several types of punishment that can be inflicted upon an offender including, fines, community sanctions and imprisonment (The Judicial Conference of Australia, 2007). Punishment is described as a sanction which inflicts a certain amount of pain and loss on the offender, used for payback and deter (The Judicial Conference of Australia, 2007; Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002). There are three ways society justifies punishing offenders, through the
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.
The aims of sentencing include punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection. Punishment is used to punish the offender for their wrong conduct to an extent and in a way that is just in all circumstances and is intended to show public abhorrence from the offence. An example of a sentencing option that may be used to punish an offender includes imprisonment. A recent sentence imposed in the Tasmanian Supreme Court aimed at punishing an offender is the case of Michael Robert Keeling v State of Tasmania in which the judge needed to balance the need to punish the offender and the need to deter him and others from such conduct while keeping the best interests of the community in mind. Deterrent sentences are aimed at deterring not only the offender from further offences but also potential offenders. Specific deterrence is concerned with punishing an offender in the expectation they will not offend again whereas general deterrence is related to the possibility that people in general will be deterred from committing crime by the threat of punishment. An example of ...
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
Sentencing models are plans or strategies developed for imposing punishment for crimes committed. During the 19th century these punishments were normally probation, fines and flat sentences. When someone was given a flat sentence, he or she had to serve the entire sentence without parole or early release. However, by the end of the 19th century the new models were developed. These new models include indeterminate, determinate, advisory/voluntary guidelines, presumptive and mandatory minimum sentencing (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011).
This paper will be focusing on the courts as the specific sub-system in the criminal justice system. As said in the book the court system is responsible for charging criminal suspects, carrying out trials, and sentencing a person convicted of a crime. The fear of crime influences criminal justice policies in the court system. One way it does this is with the courts sentencing. Courts are able to give out severe punishments as a method of deterrence. This specific type of deterrence would be general deterrence. The book says that general deterrence theory should work if the punishment is clear, severe, and done swiftly. According to this theory, crime rate should drop because people will fear the punishment. The other way fear of crime influences
The purpose of the criminal justice system is to deliver justice for all, by convicting and punishing the guilty, while protecting the innocent. Therefore, sentencing became an individualized tool to maintain the standards of the criminal justice system by distributing fair punishments. Sentencing has evolved through the years, for "the Federal Government, all States, and the District of Columbia had indeterminate sentencing systems" penalizing offenders to a specified term or to a range of years (Mackenzie 6). However, the increase in crime, the evidence that offenders were not being rehabilitated, and the concern that indeterminate sentencing produced unjust disparities led to the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) of 1984 (Bowman 1322). Reconstructing the method of sentencing was meant to "prevent new crimes; to promote the correction and rehabilitation of the offenders; and to safeguard offenders against excessive,
Deterrence suggests that people are “deterred” from a crime by the threat of punishment. In other words, people won’t commit a crime if the ramifications that were to follow are so severe. Deterrence comes in two flavors, specific and general. Specific deterrence refers to the “threat of punishment” being directly aimed towards a particular individual who has already committed the crime through actually experiencing the punishment first hand. An example of this may be, being convicted of a crime and as a result being sentenced to so many years in jail or prison. However, in order for it to be successful, the “previously ...
The criminal justice system is the system of law enforcement that takes an extensive position in prosecuting, defending, sentencing, and punishing those who are suspected or convicted of criminal offenses. It is essential to know the many theories of punishment that the justice system has created in their minds that eventually became a part of society. This paper will analyze the theoretical explanations of punishment and their effect on society by generating an opinion of how each type of punishment deters crime the best and if punishment provides any benefit to the offenders and to society.
According to David Garland, punishment is a legal process where violators of the criminal law are condemned and sanctioned with specified legal categories and procedures (Garland, 1990). There are different forms and types of punishment administered for various reasons and can either be a temporary or lifelong type of punishment. Punishment can be originated as a cause from parents or teachers with misbehaving children, in the workplace or from the judicial system in which crimes are committed against the law. The main aim of punishment is to demonstrate to the public, the victim and the offender that justice is to be done, to reduce criminal activities and to deter people from wanting to commit any form of crime against the law. In other words it is a tool used to eliminate the bad in society or to deter people from committing criminal activities.