In many western democratic countries, maintaining public confidence in judicial administration is regarded as a critical issue across the whole of government, especially in the criminal justice system. The judiciary consists of many organizations, such as police, the courts, prison service and correlations, that is centrally concerned with controlling crime and protecting community by the exercise of power (Snowball & Jones, 2012). However, a system fails to command public trust may also fail to establish its legitimacy and function effectively (Hough & Roberts, 2004 cited in Jones et al., 2008). For witnesses or victims, they might not report crimes to polices if they feel that their report will not be acted upon or solved quickly. Accordingly, …show more content…
Prior research
It is indicated by Roberts (et al., 2003) that most research discussed public confidence through social attitudes of sentencing, while sentencing appropriately is only one of the public expectation. Publics also expect the government to deal with their matters expeditiously and reduce the crime rate and prevent re-offending.
Australian studies
It is indicated by Gelb (2011) that little research examines the problem of confidence in the courts in Australia. The Australian Survey of Social Attitudes becomes the main national source of information, which is a biennial survey that asks respondents their confidence levels they have in ‘the police’ and ‘the courts’. The first study was conducted in 2003 by Indermaur and Roberts (2005). They found that 70 per cent of respondents reported that they had ‘a great deal’
…show more content…
Since police, criminal courts and prisons are the three main organizations in the criminal justice system, the average level of these three could be seem as the confidence in the system. In the figure, it is clear that the mean number of the level of confidence in police, criminal courts and prisons are all above ‘2’ and under ‘3’, which means most people feel between ‘quite a lot of confidence’ and ‘not very much confidence’ in the criminal justice system.
Table 2 provides the distribution of participants’ responses about the level confidence in the criminal justice system. Responses to first questions about the confidence level in police to respond quickly to crime were 45.58 per cent of participants feel ‘quite a lot of confidence’, and a large proportion of respondents about 58.5 per cent and 39.83 per cent feel ‘not very much confidence’ in both criminal courts to deal with matters quickly and prison to form of punishment. By combining the frequency of level of confidence in police, criminal courts and prison, more than half of the participants (56.85%) reported ‘not very much confidence’ or even ‘not at all’ on the average
From ‘The public confidence in the Criminal Justice System report’ in 2013/2014 there was a report produced on whether the public believes in how well the system works and if it is effective and fair. The ministry of Justice (2015) argues that, “Levels of confidence in CJS in fairness and effectiveness have increased slightly from 2012/13 to 2013/14 (63% to 64% in fairness, 45% to 48% for effectiveness) (Ministry of Justice, 2015: 2). This shows that there has been an increase of 1% in the public opinion towards the CJS effectiveness, even though it is not much it still does show an increase on the previous year. However, it still does show that the CJS can do a lot more in order to gain more respect from the public in how it
When examining criminal justice systems it is important to note two important criminal justice models, the due process model and the crime control models. Most governments function based on several aspects from each criminal justice model; these crime models were initially introduced by Herbert Packer in 1968 (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2014). The due process model in the criminal justice system reflects the formal decision making process and highlights the importance of ensuring the criminal justice system works upon reliable knowledge (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2014). The crime control model is based on efficiency and ensuring crime is repressed as much as possible; this model promotes bargaining and often encourages defendants making deals with
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 governance of our present day public and social order co-exist within the present day individual. Attempts to recognize the essentiality of equality in hopes of achieving an imaginable notion of structure and order, has led evidence based practitioners such as Herbert Packer to approach crime and the criminal justice system through due process and crime control. A system where packer believed in which ones rights are not to be infringed defrauded or abused was to be considered to be the ideal for procedural fairness. “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Thomas Jefferson pg 9 cjt To convict an individual because proper consideration was not taken will stir up social unrest rather then it’s initial intent, when he or she who has committed the crime is not punished for their doings can cause for a repetition and even collaboration with other’s for a similar or greater crime.
How to appropriately and fairly carry out criminal justice matters is something that every country struggles with. A major reason for this struggle is the fallibility of the justice system. It is acceptable to concede that the possibility of human error in every case and investigation may lead to a wrongful conviction. In the case of David Milgaard, however, Canada's Criminal Justice System not only erred, but failed grievously, resulting in millions of dollars wasted, in a loss of public confidence in the system, and most tragically, in the robbery of two decades of one man's life. Factors including, but not limited to, the social context at the time of the crime, the social perception of deviance, the influence of the media, and the misconduct of investigating police and prosecution played a substantial role in the subsequent miscarriage of justice.
Public confidence is the trust that the public has in the judicial system is vital to the courts to function
In conclusion, either while watching television or listen to the news you hear of how certain things are tainting our criminal justice system or that certain things or people are being corrupted in the system.
Roberts, J. V., & Hough, M. (2005). Understanding Public Attitudes to Criminal Justice . : McGraw-Hill
Over the next 10 years the criminal Justice system could entirely change with the passing of a major law, epidemic, or failed service. Consequently, every since 9-11 our justice system has become much more open minded. Therefore, resulting in the strict enforcement of laws to protect its citizens. Nothing ever stays the same for too long. New developments related to science, technology, DNA analysis, and countless other tools and other factors are changing for the better in solving cases, prevention of crimes, and aiding in investigations. Where there is change there will be changes in the way we handle everyday processing. For example, booking a criminal, acquiring evidence, and interrogation. This also results in the field of criminal justice having no choice but to adapt to the slowly changing times or else be left behind.
It seems as if much of society believes criminals are playing a game; rolling the dice to see what they can get away-with cat and mouse. It may appear to many, arrest and prosecution are somewhat random and arbitrary. Unfortunately, the general views on the criminal justice system seem sour. In particular, within the court system, these views are based on the idea defendants of means can and do beat charges with the ‘best defense money can buy’, while poorer defendants plead to charges and serve their sentences. Repeated exonerations using DNA evidence, highly publicized incidents involving police shootings, with unindicted officers have done little to discourage these
There are different principles that makeup the crime control model. For example, guilt implied, legal controls minimal, system designed to aid police, and Crime fighting is key. However one fundamental principle that has been noted is that ‘the repression of criminal conduct is by far the most important function to be performed by the criminal processes’. (Packer, 1998, p. 4). This is very important, because it gives individuals a sense of safety. Without this claim the public trust within the criminal justice process would be very little. The general belief of the public is that those that are seen as a threat to society, as well as those that fails to conform to society norms and values should be separated from the rest of society, from individuals who choose to participate fully in society. Consequently, the crime control model pro...
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).
The police records crime reported by the public in 43 police force areas and provides these data to the Home Office and for their Basic Command Units. These data provide a wealth of statistical information on recorded crime rates and possibly identify long-term trends in recorded crime rates. Due to such data collecting process, how crime being reported by the victims or witnesses and recorded by the police may affect the accuracy of such official statistics. Thus, however, the main drawbacks of this kind of statistics are excluding crimes that are not discovered, reported or recorded. Firstly, some criminal activities are not witnessed or discovered then not recorded officially by the police. According to Croall (1998), a crime being counted officially should be perceived and recognised by a member of the public, a victim or law enforcement officers. For example, white –collar crimes such as fraud or misuse of expense accounts may not be discovered easily. Therefore, crimes that are not be seen may be uncounted in the official crime
The focus is on the issues of police accountability in modern society, and in particular why their accountability is more important than other professions. This is not surprising considering the amount of power and discretion police officers have, and the level of trust that the public holds with these civil servants. Police officers accountability is the biggest thing in their profession which has been an issue of concern they have to be accountable to the police department who want the officer to be an effective and responsible person, to people in the community who have best expectation from an officer and being accountable to themselves for their acts. An ordinary citizen of a country cannot obtain the powers that police officer’s have.
Human services provides help to individuals, families and children that are in crisis or have needs that are not being met. One of the systems within human services focuses on upholding the law to the fullest extent. According to the National Center for Victims of Crime “The criminal justice system is the set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws”. In other words this system seeks out to provide justice and safety for victims of horrendous crimes while also prosecuting those who commit these crimes. This system is in place in order to protect and serve the many individuals in the U.S be it at a local, state or federal level.