James Wilson and George Kelling introduced the broken windows theory in 1982. The broken windows theory states that any minor crimes, if ignored will increase into higher and more serious crimes. This theory implies that if you control an area to be well be ordered and maintained, this could stop further acts and decrease the crime rates. Broken windows theory sparked an evolutionary change in policing and the community. The broken windows theory is a good-fighting crime strategy and suggested the way in thinking about the community.
To wrap things up Psychological Theory says that criminal conduct is an aftereffect of individual contrasts in speculation forms. There are a wide range of mental speculations, however they all trust that it is the individual 's contemplations and sentiments that direct their activities. All things considered, issues in intuition can prompt to criminal conduct. On account of the first degree murder the wrongdoing was not one of energy, yet rather arranged. Hernandez rented a vehicles and had two friends help him do his grimy work.
Just to be secure and keep “public order”. In Crime Control it values controlling crime to do so as stated in the article “high rates of apprehension and conviction”. The process of this model must keep going and can’t stop for anything such as “Ceremonious rituals”. This model values law enforcement. It was made to control criminals and criminal acts such as breaking the law.
Control theory suggests that people with weak ties to family or society are more likely to engage in criminal activity oppose to those with a strong family bond or community relation. Furthermore, it states that behavior is affected by what an individual wants the most at any given time. The broken windows theory is also related to the control theory. The broken windows theory states that having an ordered and maintained society will prevent crime from happening. Even small cosmetic changes such as a broken window can change the entire environment.
However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities. The differences The due process model is pegged on the belief that it would be better if a criminal found innocent goes free rather than have one innocent person in jail. On the other hand, the crime control model argues that it is better to have a innocent person detained, questioned, tried and found innocent then let free than have a society full of criminals roaming
This placed a strong reliance on psychological remedies for crime, including psychological analysis, diagnosis, and treatment of the root causes of criminal behavior similar to the treatment of a patient with a mental illness. In theory this would prevent recidivism because the true cause of the behavior would be resolved. The crime control period views crime as more of a rational choice and values punishment that is swift, certain, and severe in order to prevent/suppress criminality which threatens the functioning of a free society. This “us vs them” mentality supports greater prosecutorial power, increased usage of punitive processes like imprisonment/fines, and greater police power to deter
The supporters see the need to protect the public from predatory criminals. They also believe that granting to much leeway to the law enforcement officials will end up with the loss of civil liberties and freedom for all the Americans. Between the two justice models I would choose the due process model. This is because it seems more logical.
The first step of the criminal justice system is the execution of a crime. A lot of variation can happen here, because some victims of crime do not report the crime immediately, or they do not realize they are a victim of crime until later. Also, some crimes may not have witnesses, which can lead to a crime not being reported as well. This is a great example to show why the discretionary model is so useful in the criminal justice system, because with so much variation in crime there needs to be a foundation laid down to guide the case in the right path. After the committing of a crime the law starts to get involved.
There are protective factors that will inhibit the conduct such as having a positive or resilient temperament, a sense of self-efficacy, having that much needed level of parental involvement, and having a supportive family. Restorative justice programs integrate protective factors to eliminate the risk factors. For example, according to the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, this model keeps punishment in proportion to the criminal act by focusing on three basic principles: 1) offenders who commit a wrongful act deserve appropriate consequences; 2) citizens have a moral right to give criminals only the sentence they deserve; and 3) society must avoid punishing an innocent person. Restorative justice still can involve traditional disciplinary measures, such as fines, incarceration, probation, or a combination of all three (Newton, 2013). Restorative