Someone under terrible and extreme issues may not have the ability to handle the unfair and harsh punishments given to them. Some people believe the mental illness should only be taken into consideration when the time of sentencing presents. This shows how some states chose to abolish the insanity defense and replace it with the GBMI, which carries a penalty of crime. The GBMI allows the time of imprisonment to become varied; the defendant can prove he or she no longer classifies as mentally ill after the treatment in order to have freedom from jail (Semaje). This is especially important to promote the safety of the public, for the defendant’s rights and society.
The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. 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.
An offender is someone who commits an illegal act, which is what makes up our correctional system. The correctional system punishes offenders in many different ways. The most common act of punishment is imprisonment. Imprisonment is used to take away freedom and allow the person convicted of the crime to reflect on their actions.
Other reform includes construction by the governor to build bigger prisons and fill the adult systems, forcing younger ones to be responsible for their crimes. Probation court on the other hand is trying to create a profile for repeat offenders. The idea will help gauge and correct behavior before it gets worse or happens again. The effort is to help the child no punish them. The last reform idea is By DA Gil Garcetti.
While a few theories are not as regular, others have developed and are utilized as a part of numerous criminal reviews today. Cutting edge criminologists consolidate the most important aspects of sociology, psychology, anthropology, and biological theories to advance their comprehension of criminal behavior. Rational choice theory, psychological, biological, and strain theory are used to analyze the
Instead the focus was on what was facilitating it-such as criminogenic environments due to economic hardship, broken homes, and potential mental conflicts. Thus the Progressive period was more interested in the government treating rather than judging the offender, and felt that keeping one incarcerated made it impossible to rehabilitate them into normal society. Consequently, probation, parole, and indeterminate sentencing became solutions to crime. The medical model views crime as being caused by underlying psychological factors. 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.
The victim deserves similar level of protection and attention from the court like that of an accused i.e. a victim 's interests need to be balanced vis-à-vis that of accused. Victims of crime go through mental and physical trauma and suffer throughout their lives , as there place in the society changes. A victim is certainly entitled to reparation, restitution and safeguards of his rights and criminal justice would look hollow if justice is not done to the victim of the crime. In recent years, the Legislature and the judiciary have taken gradual steps to develop the necessary principles by which appropriate compensation could be paid to the victims of crimes. The gradual shift in the approach of the Supreme Court is a positive sign but other organs i.e. the government and the legislature have to make conscious efforts to consider the rights of the victims.
1. prevent others from committing similar offences. Jeremy Bentham’s theory states that deterrence should be the main purpose of punishment. Since individual deterrence deals with the concept of preventing the same individual from committing another offense, an example that can be used is a DWI. Individuals who are convicted of a DWI face consequences that include jail time, loss of license, and excessive fines which ultimately may make them rethink committing this crime or any crime with similar consequences.
The shortcoming of this approach is that it is not appropriate for more serious crimes such as rape and murder, because in cases like those, most of the time there is nothing that offenders can do to restore the loss or make things right The benefit of this approach is that all parties who are involved get the chance to face each other. The victims get an opportunity to be directly involved in the process and get a chance to respond to the crime committed against them. The offender becomes aware of how their offense has impacted the victim, and this in turn allows the offender to take responsibility and to apologize or show remorse to their wrong doings. Through the process healing is promoted to all the parties involved, the offender might be required to pay for the harm caused.
Changing criminal behavior, not pausing it while incarcerated is what is needed to keep the public safe, making offenders aware of the destruction they have caused to society, and making them accountable via treatment programs and discipline. Unfortunately, upon release an offender may have set backs, being in a structured, disciplined environment, followed by complete freedom may prove bad for some. Many halfway houses are located far away from an offender’s residence, therefore even if employment is secured during treatment when released they return home to no job, or support, and are put back in the same situation. Community support is imperative in the effectiveness of halfway houses, sadly, many communities refuse halfway houses in their communities, lack of education and fear have been a huge
I think that the court systems should have a little more power when it comes to choosing due process or criminal control. If the person is a first time offender and it is a small crime then I think they should have the right to defend themselves. On the other hand if the person is being prosecuted for the second or more time for the same type of offense or if it was an offense that is very bad then I feel that they need to be punished for the crimes that they have committed. I do believe that there should be balance because not all court cases need to be dealt with to the extreme of punishments but then there are some cases and individuals that never seem to learn so they need to be dealt with in a different way to deter them and others from committing those same
Also, with the criminal justice system there are 3 parts which include police, courts, and corrections. Police are the ones who enforce the law, investigate crimes, and apprehend offenders. Corrections include carrying out sentences imposed by the courts and they also provide safe and humane custody and supervision of offenders. Courts are to conduct fair and impartial trials and they also decide criminal cases.
On the other hand, when local police departments use the due process model they emphasize on the treatment of the offender rather than punishing the offender. Their primary focus is doing the right thing granting offenders a fair chance. Offenders are offered treatment programs through community based alternatives rather than incarceration. Community based alternatives would grant offenders the opportunities to several different programs such as pretrial release and diversion, probation, restitution, community service, work release programs, and halfway houses. The interest of the due process model with local police departments are to develop long term solutions for offenders rather than immediately punishing an individual whether guilty or
A common theme among restorative justice (RJ) practices, as a whole, is to hold offenders accountable and empower victims. The sentencing circle, also known as the peacemaking circle, is a community-based practice with the primary goal of determining a suitable punishment that meets the needs of all parties associated with the offense. There are, however, other RJ practices, specifically ones used in cases of intimate family or domestic violence, that are in contract to the sentencing circle. For example, victim-survivor panels are a common RJ practice for victims of domestic or sexual violence. Victims do not face their abuser but rather the attendees are individuals, typically men, responsible for committing similar offenses as those described
Within the judicial and criminal justice systems, restorative justice is seen as a forward moving process in regards to the way in which the sentencing of offenders is handled (Britto & Reimund, 2013). Restorative justice works to focus on the needs of both the victim and the offender but incorporates the community as well as those who support both the victim and offender (Britto & Reimund, 2013). The approach of restorative justice in not simply a means by which society responds to and reduces crime but instead, provides an equivalently valuable social response to crime (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, the restorative approach places emphasis on the personal and relational harms which were caused by the crime while creating space for dialogue concerning the actual damage, whether directly or