This research paper will discuss why there is no value to the just deserts approach and why, if supplemented with a re-entry program, just deserts will have a greater significance. The theory and practice of the just deserts approach will be examined as well as why it does not appear to be working for offenders. Additionally, re-entry programs will be analyzed; those operating in Canada and in the United States, to further explain why reintegrating is better for the community and offenders. It is easy to agree with the just deserts approach to crime, however, when a loved one is affected by the harsh punishments and the negative consequences of prison, it makes life afterward extremely
In the article, “ The CSI Effect: TV Crime Dramas’ Impact on Real Life Cases” By Madeline Anderson says that “ Criminals may be influenced by the content on such shows to try and take steps to conceal crimes and make forensic evidence harder to uncover and use.” This shows that these television shows may influence criminals to take part in hiding anything that would lead them back to the crime. Anderson also states that “ ..the CSI Effect should be a cause for concern, making it advisable to censor or alter the material presented in crime dramas to avoid giving criminals ideas.” This shows that these crime dramas should have less of the evidence that would given in a case in order to protect future criminal cases to be tampered
Working with special populations increases these risks. Prisoners, children, and mentally disabled individuals are at increased risk for harm in research. Exemptions are not granted for these populations, because it is very important they are protected and a review is performed. There is a focus on three major cornerstones of ethics in research and they are beneficence, respect, and justice. When working with special populations it is imperative to ensure these standards are met, and extra steps may need to be taken to see that this is the case (Royse et al,
If proper steps are not taken an individual can be wrongfully convicted due to cognitive biases, institutional pressures, and normative features of the criminal justice system. For this reason, it is extremely important to take many factors into account when analyzing a case from the moment the individual went in for questioning till the moment the case is closed. Rightful steps must be made so that the presenting cognitive and physical biases do not cloud the judgment of the prosecutors or judges. For this reason, it is imperative that the criminal justice system has a comprehensive understanding of how tunnel vision can affect the system as a whole regarding criminal case
The CSI effect describes the way CSI is exaggerated on crime television shows such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and Sherlock which influences public perception. As a result, Jurors have come to have unrealistic expectations about the quantity, quality, and availability of scientific evidence, thereby raising the effective standard of proof for prosecutors. As technology improves and becomes more prevalent throughout society, people may also develop higher expectations for the capabilities of forensic technology. The csi effect creates unrealistic expectations of the public and has raised the juror’s expectations of the crime investigating field. The csi effect modifies the public’s perception of crime investigating through stereotyping and creating false myths.
The main differences between the Great Awakening and the Enlightenment is that the Enlightenment was a movement started by the philosophers and scientists centered on scientific spirit and reasoning. However, the Great Awakening was a religious and spiritual movement. For example, Document A states, ”You have sown the harmful seeds of separation and disorder among us”. This shows that George Whitefield was a dangerous man and was spreading harmful ideas. Also, in Document A, the test explains “You have stopped the spread of the Gospel, and hurt the Peace and good Order”.
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.
These are fabulous steps, however they are not a panacea. More must be done to execute new advancements in policing and different parts of the equity framework that will enhance police responsibility and diminish the extent to which the harshest parts of criminal equity fall excessively on groups of shading. The United States needs to grasp a more brilliant way to deal with criminal equity that perceives that the affinity to concentrate on race is not the response to make safe groups. The inability to guarantee that our legal and legitimate frameworks treat all Americans just as has isolated an excess of our groups. We must offer voice to the honest to goodness and across the board worries about trust in the criminal equity process.
Organizations are taking action against the death penalty by researching, publishing, and exposing facts whenever officials want to abuse their power with the law. When the final sentence is being decided, the system they use to determine, is very flawed. The sentence is determined not by the gravity of the crime, but depending heavily on the person’s lawyer. Another thing that is used against the defendant, is race. As sad as using race to determine when someone else’s life is going to end sounds, officials really do that.
The approach of regulation can seem to provide effective means to battle aspects of it. While that may be legitimate, the overarching dilemma is that it reinforces and endorses sexual violence. The consequences of this is an ominous reality for the victims. Strengthening a trade that contravenes human rights is a great slippery slope. Instead of regulation against and prosecuting the person that have been brought in illegally, the attention should be placed on executing the law which prohibits sex trafficking, and prosecute the people to buy sex and the perpetrators.