Traditional Goals Of Sentencing Essay

justice model, the crime control model, and the balanced and restorative justice model. The Parens

There are many debates on how to punish offenders and how to stop them re-offending. Retribution Theorists believe in the old fashion way of punishment, an ‘eye for an eye’ and that the suffering of the victim should determine the level of punishment, for example if a victim is brutally murdered, the offender should pay the price and suffer from a range of punishments themselves. Therefore the punishments differ to the seriousness to the crime, from theft to murder, minor to serious punishments occur. Whereas a reductivist approach believes that we punish offenders to help them change for the better which would be to rehabilitate them for example. (Cavadino 2013) states that the rehabilitation programs might “facilitate change” rather than

The main purpose for our criminal justice system should be to stop future crime. General deterrence would be a good way to set an example to communities who disobey the law. Allowing bystanders to see the punishments of crime will instill fear into them, causing them not to repeat the crime they witness. Specific deterrence allows for criminals to still be in society, but every time they think about doing something illegal they will have a negative feeling. These method focusses on educative function allowing people to learn from their mistakes and preventing further complications. If the government main goal was deterrence, then there would be less crime and fewer people in prisons. This would help with taxes and improve communities. Additionally,

Sentencing methods and rationales are continually highly contested in the Criminal Justice system. Monetary penalties are particularly pivotal in these debates. According to Walsh, research from all corners of the world continually demonstrates that the poorest in society are more likely to be subject to the Criminal Justice System. This evidence Walsh argues, ‘cannot be ignored’, when considering which sentencing options should be used. The fine is the most commonly used penal sanction in most Western Penal systems. Fines are a historic type of monetary penalty which have remained incredibly popular. Outside of the United States, fines make up about 70 % of all punishments in the lower courts. The fine can be seen as a modest penalty, and appropriate, in my opinion, only if the offence was minor. Bentham sees monetary penalties as ‘ideal’. This I argue is incorrect. Monetary penalties have so many disadvantages that they should not be used to a greater extent in the criminal justice system. Thus some have gone as far to argue that they should be completely abolished. However Burch has said that this would not be possible so reform should be favoured instead. I will argue that updating their current use is essential in order to make the current system of fines more effective and more restricted. I will continue to discuss why fines are not effective, from their rational, to their effect on the offender to the way that they are set in practice. I will conclude

Today our justice system has a multitude of options when dealing with those who are convicted of offenses. However, many argue that retributive justice is the only real justice there is. This is mainly because its advantage is that it gives criminals the appropriate punishment that they deserve. The goals of this approach are clear and direct. In his book The Little Book of Restorative Justice, Zehr Howard (2002), illustrates that the central focus of retributive justice is offenders getting what they deserve (p. 30). This reflection paper will first address the advantages of using retributive justice approach in three court-cases. Second, it will discuss the disadvantages of using retributive justice approaches by analyzing the three court-cases listed above. Third, it will elaborate on ways that the system could have used restorative justice processes in the cases, as well as present potential outcomes that could have been reached if restoration justice was taken into consideration.

Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996). Deterrence and the Death Penalty: The Views of the Experts. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1143970

Taking this first step in reconciliation allows for a face to face encounter where restorative dialogue can occur between the victim and the offender in a genuine interaction (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, this process requires that the offender take explicit responsibility for the actions committed while listening and responding to the victim affected by their crime so as to present their own approach for repairing the damage caused (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). This process promotes honest dialogue and an empowering experience for the victim as they feel that their needs are heard and feelings expressed (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). In all, restorative justice benefits the victim, the offender and the community as community ties are strengthened while the process of the restorative approach discourages the offender from committing further crimes through the use of an open-minded and rehabilitative process (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt,

Custody sentences are for punishment, rehabilitation and education, however, there are different views to youth imprisonment. Some critics say if you commit a crime you should take responsibility and jail will give you a ‘short sharp shock’ and you will receive rehabilitation. Whilst some say it is damaging to children and would lead to further reoffending once they are out due to learning crimes off other criminals. Evidence does suggest that children who have more than one risk factor present are more than likely to be involved in criminal activities (Hopkins Burke, 2016 p. 232). There are three penal institutions sometimes called secure estates - local authority secure children's homes, secure training centres and young offender’s institutes.

Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. Frontline writes that the law allocated funds to new prisons, drug education, and treatment. But its main result was to create mandatory minimum sentences. The harsh sentences on crack cocaine use disproportionately affect African-Americans April 22, 2014.

The various goals of criminal sentencing today are revenge, retribution, just deserts, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation or reformation, and restoration (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015). The first is revenge. Revenge is an emotional response to real or imagined injury or insult which requires punishment in return. This is done more on feeling than by law.

It is clear that we have not embraced the theory of rehabilitation because we still use prisons to “warehouse” offenders. The concern with “warehousing” is that the offender will more than likely end up back in prison. We have learned that recidivism is a major concern facing society today because offenders have little chance of employment, no funds or housing, and often time’s very little support from family or friends. I stand behind rehabilitation for offenders because I feel like it is the only way to truly stop crime. In

2. Restorative justice also known as balanced and restorative justice is “a sentencing model that builds on restitution and community participation in an attempt to make the victim whole again (Schmalleger 269).” Restorative justice focuses on “crime as harm and justice as repairing the harm”. This type of justice places crime control primarily in the hands of the community.

Sentencing is a fundamental stage in the of the criminal justice process. After the trial process is complete and the defendant has been found guilty the court will impose the penalty. The basic goals of modern sentencing are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration. These goals are achieved by different sentencing practices which are indeterminate and determinate sentencing. This essay will compare indeterminate and determinate sentencing; outline the pros and cons of each sentencing model while providing two examples of each.

Batley (2005) stated that restorative justice is about restoring, healing and re- integrating victims, offenders, as well as the society and also preventing further harm. In this assignment, I will be discussing approaches to restorative justice and illustrating their advantages and disadvantages to offending. I will also provide the applications of these five approaches of restorative justice which are retributive approach, utilitarian deterrence approach, rehabilitation approach, restitution approach and restorative approach in the given case study. I will then explain my preferred approach to justice through identifying a personal belief or value that underpins my choice.

There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation. In addition,