One Role of the Social Scientist in the Courtroom: The Maria Pitchford Case

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-272
Author(s):  
Katherine Van Wormer
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Jury Selection ◽  
Recent Trial ◽  
The Social

Sociologists have been involved in various aspects of the criminal justice system. The author examines the role of the sociologist in jury selection. Using as a background her involvement in a recent trial, she discusses the basic strategies involved in selecting a jury.

Breaking the Cycle: Understanding the Needs of Women Involved in the Criminal Justice System and the Role of Mentoring in Promoting Desistance

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (8) ◽  
pp. 1330-1353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Singh ◽  
Jesse Cale ◽  
Kat Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Mentoring Relationships ◽  
Mentoring Program ◽  
Specific Intervention ◽  
The Social ◽  
Gender Specific

An increasingly popular gender-specific intervention to assist women involved in the criminal justice system (e.g., ex-prisoners) is mentoring. However, despite the growing popularity of mentoring, there is a dearth of literature that has explored the intervention’s efficacy, particularly as it relates to women involved in the criminal justice system. In the current study, client files of 64 women in a one-to-one mentoring program in Australia were examined to identify (a) the social and practical needs and obstacles faced by women overcoming their involvement with the justice system, and (b) the extent to which mentoring addressed these needs and obstacles. The results show that consistent with previous research, many of the women experienced a range of social and practical difficulties that impeded the desistance process. For a large portion of the women, however, mentoring helped overcome some difficulties by enhancing positive social capital in their lives. These findings are discussed in the context of how mentoring relationships can act as key turning points in the lives of women involved in the criminal justice system.

scholarly journals PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI (Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy)

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Suharyo Suharyo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Local Officials ◽  
Strategic Position

PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIADALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI(Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy) The Attorney General of Indonesia plays a strategic position in corruption eradication. Since IndonesiaIndependent Day on 17 August 1945 until now, the attorney general keeps eradicate the corruption. As one of the elements of criminal justice system of the democracy state refers to the Act No.16/2004 on the Attorney General of Republic of Indonesia, and also a concern with the Act No.8/1981 on the Criminal Code (KUHAP). Corruption eradication is ruled and stipulated on the Act No.31/1999 on Corruption Eradication Jo the Act No.20/2001, and supported the Act No.8/2010 on the Criminal Act of Money Laundering . Questions of this research were what obstacles of corruption eradication in attorneys and how to make it effective? It was a normative-juridical method. It was  an impression that the Attorney General has no dare to enforce the law for the elite politician, local officials (governors,majors) because of their strong relationship with. This phenomenon triggered scholars to do long march and protest to the Attorney General to be consistent and responsive in corruption eradication. Good governance and bureaucracy reform had no big impact, the meaning of “Tri Atmaka” and “Tri Karma Adhyaksa” had truly not been absorbed and practiced, yet. Keywords: The Attorney General of Indonesia in eradicating corruption ABSTRAK Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia memegang posisi sangat strategis dalam pemberantasan korupsi. SejakProklamasi Kemerdekaan 17 Agustus 1945 sampai sekarang, Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia terus menerus melakukan pemberantasan korupsi. Sebagai salah satu unsur dari  sistem peradilan pidana (Criminal Justice System) di dalam negara demokrasi Kejaksaan RI mengacu pada Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kejaksaan RI, dan juga memperhatikan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). Khusus untuk pemberantasan korupsi, diatur melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tidak Pidana Korupsi no Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001, dan ditunjang Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 Tentang Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Adapun rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah kendala yang melekat jajaran Kejaksaan dalam pemberantasan korupsi, serta Bagaimana mengefektifkan Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Metode yang dipakai adalah yuridis normatif.Terdapat kesan, Kejaksaan RI sangat tumpul pada pelaku dari elit politik, dan pejabat daerah (Gubernur, Bupati/Walikota) yang mempunyai koneksi politik yang kuat.Sehingga tidaklah mengherankan, apabila di berbagai daerah, muncul aksi-aksi unjuk rasa dari kalangan mahasiswa yang menuntut Kejaksaan RI agar konsisten dan responsif dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Good Governance dan reformasi birokrasi, hanya berpengaruh positif, secara minimal. Makna Tri Atmaka, serta Tri Karma Adhyaksa, kurang diresapi dan kurang  diamalkan secara mendalam. Kata Kunci: Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi

Roadside drug testing: Incoherent policy or uncertainty by design?

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aidan Ricketts
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Road Safety ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Social Legitimacy ◽  
Driving Impairment ◽  
The Social ◽  
Negative Side Effects

Roadside drug testing regimes being implemented around Australia have been presented as essential for road safety but are compromised by significant policy incoherence. Prosecution based upon driving impairment has been replaced with prosecution based upon mere detection of a specified substance. The conflation of road safety and prohibition as the jurisprudential rationale for penalty by legislators is producing significant negative side effects for the criminal justice system and for the social legitimacy of the roadside testing process generally. Genuine impairment testing for drivers is important but it is not being achieved by the current procedures in place around Australia.

Reducing the Harm of Criminal Victimization: The Role of Restitution

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 450-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacy Hoskins Haynes ◽  
Alison C. Cares ◽  
R. Barry Ruback
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Compensatory Mechanism ◽  
Court Order ◽  
Interpersonal Justice ◽  
Criminal Victimization ◽  
Do So

Restitution is a court-ordered payment by offenders to their victims to cover the victims’ economic losses resulting from the crime. These losses can be substantial and can harm victims and victims’ families both directly and indirectly. But most victims do not receive reparation for their injuries, both because judges do not always impose restitution and because of problems with collecting restitution payments, even if there is a court order to do so. In this article, we review the literature on restitution and suggest that this compensatory mechanism is necessary to restore victims to where they were before the crime occurred. But monetary restitution alone is not sufficient. Making victims whole requires not only financial compensation from the offender but also procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice from the criminal justice system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document