Charge Bargaining and Sentence Discount: The Victim's Perspective

1997 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Fenwick
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Charge Bargaining ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Due Process Rights

This paper draws attention to the interests of the victim in the criminal justice system in relation to the use of charge bargaining and the sentence discount in UK law. The paper argues that debate in this area tends to assume that these practices, particularly use of the graded sentence discount, are in harmony with the needs of crime control and with the interests of victims, but that they may infringe due process rights. Debate tends to concentrate on the due process implications of such practices, while the ready association of victims' interests with those of crime control tends to preclude consideration of a distinctive victim's perspective. This paper therefore seeks to identify the impact of charge bargaining and the sentence discount on victims in order to identify a particular victim's perspective. It goes on to evaluate measures which would afford it expression including the introduction of victim consultation and participation in charge bargains and discount decisions as proposed under the 1996 Victim's Charter. It will be argued, however, that while this possibility has value, victims' interests might be more clearly served by limiting or abandoning the use of these practices.

scholarly journals Role of the Court in Protecting Human Rights in crime-control Model, Accrording to the Criminal Procedure Code of 2015

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Le Lan Chi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Study Guides

The court exercises the judicial power, thereby plays an important role in protecting human rights. However, such role varies across nations and models of criminal procedure. Vietnam, the country has been following the model of crime control, has its corresponding approach to the role of the court in protecting human rights. Notwithstanding, the current context of improving the rule of law and human rights has posed challenges and raised questions of changing the approach. Keywords The Court, adjudication, human rights, model, due-process, crime-control, the accused References [1] Herbert L. Packer, Two models of the criminal process, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1964, 1 (http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol113/iss1/1) [2] Joycelyn M. Pollock, Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice, Cengage Learning, Boston, 2015, p.116 [3] https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/criminal-justice/the-criminal-justice-system/which-model-crime-control-or-due-process [4] Fairchild, E. and Dammer, H. R., Comparative Criminal Justice System, 2nd ed. Belmont, Wadsworth Thomson Learning, 2001, p. 146 [5] Fairchild, E. and Dammer, H. R., Comparative Criminal Justice System, 2nd ed. Belmont, Wadsworth Thomson Learning, 2001, p. 148 [6] Đào Trí Úc, Hệ thống những nguyên tắc cơ bản của tố tụng hình sự Việt Nam theo Bộ luật tố tụng hình sự năm 2015 (in trong sách chuyên khảo “Những nội dung mới trong Bộ luật tố tụng hình sự năm 2015”, Nguyễn Hoà Bình (chủ biên), Nxb. Chính trị quốc gia – Sự thật, Hà Nội, 2016, trang 59.

Evaluating Alternatives in Criminal Justice

1976 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Musheno ◽  
Dennis Palumbo ◽  
James Levine
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Vested Interests ◽  
The Impact

A normative policy-impact model that provides criteria for evaluating specific programs as well as for determining which goals should be given priority in criminal justice is presented. With "decision structure," "self-interest goals," and "public-interest goals" the main elements of the model, the article stresses the impact of criminal justice on various groups related to this policy area. Although a policy may be aimed primarily at groups out side government (e.g., criminals), it also will have an impact on those asked to carry it out (e.g., police). When the effects benefit the nongovernment groups (sometimes called the clientele), the policy achieves "public-interest goals. " When the beneficiaries are government officials, "self-interest goals" are being attained. One of the main themes of this paper is that the extent to which public-interest goals can be reached depends entirely on how well they serve the self-interests of those who are responsible for executing the policies in question. Thus, while the article proposes that the ultimate goal of the criminal justice system should be the "equalization of the burden of crime," it emphasizes that the means of accomplishing this goal are uncertain because traditional crime-control strategies (e.g., deterrence) have major fallacies. Moreover, even if promising strategies are discovered, the self- interests of personnel in the criminal justice system motivate them to subvert such policies. Only through conscious mani pulation of work incentives can the vested interests of many criminal justice personnel in the status quo be altered and the equalization of the costs of crime be obtained.

scholarly journals Arti Penting Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan: Kajian Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 130/PUU-XIII/2015

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 170
Author(s):  
Hwian Christianto
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Model ◽  
Constitutional Court

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 130/PUU-XIII/2015 tidak hanya sekedar memberikan perubahan kepada rumusan Pasal 109 ayat (1) KUHAP akan tetapi penekanan konsep hukum acara pidana yang berlaku. Keberadaan Putusan membawa problematika tersendiri dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia yang berlaku selama ini sehingga kajian terhadap Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan (SPDP) penting dilakukan berdasarkan asas hukum acara pidana dan jaminan hak asasi manusia. Metode penelitian yuridis normatif menganalisis pertimbangan Mahkamah Konstitusi menurut asas hukum acara pidana, ketentuan hukum yang berlaku dan instumen hukum internsional dan nasional terkait hak asasi manusia. Hasil analisis yang diperoleh antara lain pertama, keharusan pemberitahuan SPDP kepada tersangka, korban, dan penuntut umum menunjukkan adanya pergeseran konsep Crime Control Model ke konsep Due Process Model sekaligus sebuah terobosan hukum yang didasarkan pada tujuh asas hukum acara pidana yang berlaku. Mahkamah Konstitusi menunjukkan konsistensi sistem acara pidana yang mengedepankan prinsip diferensiasi fungsional antara penyidik dan penuntut umum sebagai integrated criminal justice system; kedua Pemahaman akan arti penting penyampaian SPDP juga memenuhi hak asasi manusia yang dimiliki oleh tersangka, korban dan Negara.The Decision of Constitutional Court Number 130/PUU-XIII/2015 did not only change the formula of Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code, but also the focus of the legal concept of the law in order. The existence of the decision has brought problems in the Criminal Code in effect, so the analysis of the Notification Letter of the Commencement of Investigation is important based on the legal base of the Criminal Code and the guarantee of human rights. A normative juridical method was used in analyzing the consideration of the Constitutional Court according to the Criminal Code, the provisions which were in effect and international and national legal instruments related to the human rights. The result of the analysis showed that, first, SPDP must be issued to the suspect, victim, and the prosecutor to show the movement of the concept of crime control model to the concept of due process model as well as a legal breakthrough based on the seven bases of the Criminal Code in effect. The Constitutional Court showed the consistency in the system of crime which put forward the principal of functional differentiation between the investigator and the prosecutor as the integrated criminal justice system; secondly, the understanding of the important meaning of issuing SPDP also fulfilled human rights of the suspect, the victim, and the country.

scholarly journals NATURE AND BASIC PROBLEMS OF NON-CONVICTION-BASED CONFISCATION IN THE UNITED STATES

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (34) ◽  
pp. 41-65
Author(s):  
Stefan D. Cassella
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
Property Owners ◽  
Asset Forfeiture ◽  
Due Process Rights

This report discusses the goals that asset forfeiture is intended to serve in the federal criminal justice system, the types of property that are subject to forfeiture, and the procedures that are used to initiate, litigate, and conclude asset forfeiture cases.  With respect to procedure, its focus is on non-conviction-based (NCB) forfeiture, and especially on the safeguards that protect the property interests and due process rights of property owners.

A Truce in Criminal Law’s Distributive Principle Wars?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 565-583
Author(s):  
Paul H. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
A Value ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Past Wrongs

Crime-control utilitarians and retributivist philosophers have long been at war over the appropriate distributive principle for criminal liability and punishment, with little apparent possibility of reconciliation between the two. In the utilitarians’ view, the imposition of punishment can be justified only by the practical benefit that it provides: avoiding future crime. In the retributivists’ view, doing justice for past wrongs is a value in itself that requires no further justification. The competing approaches simply use different currencies: fighting future crime versus doing justice for past wrongs. It is argued here that the two are in fact reconcilable, in a fashion. We cannot declare a winner in the distributive principle wars but something more like a truce. Specifically, good utilitarians ought to support a distributive principle based upon desert because the empirical evidence suggests that doing justice for past wrongdoing is likely the most effective and efficient means of controlling future crime. A criminal justice system perceived by the community as conflicting with its principles of justice provokes resistance and subversion, whereas a criminal justice system that earns a reputation for reliably doing justice is one whose moral credibility inspires deference, assistance, and acquiescence, and is more likely to have citizens internalize its norms of what is truly condemnable conduct. Retributivists ought to support empirical desert as a distributive principle because, while it is indeed distinct from deontological desert, there exists an enormous overlap between the two, and it seems likely that empirical desert may be the best practical approximation of deontological desert. Indeed, some philosophers would argue that the two are necessarily the same.

Due Process: A Conversation with Maria Augusta Ramos

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 52-58
Author(s):  
Nilo Couret
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Everyday Life ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Truth Telling

Nilo Couret interviews Brazilian documentary filmmaker Maria Augusta Ramos. Her recent documentary, O Processo (The Trial, 2018), chronicles the “parliamentary coup” against Dilma Rousseff, delving into the impeachment process and the former president's trial in the Senate. In O Processo, Ramos engages with enduring themes and subjects from her twenty-year career, particularly her well-known Justice Trilogy, which examined the Brazilian criminal justice system. For Ramos, documentary shares an affinity with forensic discourse when its purpose is truth-telling in the service of justice. Rousseff's trial and impeachment, however, find the filmmaker probing how justice has been sundered from the truth in a contemporary moment when corruption scandals and fake news compromise our democratic institutions. Her films combine an observational approach with institutional analyses in order to reveal the workings of power behind the surfaces of everyday life.

scholarly journals Investigating the Impact of Jury Sentencing Recommendations Using Procedural Justice Theory

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianni Ribeiro ◽  
Emma Antrobus
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Frustration Effect ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Justice Theory ◽  
Perceptions Of Fairness ◽  
Sentencing Recommendations ◽  
The Impact

Public confidence in the criminal justice system is critical for the system to function effectively. Two studies investigated the impact of jury sentencing recommendations on public confidence using procedural justice theory. The first study (N = 80) manipulated the presence of jury involvement in sentencing (voice present versus voice absent) and the punitiveness of the minimum non-parole period (more punitive versus less punitive) to examine whether giving juries a “voice”—a key element of procedural justice—would increase public confidence in the courts, as well as perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. Contrary to predictions, results revealed that a more punitive sentence led to increased perceptions of legitimacy, which was associated with higher confidence. The second study (N = 60) examined whether manipulating the Judge’s agreement with the jury’s recommendation—as well as the Judge’s reason for disagreement—would elicit the “frustration effect,” leading to a decrease in confidence and perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. There was no evidence to suggest that the frustration effect was present. Results of both studies could suggest that jury sentencing recommendations may not effectively increase public confidence and perceptions of fairness and legitimacy in the courts, however alternate explanations are discussed.

scholarly journals Kijibashik: Turn it Around

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tenzin Butsang ◽  
Flora Matheson ◽  
Jerry Flores ◽  
Angela Mashford-Pringle
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Indigenous Women ◽  
Core Knowledge ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Critical Gap ◽  
Federal Prisons ◽  
The Impact

Over the last decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of incarcerated Indigenous women within Canada’s federal prisons. More than half of these women also identify as single mothers of multiple children, extending the scope of incarceration’s impact across generations. While maternal incarceration has been shown to contribute to a myriad of issues in children, including mental illness and increased mortality, there are few qualitative studies where previously incarcerated Indigenous women have been asked directly about the impact of incarceration on their wellbeing and mothering. This project will utilize a community-based research methodology that centers the voices of previously incarcerated Indigenous mothers by examining the commonalities and distinctions in their lived experiences. We will (1) identify the mental, emotional, spiritual, physical, and relational implications of incarceration for Indigenous mothers, (2) explore Indigenous concepts of motherhood and kinship, (3) identify the unique needs of this population in the criminal justice system, and (4) inform new and existing programs and services directed towards Indigenous mothers involved in the criminal justice system. Semi-structured individual interviews with previously incarcerated Indigenous mothers and Sharing Circles (focus groups) with key stakeholders, including Elders, Healers, and community partners involved in the criminal justice field will form the core knowledge for the project. This project will address a critical gap in public health research concerning the wellbeing of marginalized and incarcerated individuals and contribute significantly to our understanding of the experiences of Indigenous women in the criminal justice system. Through a collaborative partnership with several key Indigenous-centred organizations, the knowledge generated will be used to inform and develop decarceration programming and supports for previously incarcerated Indigenous mothers, establishing concrete measures to reduce the overrepresentation of Indigenous women in the Canadian criminal justice system, now and into the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document