scholarly journals Wrongful Convictions and Erroneous Acquittals: Applying Packer’s Model to Examine Public Perceptions of Judicial Errors in Australia

2021 ◽  
pp. 0306624X2110668
Author(s):  
Harley Williamson ◽  
Mai Sato ◽  
Rachel Dioso-Villa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Social Attitudes ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
Judicial Errors

The fallible nature of the criminal justice system continues to see judicial errors—that is, wrongful convictions and erroneous acquittals—undermine its integrity, efficacy, and legitimacy. Public perceptions of judicial errors are important contributors to criminal justice policy and reforms. The current study utilizes the 2016 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AuSSA) dataset to examine public attitudes toward judicial errors. It applies Herbert Packer’s crime control and due process models to understand how concerns around procedural safeguards and public safety are associated with public perceptions toward judicial errors. Packer’s model has been challenged by studies, which theorize that the models are not mutually exclusive. Yet, they have not been empirically tested in this context, which is a gap this study seeks to fill. Findings show that due process and crime control concerns shape public attitudes toward wrongful convictions and challenge the notion that Packer’s models be applied on a continuum.

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.

8. Summary justice in the magistrates’ court

2021 ◽  
pp. 389-430
Author(s):  
Lucy Welsh ◽  
Layla Skinns ◽  
Andrew Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Impact

This chapter focuses on the magistrates’ courts. It discusses the importance of the magistracy and the work that they do; the involvement (and funding) of lawyers in summary justice; major pre-trial decisions such as bail and whether a case can be dealt with in the magistrates’ court or is so serious that it needs to be sent to the Crown court (mode of trial/allocation); how magistrates and their legal advisors measure up to the crime control/due process models of criminal justice; and the future of summary justice (including the impact of managerialist and ‘victim rights’ reforms and trends that encourage dealing with much lower court business away from the courtroom itself).

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.

Convicting the Innocent or Freeing the Guilty? Public Attitudes Toward Criminal Justice Errors

2020 ◽  
pp. 0306624X2094468
Author(s):  
Yue Zhuo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Criminal Justice Policy ◽  
Innocent Person ◽  
Contemporary China ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
Judicial Errors

Two types of judicial errors—convicting an innocent person or acquitting a guilty person—challenge the integrity and legitimacy of criminal justice. How citizens view these errors plays an important role in criminal justice policy. Utilizing data from a national survey, this study applies the established Western theories to explore the correlates of public attitudes regarding the relative acceptance of wrongful convictions and erroneous acquittals in contemporary China. The findings lend support to both constructionist/conflict and symbolic theories.

The Racial Politics of Due Process Protection

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason T. Carmichael ◽  
Stephanie L. Kent
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Racial Politics ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Interaction Terms ◽  
System Errors

Discoveries of wrongful convictions have increased substantially over the last several decades. During this period, practitioners and scholars have been advocating for the adoption of policies aimed at reducing the likelihood of convicting a person for a crime they did not commit. Implementing such policies are vitally important not only because they help ensure that the innocent do not receive unwarranted sanctions or that the guilty go unpunished but also because cases of wrongful conviction can erode public confidence in the criminal justice system and trust in the rule of law. To avoid such outcomes, many states have adopted policies through legislation that aim to reduce system errors. It remains unclear, however, why some states appear more willing to provide due process protections against wrongful convictions than others. Findings suggest that dimensions of racial politics may help explain the reluctance of some states to adopt protections against wrongful convictions. Specifically, interaction terms show that states with a Republican governor and a large African American population are the least likely to adopt policies aimed at protecting against wrongful convictions. We thus identify important differences in the political and social context between U.S. states that influence the adoption of criminal justice policies.

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.

Public Attitudes Toward New Prisons in New Zealand and Deficit Narratives: A Quantitative Survey

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adele N. Norris ◽  
Kalym Lipsey
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
News Media ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Prison Population ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
The United States ◽  
Quantitative Survey

The imprisonment rate in New Zealand ranks seventh among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Yet the imprisonment of Indigenous people is on par with the United States, which has the world’s highest incarceration rate. Almost 70% of the prison population in New Zealand is comprised of people racialized as non-White. In 2016, the National Government proposed to spend $2.5 billion over a 5-year period to build new prisons (1,500 prison beds) to accommodate a growing prison population. This study assessed public attitudes toward the need for more prisons and the equity of treatment of individuals within the criminal justice system. Findings from a 2016 and 2017 quantitative survey of 5,000 respondents each year revealed that roughly half of the respondents believed the proposed spending for new prisons to be extremely to somewhat necessary. A large proportion of respondents also believed Māori and Pākehā, if convicted of the same crime, are treated similarly within the criminal justice system. New Zealand scholars have critiqued news media coverage of contentious sociopolitical issues, such as crime and prisons, for employing tactics that have worked to construct a morally and culturally deficit “Other” while normalizing whiteness, rendering it invisible and raceless. This article concludes that this process masks racial disparities of individuals located within the criminal justice system and preserves the ideal that prisons are a normal function of the social landscape.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document