Effects of Offenders' and Victims' Characteristics on Severity of Punishment

1993 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart J. McKelvie ◽  
M. Mitchell ◽  
R. Arnott ◽  
M. Sullivan

244 undergraduates read a transcript of a murder case, then made recommendations for treatment of the offender. In Exp. 1, length of sentence for a convicted murderer was unrelated to his mode of attire. In Exp. 2, sentences were unrelated to intention but were longer with than without a motive. In Exp. 3, punishment was not consistently related to the victim's gender. Suggestions for research are given.

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (42) ◽  
pp. e2108507118
Author(s):  
Kinneret Teodorescu ◽  
Ori Plonsky ◽  
Shahar Ayal ◽  
Rachel Barkan

External enforcement policies aimed to reduce violations differ on two key components: the probability of inspection and the severity of the punishment. Different lines of research offer different insights regarding the relative importance of each component. In four studies, students and Prolific crowdsourcing participants (Ntotal = 816) repeatedly faced temptations to commit violations under two enforcement policies. Controlling for expected value, we found that a policy combining a high probability of inspection with a low severity of fines (HILS) was more effective than an economically equivalent policy that combined a low probability of inspection with a high severity of fines (LIHS). The advantage of prioritizing inspection frequency over punishment severity (HILS over LIHS) was greater for participants who, in the absence of enforcement, started out with a higher violation rate. Consistent with studies of decisions from experience, frequent enforcement with small fines was more effective than rare severe fines even when we announced the severity of the fine in advance to boost deterrence. In addition, in line with the phenomenon of underweighting of rare events, the effect was stronger when the probability of inspection was rarer (as in most real-life inspection probabilities) and was eliminated under moderate inspection probabilities. We thus recommend that policymakers looking to effectively reduce recurring violations among noncriminal populations should consider increasing inspection rates rather than punishment severity.


2006 ◽  
Vol 226 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannes Spengler

SummaryAccording to the economic theory of crime, a rise in expected punishment - i.e. the product of probability and severity of punishment - results in a reduction of crime due to deterrence. What appears to be a simple and straightforward hypothesis turns out to be a demanding task for empirical examination because “crime” is composed of many different offence categories and expected punishment is influenced by the actions and decisions of different institutions such as police, public prosecutor’s office and the courts, and, thus, varies with respect to clearance and conviction rate as well as decisions regarding form (fine, probation, imprisonment) and size (length of prison sentence and size of fine) of punishment. Moreover, it makes a difference whether offenders are subject to general or juvenile criminal law. Usually, empirical analyses of crime/deterrence take simultaneous account of only a fraction of the items detailed above. In order to overcome this shortcoming the author has established a unique database combining information from different sources of official judicial statistics covering the German states for the period 1977-2001. Building on this database a comprehensive system of criminal prosecution indicators is derived and subsequently related to the incidence of six major offence categories using panel-econometrics. Revealing many negative significant effects for clearance and conviction rates but mostly insignificant coefficients for indicators of form and size of punishment the estimation results suggest that deterrence is mainly exerted at the initial levels of the criminal prosecution process. Finally, the econometric estimates are used in order to assess cost reductions for crime victims from increases in the severity of criminal prosecution. Thus, intensifying criminal prosecution permanently by 10 percent would reduce victims’ costs by at least € 250 million p.a.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-279
Author(s):  
Mahrus Ali ◽  
M. Arif Setiawan

Douglas Husak has been widely known, especially in the United States and Europe, as a leading theorist who combines the disciplines of legal philosophy and criminal law. Most of his writings were directed at the use of the coercive means of the state through criminal law as minimum as possible. The minimalist theory of criminal law that he coined was motivated by the phenomenon of the increasing number of acts criminalized in the United States Federal State Law in which the majority related to offenses of risk prevention causing overcriminalization. To prevent this, criminal law must be placed as a last resort. The state’s decision to criminalize an act must pay attention to internal and external constraints. The first includes the nontrivial harm or evil constraint, the culpability of the actor, and the proportionality of punishment, while the second is related to the substantiality of the state’s authority to punish. The thought is relevant to be adopted in the criminalization policy in Indonesia, especially regarding the principle of the blameworthiness of conduct, the severity of punishment must weigh the dangerousness of the (actor) offenses, and criminalization should not be taken if other means are equally effective or even more effective to achieve the goal. Abstrak Douglas Husak dikenal luas terutama di Amerika Serikat dan Eropa sebagai teoretisi terkemuka yang menggabungkan antara disiplin filsafat hukum dan hukum pidana. Tulisan-tulisan Husak kebanyakan diarahkan pada penggunaan sarana koersif negara melalui hukum pidana seminimal mungkin. Teori hukum pidana minimalis yang dicetuskannya dilatarbelakangi fenomena semakin banyaknya perbuatan-perbuatan yang dikriminalisasi dalam undang-undang Negara Federal Amerika dan mayoritas terkait offenses of risk prevention sehingga menimbulkan kelebihan kriminalisasi. Untuk mencegahnya, hukum pidana harus ditempatkan sebagai sarana terakhir. Keputusan negara untuk mengkriminalisasi suatu perbuatan harus memperhatikan pembatas internal dan pembatas eksternal. Yang pertama meliputi sifat jahat dan dampak kerugian/kerusakan yang begitu serius dari dilakukannya suatu tindak pidana, kesalahan pembuat, dan proporsionalitas pidana; sedangkan yang kedua terkait substansialitas kewenangan negara untuk memidana. Pemikiran Husak relevan untuk diadopsi dalam kebijakan kriminalisasi di Indonesia terutama menyangkut prinsip ketercelaan suatu perbuatan, penetapan beratnya ancaman pidana mengacu pada seriusitas delik dan kesalahan pembuat, dan kriminalisasi tidak boleh ditempuh jika cara-cara lain sama efektif atau bahkan lebih efektif untuk mencapai tujuan.


Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird

Offences of strict liability are those crimes that do not require mens rea or even negligence as to one or more elements in the actus reus. Where an offence is interpreted to be one of strict liability, the accused will be criminally liable even if he could not have avoided the prescribed harm despite attempting to do so. Where someone is accused of strict liability, it is not necessary for the prosecution to tender evidence of mens rea as to the matter of strict liability. This chapter discusses strict liability and its distinction from ‘absolute’ liability, crimes of strict liability in common law and statutes, strict liability and the presumption of innocence, the presumption of mens rea, the severity of punishment for strict liability, arguments for and against strict liability, the imposition of liability for negligence, and statutory due diligence defences.


1978 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nona J. Barnett ◽  
Hubert S. Feild
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Lisa Kerr

Abstract Ashley Smith’s experience in the adult prison system flowed from certain of its systemic features. This article considers whether and how it is possible to reconcile the basic commitments of sentencing law, including the legal aims of punishment, with that systemic portrait. The youth court that ordered Smith’s transfer to adult custody relied upon an idealized conception of adult imprisonment, just as ordinary adult sentencing courts do. Judges purport to stipulate the severity of punishment, but tend not to consider how prison conditions will shape the severity of the sanction. Even where a particular defendant is likely to face unique difficulties in custody, courts tend to take notice in limited and rare ways. Smith’s experience in adult custody challenges us to more clearly identify, and to consider extending, doctrinal sentencing rules that represent a judicial concern with the effects and prospects of imprisonment in particular cases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document