Thatcherism and Crime: The Beast That Never Roared?

Author(s):  
Stephen Farrall ◽  
Will Jennings

This chapter explores the Thatcherite legacy for crime and the criminal justice system. We argue that, despite much of Thatcher’s rhetoric on ‘law and order’, most criminal justice activity during her period in office was essentially liberal (that is, progressive) in nature. Nevertheless, the social and economic policies pursued in the early to mid-1980s were, we argue, associated with rises in the crime rate, which in turn shifted public attitudes towards crime and the treatment of offenders. Coupled with the Labour party’s shift rightwards from the early 1990s and Blair’s focus on crime as a topic Labour ‘owned’ meant that both the Conservative and Labour parties were engaged in a crime ‘arms race’ towards policies which were in tune with the Thatcherite instinct on crime.

Author(s):  
Saheed Aderinto

This chapter discusses how the criminal justice system assumed a prime position in the policing of prostitution. By differentiating between adult and child prostitution laws, the legal system played a significant role in molding public and official perceptions toward the identity of adult and underage practitioners of prostitution and the perceived menace each type of prostitution allegedly posed. Moreover, unlike the social interpretation of sex work, the new legal regime from the early 1940s institutionalized the criminalization of transactional sex as a component of social and public order. As such, prostitution became a component of the colonial state's maintenance of law and order, which was cardinal to the effective exploitation of the colonies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adele N. Norris ◽  
Kalym Lipsey

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aidan Ricketts

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.


Author(s):  
Stuart Don

This chapter analyses the pervasive impact of the Charter on the Canadian criminal justice system. Active judicial interpretation of Charter rights has put in place distinctive constitutional standards of substantive law, including those of fault, and struck down oppressive laws for arbitrariness and overbreadth. Also examined are new standards for police powers to stop, search, detain and interrogate, fair trial rights such as the duty of full Crown disclosure, and for assessing mandatory minimum sentences. This chapter describes and welcomes a robust exclusionary discretion for evidence obtained in violation of the Charter. It is suggested that the Canadian Charter standards are no panacea and are sometimes too weak but that they have often provided a welcome balance to the expedient lure of law-and-order politics.


1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-272
Author(s):  
Katherine Van Wormer

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.


Author(s):  
Brett Curry ◽  
Banks Miller

The pervasiveness of their influence arguably makes prosecutors the most consequential actors in the American criminal justice system. Armed with discretion over which cases to pursue, what charges to file, and which issue areas to prioritize, prosecutors play a decisive role in determining what progresses from investigation to the courtroom. It is their charge to do justice in each case, but that obligation hardly forecloses the influence of politics on their decisions. Despite their centrality, however, prosecutors and their behavior have failed to garner even a fraction of the attention that scholars have directed toward law enforcement, correctional systems, or judges. The discretion of American prosecutors is theoretically immense; there are few formal constraints upon it. If a federal or state prosecutor declines to pursue a case that has been referred to him or her, that declination decision is essentially immune from judicial review. But these formalisms come with more practical limitations. At the federal level, United States Attorneys are appointed by the president and, therefore, are expected to carry out an administration’s general policy priorities. In the states, most district attorneys answer to the electorate, which imposes its own constraints on a prosecutor’s freedom of action. Chief prosecutors—state and federal—are simultaneously principals to their subordinates and agents of the people or the president. If those considerations were not enough, American prosecutors must be mindful of still other factors. How might their actions today impact their future career paths? What influence might legislative changes, public opinion, or judicial rulings have on how they operate? Scholarship on prosecutors has addressed some of these questions, but we still lack a good understanding of all the ways in which politics infects prosecutorial decision-making. As “progressive prosecutors”—many who are former public defenders—continue to win office, new questions will arise about how far prosecutors can push reform of the criminal justice system. A major looming question is how voters conditioned to law-and-order rhetoric will evaluate the new prosecutors. Some preliminary work shows that non-White prosecutors tend to reduce rates of incarceration, while Republican-affiliated prosecutors increase them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document