Still Standing: Innocence work in England and Wales

This article examines the two categories that have evolved in the literature concerning Innocence Projects; the pedagogical value of innocence work and the problems with associating the term innocence with the English criminal justice process. This research draws upon a study undertaken in 2017 by the Innocence Project London (unpublished) and another in 2020. Both studies sought to understand the extent to which organisations are undertaking innocence work in England and Wales. This research is written from the perspective of the Directors of both the Innocence Project London and Manchester Innocence Project, and as a result, the projects are discussed at length in various sections. An effort has been made however, to discuss other organisations that undertake similar work in various parts of this article.

Protection of participants in a proposed treatment-based alternative to prison for men who have sexually assaulted an adult

<p>This thesis examines the proposed “treatment track” for men who have sexually assaulted an adult. The treatment track would offer community-based rehabilitation as an alternative to imprisonment when a perpetrator pleads guilty and is assessed as suitable for entry. It has the potential to increase reporting of sexual assaults of adults, decrease attrition in the processing of those complaints, provide a less distressing experience for complainants, and reduce reoffending. The treatment track has broad public support in principle, but work is required to develop the idea into a model and assess its feasibility. In this thesis, I consider whether the treatment track – as part of the criminal justice process – could offer sufficient protection for the liberties of its potential and actual participants. I use Roberts’ discussion of penal minimalism as a theoretical framework, which has not been applied to alternative ways of resolving offending before. I conclude that the treatment track could not yet fulfil the requirements of penal minimalism. Overall, the thesis advances the development of fair and effective alternative resolutions of serious offending. It does this by considering how one such alternative could be designed so that it respects fundamental liberties, developing sentencing theory to make it applicable to this new context, and by proposing an empirical research agenda guided by the requirements of penal minimalism. The thesis argues the following: The first condition of penal minimalism is that the state’s preventive duty should be exercised only where there is sufficiently serious harm to warrant intervention by the criminal justice process. In this context, it must be established that sexual recidivism is a serious enough problem to warrant intervention with legally-mandated, potentially intrusive treatment and risk management measures. Official conviction rates suggest no pressing need for more widely available treatment to reduce recidivism by men convicted of sexually assaulting an adult. I argue, however, that the self-report literature on undetected perpetration and the under-reporting and attrition figures in sexual cases indicate that repeat sexual violence perpetration (both by men whose offending currently results in a conviction and those whose offending has not been formally detected) is a serious problem requiring intervention, thus fulfilling the first condition of penal minimalism. The second condition of penal minimalism is that the proposed reform is likely to be effective in preventing the identified harm. I argue that the treatment track could reduce sexual recidivism if it achieved either of two things. First, it could bring into the criminal justice process perpetrators of sexual violence who are likely to reoffend without intervention and with whom there would not otherwise be any intervention to reduce their risk of reoffending. Secondly, the treatment track could reduce reoffending by men who would currently be convicted of a sexual offence and imprisoned, more effectively than current sentencing and correctional practice. I synthesise the various relevant bodies of empirical evidence to try to answer these questions, highlighting the wide gaps in knowledge that mean it cannot be concluded that the treatment track would be effective in reducing sexual reoffending. The third condition of penal minimalism is that the proposed reform should not infringe unduly on the liberties of the accused/offender. I focus on whether the treatment track could be designed to be equivalent in severity to the sentence of imprisonment that would otherwise be imposed. I develop the theory on the principle of proportionality to accommodate resolutions such as the treatment track which are restorative and/or treatment-based, and argue that it is possible for the treatment track and a sentence of imprisonment to be of equivalent severity. I then consider whether, despite equivalence in severity, the treatment track could coerce potential participants into pleading guilty and accepting psychological treatment, both interferences with their liberty.</p>

Protection of participants in a proposed treatment-based alternative to prison for men who have sexually assaulted an adult

<p>This thesis examines the proposed “treatment track” for men who have sexually assaulted an adult. The treatment track would offer community-based rehabilitation as an alternative to imprisonment when a perpetrator pleads guilty and is assessed as suitable for entry. It has the potential to increase reporting of sexual assaults of adults, decrease attrition in the processing of those complaints, provide a less distressing experience for complainants, and reduce reoffending. The treatment track has broad public support in principle, but work is required to develop the idea into a model and assess its feasibility. In this thesis, I consider whether the treatment track – as part of the criminal justice process – could offer sufficient protection for the liberties of its potential and actual participants. I use Roberts’ discussion of penal minimalism as a theoretical framework, which has not been applied to alternative ways of resolving offending before. I conclude that the treatment track could not yet fulfil the requirements of penal minimalism. Overall, the thesis advances the development of fair and effective alternative resolutions of serious offending. It does this by considering how one such alternative could be designed so that it respects fundamental liberties, developing sentencing theory to make it applicable to this new context, and by proposing an empirical research agenda guided by the requirements of penal minimalism. The thesis argues the following: The first condition of penal minimalism is that the state’s preventive duty should be exercised only where there is sufficiently serious harm to warrant intervention by the criminal justice process. In this context, it must be established that sexual recidivism is a serious enough problem to warrant intervention with legally-mandated, potentially intrusive treatment and risk management measures. Official conviction rates suggest no pressing need for more widely available treatment to reduce recidivism by men convicted of sexually assaulting an adult. I argue, however, that the self-report literature on undetected perpetration and the under-reporting and attrition figures in sexual cases indicate that repeat sexual violence perpetration (both by men whose offending currently results in a conviction and those whose offending has not been formally detected) is a serious problem requiring intervention, thus fulfilling the first condition of penal minimalism. The second condition of penal minimalism is that the proposed reform is likely to be effective in preventing the identified harm. I argue that the treatment track could reduce sexual recidivism if it achieved either of two things. First, it could bring into the criminal justice process perpetrators of sexual violence who are likely to reoffend without intervention and with whom there would not otherwise be any intervention to reduce their risk of reoffending. Secondly, the treatment track could reduce reoffending by men who would currently be convicted of a sexual offence and imprisoned, more effectively than current sentencing and correctional practice. I synthesise the various relevant bodies of empirical evidence to try to answer these questions, highlighting the wide gaps in knowledge that mean it cannot be concluded that the treatment track would be effective in reducing sexual reoffending. The third condition of penal minimalism is that the proposed reform should not infringe unduly on the liberties of the accused/offender. I focus on whether the treatment track could be designed to be equivalent in severity to the sentence of imprisonment that would otherwise be imposed. I develop the theory on the principle of proportionality to accommodate resolutions such as the treatment track which are restorative and/or treatment-based, and argue that it is possible for the treatment track and a sentence of imprisonment to be of equivalent severity. I then consider whether, despite equivalence in severity, the treatment track could coerce potential participants into pleading guilty and accepting psychological treatment, both interferences with their liberty.</p>

Rape complainants on trial: Defence questioning approaches and witness emotionality

<p>Sexual offending has always been a crime that is difficult to prosecute. Despite efforts to reform the criminal justice process, prosecuting sexual offending remains problematic (McDonald & Souness, 2011). In particular, the trial process has a reportedly traumatising effect on complainants, and this dissuades others from going to court. This issue is exacerbated in cases where the perpetrator and victim are acquainted. Compared to unknown perpetrators, there is more of a perceived possibility that the complainant consented. This puts her testimony under heightened scrutiny and makes her credibility all the more salient to the trial. Cross-examination therefore becomes an important point in the trial. However it is also identified as the point in the process where the complainant becomes retraumatised. While there is a consensus that the cross-examination is traumatic, no studies have analysed how trauma unfolds in the courtroom. This research offers some insight into aspects of cross-examination that distress complainants and potentially inhibit the prosecution of sexual offending. It uses three New Zealand District Court cross-examinations where the perpetrator is an ex-partner. The study firstly presents findings on how defence counsel construct questions and what information they house within them. It finds that defence counsel predominantly ask questions that request confirmation. These questions were used in series to construct inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony. They were also used to mount challenges and accusations. Furthermore this study makes preliminary observations that defence counsel questions house prejudicial stereotypes about rape. Such questions misrepresent the reality of sexual offending and serve to undermine the complainant’s credibility. Secondly, the study presents preliminary findings from two cases in which the defence reissued questions in pursuit of a particular response. This occurred where the complainant resisted answering on the terms of the question. The defence treated this as inadequate and subsequently reissued the question. When defence pursued responses in this way, complainants displayed signs of emotionality in the courtroom. It was also found that after continual resistance in two cases the defence concluded the line of questioning with a three-part list. The list challenged the complainant’s credibility. This study makes preliminary observations that complainants display emotion when the counsel tells them their answers are inadequate and reissue questions repeatedly. Initial insight is offered into how defence counsel conduct the cross-examination and how it impacts the prosecution of sexual offending. This study also recommends improved education and awareness-raising for justice sector professionals to address complainant trauma and rape myths in cross-examination.</p>

Rape complainants on trial: Defence questioning approaches and witness emotionality

<p>Sexual offending has always been a crime that is difficult to prosecute. Despite efforts to reform the criminal justice process, prosecuting sexual offending remains problematic (McDonald & Souness, 2011). In particular, the trial process has a reportedly traumatising effect on complainants, and this dissuades others from going to court. This issue is exacerbated in cases where the perpetrator and victim are acquainted. Compared to unknown perpetrators, there is more of a perceived possibility that the complainant consented. This puts her testimony under heightened scrutiny and makes her credibility all the more salient to the trial. Cross-examination therefore becomes an important point in the trial. However it is also identified as the point in the process where the complainant becomes retraumatised. While there is a consensus that the cross-examination is traumatic, no studies have analysed how trauma unfolds in the courtroom. This research offers some insight into aspects of cross-examination that distress complainants and potentially inhibit the prosecution of sexual offending. It uses three New Zealand District Court cross-examinations where the perpetrator is an ex-partner. The study firstly presents findings on how defence counsel construct questions and what information they house within them. It finds that defence counsel predominantly ask questions that request confirmation. These questions were used in series to construct inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony. They were also used to mount challenges and accusations. Furthermore this study makes preliminary observations that defence counsel questions house prejudicial stereotypes about rape. Such questions misrepresent the reality of sexual offending and serve to undermine the complainant’s credibility. Secondly, the study presents preliminary findings from two cases in which the defence reissued questions in pursuit of a particular response. This occurred where the complainant resisted answering on the terms of the question. The defence treated this as inadequate and subsequently reissued the question. When defence pursued responses in this way, complainants displayed signs of emotionality in the courtroom. It was also found that after continual resistance in two cases the defence concluded the line of questioning with a three-part list. The list challenged the complainant’s credibility. This study makes preliminary observations that complainants display emotion when the counsel tells them their answers are inadequate and reissue questions repeatedly. Initial insight is offered into how defence counsel conduct the cross-examination and how it impacts the prosecution of sexual offending. This study also recommends improved education and awareness-raising for justice sector professionals to address complainant trauma and rape myths in cross-examination.</p>

Penyelesaian Perkara Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan Dengan Pelaku Anak Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012

Introductioan: Cases of criminal abuse with child offenders, the form of settlement is a restorative justice approach through diversion, which is an initial step in the settlement process before proceeding to the next legal process.Purposes of the Research: This study aims to analyze and discuss the form of settlement of cases of criminal abuse with child offenders according to Law Number 11 of 2012.Methods of the Research: The type of research used in this research is Normative Juridical. Approach the problem using a statutory approach (statute approach), conceptual approach (conceptual approach) and a case approach (Case approach). Sources of legal materials include primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The technique of collecting legal materials through documentation studies and analysis of legal materials uses qualitative analysis.Results of the Research: The research results show In if the settlement of a criminal case of persecution through diversion is successful in peace between the parties, the report will be withdrawn because there has been a mutual agreement in the settlement that has been carried out. Not all of these settlement processes with diversion can run smoothly and have succeeded in reaching a peace agreement between the parties. If in the event that the diversion process does not result in a peace agreement or the diversion agreement is not implemented, the juvenile criminal justice process will proceed to the Court and the settlement of cases of criminal abuse with child perpetrators is in accordance with Law No. 11 of 2012. However, in the settlement of cases of criminal abuse with child offenders there are still obstacles faced by law enforcement officials and the parties in litigation.

Technology facilitated re-victimization: How video evidence of sexual violence contributes to mediated cycles of abuse

With the ubiquity of technological devices producing video and audio recordings, violent crimes are increasingly captured digitally and used as evidence in the criminal justice process. This paper presents the results of a qualitative study involving Canadian criminal justice professionals, and asks questions surrounding the treatment of video evidence and the rights of victims captured within such images. We argue that loss of control over personal images and narratives can re-traumatize survivors of sexual violence, creating technologically-facilitated cycles of abuse that are perpetuated each time images are viewed. We find that the justice system has little to no consistent policy or procedure for handling video evidence, or for ameliorating the impact of these digital records on survivors. Subsequently, we assert that the need for a victim-centred evidence-based understanding of mediated evidence has never been greater.

Risk Refraction: Thoughts on the Victim-Survivor’s Risk Journey through the Criminal Justice Process

The limits of inter-agency understandings of risk in the context of intimate partner violence are well documented. Informed by Hester’s (2011) ‘three planet’ analogy and using empirical data in one police force area in the south of England, this paper offers an exploration of intra-agency operations, focusing on police risk assessment practices. Exploring the policing risk lens and the victim-survivor journey together, findings highlight police operate with at least three risk assessment moments (call hander, front-line and Safeguarding Hub) and point to the tensions that result when failing to centralise victim-survivors’ own assessment of their risk. Using complexity theory, this paper examines the complex interplay of risk that occurs when the victim-survivor risk journey intersects with the policing aspect of the criminal justice process.

The Power of Racialized Discretion in Policing Migration

Discretionary practices have often been put forward to explain the racially disproportionate patterns we see in policing. The focus on discretion rather than racism neatly shifts attention away from race and instead towards discretionary practices, which are notoriously amorphous and inscrutable. The attention towards discretion (rather than race) further allows race to operate without being explicitly named and, therefore, to operate as an absent present. In this article, I discuss how race and discretion work together when ordinary police officers are tasked with migration control duties to identify foreign national offenders. Drawing on empirical research conducted in England, I propose the concept of racialised discretion and argue that it holds merit because it recognises that certain discretionary practices and decisions are animated because of race, through race and with the effect (intentional or not) of racially disproportionate outcomes. The article argues for the need for racialised discretion to be seen as distinct from other forms of discretion both in policing and the criminal justice process more widely.

Children's Rights Conflict with the Law in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Children are individuals who are less than 18 years old. Children both in the constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and internationally have the right to be protected. This scientific work aims to analyze the rights of children who are in conflict with the law during the covid 19 pandemic, do children who are in conflict with the law during the covid 19 pandemic get special rights? The method used to obtain data in this scientific work is using the empirical juridical method with primary data obtained directly. Based on the results of the analysis conducted, the rights of children who are in conflict with the law during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia get special rights or get special treatment. The rights of children given are the right to survival (survival rights), the right to grow and develop (development rights), the right to obtain protection (protection rights), the right to participate (participation rights). Giving health rights to children in conflict, and resolving legal conflicts by prioritizing the diversion process, namely the transfer of the settlement of children's cases from the criminal justice process to processes outside criminal justice. There are obstacles or obstacles in handling children who are in conflict with the law, namely in general the detention rooms for children in Indonesia are not adequate, even some areas do not have special detention rooms for children and special investigators for children. and resolve legal conflicts by prioritizing the diversion process, namely the transfer of the settlement of children's cases from the criminal justice process to processes outside of criminal justice. There are obstacles or obstacles in handling children who are in conflict with the law, namely in general the detention rooms for children in Indonesia are not adequate, even some areas do not have special detention rooms for children and special investigators for children. and resolve legal conflicts by prioritizing the diversion process, namely the transfer of the settlement of children's cases from the criminal justice process to processes outside of criminal justice. There are obstacles or obstacles in handling children who are in conflict with the law, namely in general the detention rooms for children in Indonesia are not adequate, even some areas do not have special detention rooms for children and special investigators for children.