Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
31 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
David Cameron's speech on prison. Things to note? |
Appeal to compassion rather than fear. Victims were to be the CJS' priority. More power to prison governors. |
|
|
What is the role of victims in the CJS? |
(1) They are witnesses. (Remember that all crimes are against the state/ crown not a person. (2) They can be recipients of compensation if that is awarded by the court. Note: Victims are judged themselves: compensation from the Victims compensation scheme is partially adjudged on the victims character. Character can mean how blameworthy the victim is; whether they have prior offences. |
|
|
What rights has the code of practice for victims of crime (2015) given victims? |
(1) The right to be kept informed of their case. (2) The right to make a personal statement* (3) The right to apply for increased protections for vulnerable people giving evidence. Overall it sets out a 'minimal level of service' for victims. |
|
|
Pre 18th Century, what were the main differences to the CJS? |
Pre-Modern CJS (1) Crimes were private and as such they were dealt with by the victims. (2) It was the victims responsibility. (3) Private vigilantes were often hired to uphold the law and capture criminals. Modern CJS (1) Crimes are against the state. The state acts to redress the balance. (2) It is no longer private vengeance. (3) Victims does not have to bear the burden. Note: This means, as a victim, one gives up one's right to vengeance. |
|
|
Problems with treating victims as witnesses. |
(1) Victims know best how the crime has affected them. (2) They cannot offer their own version of the events and their effects by answering questions. |
|
|
So how can we discover how harmed a victim is by a crime? Will this bring about a more and just and accurate form of sentencing? |
Are Victim Impact Statements the answer? |
|
|
Court Control is Essential for the court system to run smoothly. (1) What are the knock on effects of court control? (Think Key Criminology Terms) |
(1) - The court process becomes a degradation ceremony for witnesses and victims and makes them docile bodies. - The emphasis on oral testimony - the defence/ prosecution attempt to poke holes in statements of Vics/Wits. - The effect of this is what is called 'secondary victimisation' - Adler's research shows that this is especially acute in rape/ sexual assault claims. Victims were subjected to bullying from prosecutors. |
|
|
Court Control is Essential for the court system to run smoothly. (2) What happens when control is lost? |
(2) During the trial of Damilola Taylor's accused murderers, the prosecution's start witness, Bromley, was found to be lying. She made a mockery of the court system, laughing during proceedings and storming out of the witness box. The case broke down. |
|
|
What is a Victim? What is the stereotype of the 'ideal victim'? |
Christie 1986 Talks about the 'ideal victim' - Completely blameless - Sympathetic - Weak - Harmed by a stranger - Of a different 'group' to stereotypical offenders. |
|
|
What is a Victim? What is the most common victim? |
Most victims of crimes tend to be of the same group as the people that harm them.
Male's 16-24. Persons with prior criminal offences more likely to be victims. They come from the same place/ same social standing. Poor households most likely to be victims/offenders. |
|
|
Victim Impact Statements. Do the effect outcomes? |
(1) Would that have changed the outcome of the case of Jill Saward? Saward's case: The judge gave a harsher penalty for the burglary than her rape because she appeared composed in court. (2) Did the statement of Adele Eastman effect the outcome of Tom AR Price case? Eastman's VIS is heartfelt and powerful. She is able to express how she feels in written words but that is not true of every person. This, potentially, can create two-tier justice. |
|
|
Victim Impact Statements. What does Ashworth have to say about Victim Impact Statements? What would Ashworth say about Restorative Justice? |
Just because the offence is against you does not privilege your views over mine. This is an opinion that would not support the idea of restorative justice. |
|
|
Restorative Justice What is at the heart of RJ? |
RJ allows the victim to take ownership of the offence that is committed against them.
The heart of this is that offences are a private matter and the most important persons in resolving it are the victims and the offenders. |
|
|
How do we define justice in the CJS? (Conventional Justice) |
(1) Crime is lawbreaking - A factual event. (2) Individuals are not victims - The state is. (3) CJS investigates to establish facts/guilt. (4) End result is to decide how much pain ought to be dealt. |
|
|
What are the problems with conventional justice in the CJS? |
(1) It does not work for victims. (Focus on guilt/innocence puts victims on trial). (2) CJS does not work for offenders either - it does not deter or correct lawbreaking. It causes stigma. It discriminates against certain groups. (3) It does not work for communities.* |
|
|
How can the community be harmed? |
(1) Directly - By damaging a public building/ graffiti. (2) Indirectly - By causing fear of crime. - It affects the relationships within the community. See: Christie 1977 - CJS steals conflicts. This is 'criminal injustice.' Christie believes we need a system based on conflict resolution (rather than assertion of guilt). |
|
|
Where is Restorative Justice traditionally used? |
South Africa - Zulu tribes. New Zealand - Maori Australia - Some Aboriginal communities. |
|
|
What are the central components to RJ? |
(1)Justice should be a positive process. (2)Dialogue and negotiation are central. (3)Collective Responsibility. (4)An aim to repair the harm that was caused. (5)Collective decision on what should be done to make amends. |
|
|
Maruna and King - What do the public want in the CJS? |
The public want an emotional CJS. They want to appeal to the idea of redemption. The public do not want a CJS about punishment. Appeals to punitivism do not reduce fear. |
|
|
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Conventional Justice defines crime as lawbreaking. |
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Restorative Justice defines crime as harm. |
|
|
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Conventional Justice says that the state is the victim. |
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Restorative Justice says that the individual and the community are the victim. Zehr - A violation of a person by another person. |
|
|
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Conventional Justice focuses on establishing guilt. |
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Restorative Justice focuses on solving the problems. |
|
|
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Conventional Justice uses an adversarial trial |
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. Restorative Justice uses dialogue and negotiation. |
|
|
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. The end of conventional justice is to decide how much pain should be dealt. |
Differences between criminal justice and restorative justice. The end of Restorative Justice is to understand the harm that was caused and to resolve the conflict through reconciliation. |
|
|
What can RJ do for the victim? |
(1) Therapeutic - Offender can apologise/ Vic can offer forgiveness. (2) Empowering - Vics get a chance to own their crime. (3) Reduces Fear - By owning the conflict, a vic can see who they are, they can discover the reason why. |
|
|
What can RJ do for the offender? |
(1) Also Therapeutic. The offender has a chance to explain themselves. They regain their voice, they can be forgiven, they are no longer docile bodies. (2) There is no way of neutralisation for offender. Face to face with vic, an offender cannot pretend they deserved it/ it did not effect them. (3) The offender becomes a participant not just a listener, waiting to hear their fate. |
|
|
What can RJ do for the community? |
(1) It can reinforce bonds and develop relationships between those close to the offender and those close to the victim. (2) It can foster a wider sense of community through participation. (3) It can reinforce what is acceptable within the community/ the collective conscience (Durkheim). |
|
|
Positive Assessments of Restorative Justice. |
(1) It is cheap in comparison to trials, imprisonment. (2) It is satisfying for victims - 85% satisfaction. (3) It appears to reduce reoffendment rates - some studies have suggested it as low as 27%. |
|
|
What are the limitations of Restorative Justice? |
(1) Can it be used for everything? - What about murder? (Sherman and Strang suggests it is very effective for serious offences) - What about crimes of domination? (Domestic Violence). - What about Corporate Crime? Can a corporation reconcile with its victim? Apple and its sweatshops? (2) Can it be compulsory? (3) What if there's no forgiveness/ apology? (If it requires these to work, then can it always work?) (4) Is this making the CJS too complicated? Should it be as simple as crime and punish? |
|
|
Opportunities for Injustices in Restorative Justice. |
(1) Ashworth - Does a personal apology serve the public? - By having a stakeholders determine how to reconcile actions, will this lead to geographical injustices/ localised justice? (But The CJS already discriminates geographically/ racially) (2) By having a coercive CJS in the background, are we putting too much pressure on RJ and its users? |
|
|
Can RJ replace punishment? Can RJ replace the CJS? |
(1) We could have it as a voluntary addition to the CJS. (But does it give it any weight or emphasis. This does not fix any of the CJS' problems). (2) We could make RJ part of the punishment. (3) The primary justice system becomes RJ, but with CJS as a background action. (Braithwaite 1996) (4) We could revolutionise. The CJS does not work. It needs to be replaced by something meaningful and humane. (Christie 1977) |
