210 likes | 463 Views
DISCUSS. THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT. “ Identify issues and provide points FOR and AGAINST ”. Deterrence Specific General Retribution Rehabilitation Incapacitation. ISSUE 1. AGAINST. FOR. AGAINST. FOR. AGAINST. Name an issue. FOR. ISSUE 2. FOR. AGAINST.
E N D
DISCUSS THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT “Identify issues and provide points FOR and AGAINST” • Deterrence • Specific • General • Retribution • Rehabilitation • Incapacitation ISSUE 1 AGAINST FOR AGAINST FOR AGAINST Name an issue FOR ISSUE 2 FOR AGAINST DISCUSS factors that affect sentencing decisions, including the purposes of punishmentand the role of the victim FOR AGAINST Name an issue THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General • Retribution • Rehabilitation • Incapacitation
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General • Retribution • Rehabilitation • Incapacitation Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Section 3Asets out the purposes “for which a court may impose a sentence on an offender” • Deterrence • Specific • General • Retribution • Rehabilitation • Incapacitation WHY are we punishing this person IN THIS WAY for the crime they’ve been found guilty of?
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General DETER= Give someone a reason NOT to do something Discourage an action by providing possible consequences TWO TYPES of deterrence: • SPECIFIC deterrence – Where THE DEFENDANT as an individual is given a serious punishment to stop HIM/HER from ever doing it again; and • GENERAL deterrence– Where ONE defendant is punished harshly to set an example for anyone else who thinks it would be a good idea
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General Imprisonment as… … a SPECIFIC deterrent: Imprisonmentdoes not really work very well as a specific deterrent – BOCSARreleased a report in 2006 that showed that 41% of released prisonerswere back in jail within 3 years! The bestgeneral deterrence is increasing the likelihood of getting caught. Increasing penalties doesn’t work (because criminal don’t plan on getting caught!!!).
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General Imprisonment as… … a SPECIFIC deterrent: Offenders who received a prison sentence are slightly MORE likely to re-offendthan those who received a non-custodial (non-prison) penalty ‘The Effect of Prison on Adult Re-offending’, Bureau of Crime Statistics, 2010 … a general deterrent: Crime levels are not affected by the severity of sentences Crime and Justice - A Review of Research, (2004)
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Deterrence • Specific • General Imprisonment as… … a GENERAL deterrent: The former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (Jim Spigelman) has been frustrated that the media only seems to report the sentences they see as “too lenient/low” – “The media would enhance the deterrent effect if they reported it more fully or accurately” Putting the Truth into Sentencing, SMH, 2010
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT RETRIBUTION = REVENGE • Retribution When a criminal is punished, it is sometimes not to rehabilitate (“fix”) them OR to stop them from doing it again, it is done mainly to get revenge for what their victim suffered. We call this “retribution” One reason we let judges dish out punishments for the purpose of retribution is to stop people from taking the law into their own hands. The legal system discourages this by trying to make sure that the victims and the victims’ families (and society as a whole) feel like they have got revenge (“retribution”) for that crime.
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT REHABILITATION does notalways mean DRUG REHABILITATION • Rehabilitation When it comes to the purposes of punishment, rehabilitationjust means ‘reform’ (bringing the person back to a “normal” way of behaving)
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation We’re doing a terrible job rehabilitating criminals. The rate of recidivism (% of people who re-offend within 2 years of being convicted the first time, not necessarily went to jail) was 29%! For young people, it was MUCH worse – 56%!!! This might be because the NSW government spends less than 1% of its total budget for “Corrections” (prisons, etc) on rehabilitation.
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation • So, prison is completely useless as rehabilitating offenders. • BUT, there are OTHER punishments where the purpose is to rehabilitate: • Community Service Orders • Bonds (where the offender has to attend some sort of counselling)
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation For young people… The Young Offenders Act 1997aims to keep young offenders away from the criminal justice system (diversionary programs, like Youth Conferencing). For those that DO end up in the Children’s Court facing a punishment, the main aim is ALWAYS rehabilitation.
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation • For drug addicts… • The Drug Courts: • If the defendant pleads guilty, they can be dealt with in a Drug Court and sent to rehabilitation programs. • Reduces reoffending by 37% (BOCSAR 2010) • The MERIT program: • Works through the Local Court. • The defendant doesn’t have to plead guilty, but they have to be motivated to go through a rehabilitation program. • Reduces reoffending by 12% (BOCSAR 2009) • The Alcohol-MERIT program: • A couple of Local Courts have the MERIT program for people where alcohol is behind their offending.
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation For young people who are also drug/alcohol addicts… The Youth Drug and Alcohol Court: Sent young offenders to counselling and rehabilitation programs instead of jail. The NSW government decided to shut it down in 2012 because it was “too expensive”. Anger as NSW axes youth drug court (ABC, 2012)
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation Probably the most controversial area of rehabilitation is when it comes to child sex offenders. Should we focus more strongly on taking action to rehabilitate them, given that they don’t stay in prison forever (though, theoretically, they can now under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006*)? Public fear of “paedophiles” has made this difficult. In fact, the public’s focus on punishing them for the purposes of incapacitation and retribution (while natural responses) has been shown to increase rather than decrease their likelihood of reoffending. Research from the University of Melbourneemphasised that the vast majority of sex offenders were not what a psychologist would see as paedophiles. Apparently only 3-4% of child sex offenders meet the definition; most would have preferred to have sex with an adult if they could. So, whilst actualpaedophiles can’t be rehabilitated (and should be imprisoned for the purpose of incapacitation), many sex offenders can change their behaviour… … just don’t move one next-door to me and my son… Stress on sex offenders increases risk of re-offending (SMH 2012)
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation A quote (for you guys who like using quotes): “The rights of the victims of crime, of course, should not be ignored. Indeed, they are paramount. If justice is to be more than merely punitive, and we as a society are to be more than mere jailkeepers, then surely there is a case for investing more in rehabilitation” Balancing punishment and rehabilitation (SMH 2013) THEME 5: The extent to which law balances the rights of victims, offenders and society
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Rehabilitation The Crimes (Sentencing Legislation) Amendment (Intensive Correction Orders) Act 2010 This is a new(ish) sentencing option in NSW (only for offenders facing less than 2 years possible imprisonment) where the offender gets conditions placed on him. e.g. MANDATORY/COMPULSORY participation in rehabilitation programs Strict curfews and association restrictions 24/7 electronic monitoring Community service work etc etc etc…
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Incapacitation Incapacitation This means that the person is imprisoned (notice the “im” not “in”). The idea of this is that while they are imprisoned, they are taken out of society, and therefore the rest of society is protected. If the person is really seriously dangerous, they could even be isolated from other prisoners within the prison itself.
THE PURPOSES OF PUNISHMENT • Incapacitation Matthew Milat was given a Minimum Non-Parole Period of 30 years for murdering his friend with an axe. The sentencing judge said that he remained a serious potential threat to the community because: He had no remorse for his killing; He seemed to have little motive for doing it; He was still young (only 19 when sentenced); and He seemed to enjoy being known as a murderer. Milatjailed for 43 years (SMH 2012)