Emotions In Criminal Justice Summary

In his book, Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text For The 21th Century, author Frank Schmalleger inform us that two social realities coexist in prison setting; the first, being the official structure of rules and procedures put in place by the wider society and enforced by prison staff, the second, being the more informal and intimate world of the inmate, namely the prison subculture (Schmalleger, 2001). Prison subculture, in its broad sense, refers to the customs, beliefs, attitudes, values and lifestyles of prison inmates (Dugger, 2017). Here, inmates develop their own myths, slang, customs, rewards, and sanctions; with their own values, roles, language and leadership structure (Clear, Cole, Petrosino, Reisig, 2015).

It follows that when a crime is committed, the legal locomotive will set in to punish the convicted accordingly. Without dwelling into the functions of punishment, the concept of Durkheim’s Degrading Ceremonies must be explained. Through agencies like the mass media and the Courts (when conducting public hearings), criminal behaviour would be publicised. The publicising of these acts functions to make the public aware of the tolerance of society, and also reinforces the society’s opinion of such criminal behaviour. This promotion of “boundary maintenance”[6] brings upon the next function of crime and deviance – integration.

In this paper I’m going to describe how society’s response to crime impacts public policy, sentencing, practices, and correctional operations. Also an overview of the evolution of society’s views on crime and punishment. Along with need for crime and punishment. Fallowed up by the shift in sentencing laws and impact (prisons, Get Tough On Crime, present day). Fallowed up an emphasis on

We discussed the recent mob uprising and the state of unrest in the community. It was the judgment of all present that the life of the defendant, even if the wrong man, could not be saved; that an appeal would so inflame the public that the jail would be attacked and perhaps other prisoners executed by violence. In the opinion of all of us a case was presented where the defendant, now that he had been convicted by a jury, must die by the judgment of the law, or else, if his case were appealed, he would die by the act of the uprising of the people (Pfeifer, “United”).

Attempts to define “emotion” have proved to be rather difficult. Instead of searching for a comprehensive definition, Gross (2011) describes the three core features of emotions. First, emotions occur when an individual decides that a situation is relevant to his or her goals. Second, emotions are multi-faceted, and involve both subjective and physiological experiences, as well as behaviors. The third feature involves the authoritative nature of emotions. They have the powerful ability to interrupt ongoing processes, assert their priority over other activities, and force their way into awareness. For example, some traditions describe emotions as “disorganized interruptions of mental activity” (Salovey & Mayer, 1989). Emotions are such an

The Chapter presented above addresses many different problems that occur in the justice system and how it relates back to basic psychological principals. The process of solving a crime can include many mistakes which in the case of John

What is the expectation when someone commits a crime? Many would say that offenders require strict punishment, as well as harsh sentencing without the benefit of rehabilitation. Two conflicting views are examined, they are from Eugene H. Methvin, who is a supporter of mandatory sentencing as well as ‘three strikes’ sentencing that can result in life sentences being mandatory for repeat offenders even if they are non-violent crimes. On the other hand, is David Shichor, who supports sentencing that is efficient and fair, objecting punishments that only attend retribution, especially since they do not contribute to the lessening of crime commission. Reviewed are two works, that of Eugene Methvin is his paper Mugged by Reality and David

Edwin and Paul hold incredible educational and research related criminal law and criminology. In this article, the authors discussed the effect of society’s communal condemnation of the criminal justice actions. The article is different to that of Adam and Aiden (2012). The article provides an in-depth analysis of the common law, federal law, environmental law and the criminal law. The research included results that indicated that the law prohibits and facilitates enforcement of the criminal law even if it means to wrongfully convict innocent individuals. In addition, the findings prove that there would always be perpetual temptations to violate the laws which result into corruption in policing” (Edwin and Paul, 2012). Furthermore, it also

The area this dissertation will be focusing on is the justifications of prison and punishment, and looking at whether these objectives are being achieved today in the current prisonsystem, with a thorough analysis of short sentences.

The traditional criminal justice system is criticized for its neglect of victim importance and needs, for example (Symonds, 1980) acknowledges, that the criminal justice system is concerned about looking back at the event rather than focusing on how to rehabilitate and as a consequence making victims be in a ‘secondary victimization’ effect. This is the attitudes, behaviors and the beliefs of the people in the criminal

Different punishments are used for the unacceptable behavior of people. These sentences are supposed to reinforce the behavior of the individual negatively. People who commit serious crimes should be punished accordingly. There are many opponents of the death penalty, and they argue that it is against the human rights. Individuals who are for capital punishment believe that the criminals, who commit violent crimes like murders, should be subjected to the death penalty. Strict rules for death penalty become a warning for the future criminals, and they think before committing the offense. The death penalty can act as a tool for maintaining peace in the society to some extent. The present article is a rhetorical analysis of the arguments for the death penalty, and the purpose of the paper is to explain that death penalty is justified for violent criminals like those who kill others. The paper is composed of the visual rhetoric, ethos, logos and pathos related to the death penalty and its effects on the society.

The authors confirm that there exists evidence supporting the fact that many criminal justice processes are unfair and could be described as biased, subjective, inequitable, serving financial morals and grows out of the criminal law. They also conclude from the study that the myth on the criminal justice system being fair is not true from the law making department down to the correctional department.

This paper is on the Classical School theory that emerged in the eighteenth century; two writes of this period were Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Among the major ideas that descend from this theory are the concepts of humans as free-willed, rational beings, utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number), civil rights and due process of law, rules of evidence and testimony, determinate sentencing, and deterrence. The writes during this period examined not only human nature but also social conditions as well. The Classical School, gave us a humanistic conception of how law and criminal justice system should be constructed. Law was to protect the rights of both society and individual, and its chief purpose was to deter criminal behavior, the law emphasized moral responsibility and the duty of citizens to consider full the consequences of behavior before they acted. This thinking required humans possessing free will and a rations nature.

The infamous Chamberlin case tells us the attitudes towards crime during the 1980s because this case was based on the attitudes of society which led to the false imprisonment of a mother who had lost her child. This case reveals societies attitudes through the opinions of the vast majority on the rareness of the crime, their understanding of culture and ability to consider facts rather than be influenced by the media.

To some extent the new criminal code shows signs of a stronger authority of retributive concepts, even if they are only addressed in terms of arguments. There are, according to research, communal needs for just responses to any crime. This is a need that must be addressed in