Pub Date : 2020-10-08DOI: 10.4324/9781003060581-37
D. Archer, R. Gartner, Marc Beittel
bate is complex and confused, partly because support for the death penalty reflects no single theory but, instead, a conglomeration of several different theories. These include retribution, avoidance of economic costs associated with protracted imprisonment, a disbelief in rehabilitation, and, finally, a conception that has come to be called "deterrence theory." While each argument for the death penalty has its supporters, it is deterrence theory that has captured public imagination and scientific attention.
{"title":"Homicide and the Death Penalty","authors":"D. Archer, R. Gartner, Marc Beittel","doi":"10.4324/9781003060581-37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003060581-37","url":null,"abstract":"bate is complex and confused, partly because support for the death penalty reflects no single theory but, instead, a conglomeration of several different theories. These include retribution, avoidance of economic costs associated with protracted imprisonment, a disbelief in rehabilitation, and, finally, a conception that has come to be called \"deterrence theory.\" While each argument for the death penalty has its supporters, it is deterrence theory that has captured public imagination and scientific attention.","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42204016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Flanders and Galoob explore the issue on progressive prosecution in the US in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic The pandemic alters the attitudes of state officials to incarceration in a very short time Since the beginning of the pandemic, many more people have been released, rather than detained, before trial Low-level offenders are being sentenced to home confinement More police are giving warnings for low-level offenses rather than making arrests, and prosecutors have established policies against prosecuting those arrested for low-level offenses As a result, prison and jail populations are declining, although it is too soon to tell how dramatic or permanent that decline will be These moves are driven by the fear and, in many cases, the reality of COVID-19 outbreaks in jails and prisons Correctional institutions are now virus hot spots, and states and localities do not want to be responsible for the human suffering or for the costs of caring for a rash of new patients At the same time, these reforms are in line with what so-called progressive prosecutors have proposed and fought to implement during the past several years
{"title":"Progressive Prosecution in a Pandemic","authors":"Chad W. Flanders, Stephen R. Galoob","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3605593","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3605593","url":null,"abstract":"Flanders and Galoob explore the issue on progressive prosecution in the US in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic The pandemic alters the attitudes of state officials to incarceration in a very short time Since the beginning of the pandemic, many more people have been released, rather than detained, before trial Low-level offenders are being sentenced to home confinement More police are giving warnings for low-level offenses rather than making arrests, and prosecutors have established policies against prosecuting those arrested for low-level offenses As a result, prison and jail populations are declining, although it is too soon to tell how dramatic or permanent that decline will be These moves are driven by the fear and, in many cases, the reality of COVID-19 outbreaks in jails and prisons Correctional institutions are now virus hot spots, and states and localities do not want to be responsible for the human suffering or for the costs of caring for a rash of new patients At the same time, these reforms are in line with what so-called progressive prosecutors have proposed and fought to implement during the past several years","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41821145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A rich body of literature exists on deterrence, yet little is known about how deterrence messages are communicated through social networks. This is an important gap in our understanding, because such communication gives rise to the possibility that social institutions can utilize the vicarious effect of the threat of punishment against one individual to reduce the rate of reoffending amongst their criminal associates. To test this, we identified criminals with an extensive offending history (prolific offenders) and their co-offenders using social network analysis and then conducted a randomized controlled trial to measure the effect on both prolific offenders and their cooffenders of delivering a “specific deterrence” message. The treatment— preemptive engagements with prolific offenders by a police officer offering both ‘carrots’ (desistance pathways) and ‘sticks’ (increased sanction threat)—was applied to the prolific offenders, but not to their co-offenders. The outcomes suggest that a single officer–offender engagement leads to a crime suppression effect in all comparisons, with 21.3%, 11.0%, and 15.0% reductions for specific, vicarious, and total network deterrence effects, respectively. The findings suggest that (a) social network analysis based on in-house police records can be used to cartographically understand social networks of offenders, with an aim of preventing crime; (b) deterrence messages promulgated by the police have the capacity to reduce crime beyond what was previously assumed, as the cascading of threats in cooffending relationships carries a vicarious crime reduction impact; (c) unlike “reactive specific deterrence” (i.e., a threat of punishment following a specific and detected crime) which can have perverse effects on certain offenders, preventative specific deterrence is a promising crime policy.
{"title":"“I heard it through the grapevine”: a randomized controlled trial on the direct and vicarious effects of preventative specific deterrence initiatives in criminal networks","authors":"B. Ariel, A. Englefield, J. Denley","doi":"10.17863/CAM.41581","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.41581","url":null,"abstract":"A rich body of literature exists on deterrence, yet little is known about how deterrence messages are communicated through social networks. This is an important gap in our understanding, because such communication gives rise to the possibility that social institutions can utilize the vicarious effect of the threat of punishment against one individual to reduce the rate of reoffending amongst their criminal associates. To test this, we identified criminals with an extensive offending history (prolific offenders) and their co-offenders using social network analysis and then conducted a randomized controlled trial to measure the effect on both prolific offenders and their cooffenders of delivering a “specific deterrence” message. The treatment— preemptive engagements with prolific offenders by a police officer offering both ‘carrots’ (desistance pathways) and ‘sticks’ (increased sanction threat)—was applied to the prolific offenders, but not to their co-offenders. The outcomes suggest that a single officer–offender engagement leads to a crime suppression effect in all comparisons, with 21.3%, 11.0%, and 15.0% reductions for specific, vicarious, and total network deterrence effects, respectively. The findings suggest that (a) social network analysis based on in-house police records can be used to cartographically understand social networks of offenders, with an aim of preventing crime; (b) deterrence messages promulgated by the police have the capacity to reduce crime beyond what was previously assumed, as the cascading of threats in cooffending relationships carries a vicarious crime reduction impact; (c) unlike “reactive specific deterrence” (i.e., a threat of punishment following a specific and detected crime) which can have perverse effects on certain offenders, preventative specific deterrence is a promising crime policy.","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2019-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43753062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Clarks: An American Phenomenon","authors":"A. Lindesmith, William D. Mangam","doi":"10.2307/1136464","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1136464","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2018-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/1136464","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44630138","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Reducing the incidence of crime is a primary task of the criminal justice system and one for which it rightly should be held accountable. The system’s success is frequently judged by the recidivism rates of those who are subject to various criminal justice interventions, from treatment programs to imprisonment. This Article suggests that, however popular, recidivism alone is a poor metric for gauging the success of criminal justice interventions or of those who participate in them. This is true primarily because recidivism is a binary measure, and behavioral change is a multi-faceted process. Accepting recidivism as a valid, stand-alone metric imposes on the criminal justice system a responsibility beyond its capacity, demanding that its success turn on transforming even the most serious and intractable of offenders into fully law-abiding citizens. Instead of measuring success by simple rates of recidivism, policymakers should seek more nuanced metrics. One such alternative is readily available: markers of desistance. Desistance, which in this context means the process by which individuals move from a life that is crime-involved to one that is not, is evidenced not just by whether a person re-offends but also by whether there are increasing intervals between offenses and patterns of de-escalating behavior. These easily obtainable metrics, which are already widely relied on by criminologists, can yield more nuanced information about the degree to which criminal justice interventions correlate with positive (or negative) life changes. They also resemble more closely the ways in which other fields that address behavioral change such as education attempt to measure change over time. Measuring the success of criminal justice interventions by reference to their effects on desistance would mean seeking evidence of progress, not perfection. Such an approach would allow criminal justice agencies to be held accountable for promoting positive change without asking them to do the impossible, thereby creating new pathways by which the criminal justice system could be recognized for achieving real and measurable progress in crime reduction.
{"title":"Measuring Change: From Rates of Recidivism to Markers of Desistance","authors":"Cecelia M. Klingele","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3142405","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3142405","url":null,"abstract":"Reducing the incidence of crime is a primary task of the criminal justice system and one for which it rightly should be held accountable. The system’s success is frequently judged by the recidivism rates of those who are subject to various criminal justice interventions, from treatment programs to imprisonment. This Article suggests that, however popular, recidivism alone is a poor metric for gauging the success of criminal justice interventions or of those who participate in them. This is true primarily because recidivism is a binary measure, and behavioral change is a multi-faceted process. Accepting recidivism as a valid, stand-alone metric imposes on the criminal justice system a responsibility beyond its capacity, demanding that its success turn on transforming even the most serious and intractable of offenders into fully law-abiding citizens. Instead of measuring success by simple rates of recidivism, policymakers should seek more nuanced metrics. One such alternative is readily available: markers of desistance. Desistance, which in this context means the process by which individuals move from a life that is crime-involved to one that is not, is evidenced not just by whether a person re-offends but also by whether there are increasing intervals between offenses and patterns of de-escalating behavior. These easily obtainable metrics, which are already widely relied on by criminologists, can yield more nuanced information about the degree to which criminal justice interventions correlate with positive (or negative) life changes. They also resemble more closely the ways in which other fields that address behavioral change such as education attempt to measure change over time. Measuring the success of criminal justice interventions by reference to their effects on desistance would mean seeking evidence of progress, not perfection. Such an approach would allow criminal justice agencies to be held accountable for promoting positive change without asking them to do the impossible, thereby creating new pathways by which the criminal justice system could be recognized for achieving real and measurable progress in crime reduction.","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2018-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.3142405","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48687245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Austin D. Sarat, Robert P. Kermes, Haley Cambra, Adelyn Curran, Margaret Kiley, K. Pant
{"title":"The Rhetoric of Abolition: Continuity and Change in the Struggle Against America's Death Penalty, 1900-2010","authors":"Austin D. Sarat, Robert P. Kermes, Haley Cambra, Adelyn Curran, Margaret Kiley, K. Pant","doi":"10.4324/9781315747699-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315747699-8","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2017-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70439268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Capital Punishment Controversy, The","authors":"W. O. Hochkammer","doi":"10.4324/9781315081809-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315081809-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2017-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46157354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. When courts admit the evidence based on the good faith of the second officer, the original constitutional taint disappears in the wash. In the years since Herring was decided, courts have allowed evidence laundering in a variety of contexts, from cases involving flawed databases to cases stemming from faulty judgments and communication lapses in law enforcement teams. Courts typically zero in on individual officer behavior, or limit their review to a single incident rather than considering the entire course of conduct. In so doing, they have taken the concept of good faith to unprecedented heights.The expanded good faith doctrine that Herring embodies makes visible the individualistic view of police work that is implicit in much of Fourth Amendment doctrine. This atomistic perspective, however, fails to appreciate the realities of modern policing, which depends heavily on teamwork and delegation. At the same time, the increased emphasis on police intentions and on balancing the costs and benefits of exclusion brings our courts into closer alignment with courts elsewhere in the world. As the exclusionary rule doctrine in the U.S. converges with its counterparts abroad, comparative work offers useful insights about future doctrinal developments and the likely effects of the transformed exclusionary rule.
{"title":"Evidence Laundering in a Post-Herring World","authors":"Kay L. Levine, J. I. Turner, R. Wright","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2558737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2558737","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court’s decision in Herring v. United States authorizes police to defeat the Fourth Amendment’s protections through a process we call evidence laundering. Evidence laundering occurs when one police officer makes a constitutional mistake when gathering evidence and then passes that evidence along to a second officer, who develops it further and then delivers it to prosecutors for use in a criminal case. When courts admit the evidence based on the good faith of the second officer, the original constitutional taint disappears in the wash. In the years since Herring was decided, courts have allowed evidence laundering in a variety of contexts, from cases involving flawed databases to cases stemming from faulty judgments and communication lapses in law enforcement teams. Courts typically zero in on individual officer behavior, or limit their review to a single incident rather than considering the entire course of conduct. In so doing, they have taken the concept of good faith to unprecedented heights.The expanded good faith doctrine that Herring embodies makes visible the individualistic view of police work that is implicit in much of Fourth Amendment doctrine. This atomistic perspective, however, fails to appreciate the realities of modern policing, which depends heavily on teamwork and delegation. At the same time, the increased emphasis on police intentions and on balancing the costs and benefits of exclusion brings our courts into closer alignment with courts elsewhere in the world. As the exclusionary rule doctrine in the U.S. converges with its counterparts abroad, comparative work offers useful insights about future doctrinal developments and the likely effects of the transformed exclusionary rule.","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2017-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2558737","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42818143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Barbara O'Brien, Catherine M. Grosso, Abijah P. Taylor
Scholarship about racial disparities in jury selection is extensive, but the data about how parties examine potential jurors in actual trials is limited. This study of jury selection for 792 potential jurors across twelve randomly selected North Carolina capital cases uses conversation analysis to examine the process that produces decisions about who serves on juries. To examine how race influences conversations in voir dire, we adapted the Roter Interaction Analysis System, a widely used framework for understanding the dynamics of patient–clinician communication during clinical encounters, to the legal setting for the first time. This method allows us to document the conversational dynamics of actual questioning of potential jurors that precedes the decision to seat or strike a juror, or to excuse her for cause. Our preliminary analysis of this uniquely rich archival data suggests ways in which the discourse of jury selection varies by race, and provides the foundation for future work looking at the ways in which the evaluation of fitness for jury service itself is skewed and contributes to racial disparities in jury selection.
{"title":"Examining Jurors: Applying Conversation Analysis to Voir Dire in Capital Cases, a First Look","authors":"Barbara O'Brien, Catherine M. Grosso, Abijah P. Taylor","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3428712","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3428712","url":null,"abstract":"Scholarship about racial disparities in jury selection is extensive, but the data about how parties examine potential jurors in actual trials is limited. This study of jury selection for 792 potential jurors across twelve randomly selected North Carolina capital cases uses conversation analysis to examine the process that produces decisions about who serves on juries. To examine how race influences conversations in voir dire, we adapted the Roter Interaction Analysis System, a widely used framework for understanding the dynamics of patient–clinician communication during clinical encounters, to the legal setting for the first time. This method allows us to document the conversational dynamics of actual questioning of potential jurors that precedes the decision to seat or strike a juror, or to excuse her for cause. Our preliminary analysis of this uniquely rich archival data suggests ways in which the discourse of jury selection varies by race, and provides the foundation for future work looking at the ways in which the evaluation of fitness for jury service itself is skewed and contributes to racial disparities in jury selection.","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68592817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT-DUE PROCESS AND AN INDIGENT ' S RIGHT TO COURT-APPOINTED PSYCHIATRIC ASSISTANCE IN STATE CRIMINAL","authors":"B. Levine","doi":"10.2307/1143501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1143501","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/1143501","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68403888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：