Shift in the Criminal Justice System towards a Crime Control Model - Essay Example

“There Has Been A Shift In The Criminal Justice System Towards A Crime Control Model” .Discuss In Relation To The New PenologyPerspective The standard function and aims of the English system in criminal justice involves assuring the public of their protection through the prevention and deterrence of criminal activities. This is done mainly through the incapacitation of criminal offenders or through their rehabilitation (McNicol, 2011). The English law additionally aims at upholding the rule along with the respect of the country’s law, providing punishment, and sentences for criminals while improving the public’s confidence in their security systems (Simons, 2007). Two models are currently being utilized in the United Kingdom which includes the crime control along with the process models (Feeley & Simon, 1992). The existing models represent the value systems within their society that are competing for first priority in carrying out activities in their criminal processes (Simons, 2007). The two models utilized within the United Kingdom usually have different motives with the crime control models being aimed at delivering effective crime controls whereas the process models aim at delivering justice to the criminals and their victims (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). The model on crime control is founded on the propositions that suggest that criminal conducts should be repressed and this is expressed as the most vital function that the process performs (Hillyard, 2004). This came about because there was great failure by the authorities to control criminal activities which has largely been perceived as the main reason for the breakdown in the country’s public orders along with the ignorance for the legal controls that is currently exists (Feeley & Simon, 1992). Therefore, the model is aimed at increasing the number of criminals who have been stopped from participating in criminal activities and have faced justice from the existing systems (Cornwell, McElrea, Blad & Cormier, 2006). This model requires that prime attention should be given to the systems efficiency of screening suspects, determining their guilt along with securing the most appropriate temperaments for the people who have already been convicted of performing various criminal activities (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). In this model, the legal controls should come in handy after information has been collected, there have high rates of conviction or the police have been supported in their activities (Pelovangu, 2010). The model was established for the sole reason of dealing with the large number of criminal cases that were brought before the country’s judicial system rather that offering quality measures to help in curbing crime in the country. This model can be said to place a great emphasis on the capturing and prosecutions of criminals (Simons, 2007). On the other hand, the model of due processes is usually more concerned with the efficiency along with the structure of the existing law within the country (Feeley & Simon, 1992). The model mainly places emphasis on evidence rules, fact finding procedures that are impartial and also insists on an individual’s innocence until he can be proven to be guilty before a court (Hirsch & Ashworth, 2005). It mainly aims at preventing and eliminating mistakes carried out within their country’s criminal system of justice. The model functions in a similar fashion to a factory that is devoted to its inputs, time, efforts and their abilities in securing justice within their system (Pelovangu, 2010). The new penology in the United Kingdom’s first came about in the 1970’s due to the neo-liberalism that was being experienced (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). It has been widely utilized in describing the changes that have taken place within the country’s penal system since it was first coined by Feeley along with Simon in the year 1992 (Garland, 2001). The new penology has also been widely utilized in describing the movements that are currently being witnessed between the state and the individuals within the country (Simons, 2007). It has additionally been widely regarded as a measure of managing risks or a waste management model used in criminal justice. Its traits are visible through the legislation on sexual offenders like the Register of sexual offenders (McNicol, 2011). This new penology along with the legislations on sexual offender’s document shifts in criminal activities witnesses from clinical model views to views of models aimed at protecting their community (Hirsch & Ashworth, 2005). The view of the clinical model is that offenders are not wholly responsible for their actions according to some individual pathology (Feeley & Simon, 1992). The model on community protection on the other hand is used in perceiving offenders as people who are dangerous and risky to their communities (Hillyard, 2004). The new penology differs from the older penology that was utilized within the United Kingdom in that provides a newer discourse for justice within the country. This is because it utilizes newer concepts such as risk along with probability unlike clinical diagnosis along with retributive judgments that were previously applied (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). It also differs from the older pathology used since it involves the establishment of newer objectives. This is because the new pathology aims at establishing domestic crime controls that were more efficient as opposed to the traditionally utilized methods of rehabilitating and controlling criminal activities (McNicol, 2011). Finally, the new penology differs from the older penology since it involves the employment of newer techniques within the country’s justice system. Its emphasis is mainly on the collective targeting of offenders as opposed to individually targeting them (McLaughlin & Muncie, 2001). This new pathology can therefore be said not to handle issues that concern the rehabilitation of a criminal but involves the identification along with the management of unruly groups of people (Hillyard, 2004). It mainly focuses on managerial developments rather than the behaviors portrayed by individuals (Feeley & Simon, 1992). It additionally does not aim at eradicating crime but make crime endurable. It greatly shifts from the tendency of normalizing the offenders within the country to the management of offenders in groups that is usually perceived as a threat to the community (Simons, 2007). This new penology has greatly helped in changing the way their people view their penal systems along with its method of operation (McLaughlin & Muncie, 2001). This newer penology within the United Kingdom has helped in lowering the people’s expectations of their penal systems and many have perceived it as their government’s method of concealing their failures (McNicol, 2011). Therefore, it can be said to be true that there has been a main shift within the United Kingdom’s justice system towards increasing the control on crime in regards to their new pathology system (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). In the notion of actuarial justice that was introduced by Jonathan Simon in the year 1988 and later on expounded by Feely along with Simon referred to the use of statistics in representing variables that were found within a population (1992). The concept comprises of the activities of testing, questioning, and comparing along with ranking of the variables. It is concerned with diagnosing risks rather than finding out the causes behind the performance of a criminal activity (Simons, 2007). This therefore implies that since justice has become Actuarial within the United Kingdom, agencies dealing with criminal justice have become more involved in ascertaining the risk behind criminal acts rather than comprehending their causes (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). The statuses of legal experts within the country have greatly diminished throughout the UK (Hirsch & Ashworth, 2005). This is mainly because the focus of decisions has changed from the judgments made in the courts to those judgments that have been made after evaluating the effects of their risks (Simons, 2007). In the Actuarial justice field, the statistics and average probabilities have been utilized in determining judicial cases thereby implying that decisions are no longer based on the legal expert’s knowledge, experience or wisdom (Feeley & Simon, 1992). According to the law on criminal justice established in the UK in the year 2003, offenders of seriously violent or sexual crimes along with those perceived to be major risks in future were to be sentenced (Hillyard, 2004). This law stipulates that once an adult is arrested and has been confirmed to have been a previous offender he is then treated as a risk to the community (Simons, 2007). The sentences provided under the law became fully operational in the year 2005 and those who were found guilty after examining the evidence provided against them are usually charged and branded as risks to their communities (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). They have to be imprisoned and are only released after satisfying the parole boards that the risks they pose have been greatly reduced (Cornwell, McElrea, Blad & Cormier, 2006). Reports indicate that by the time the law began being implemented in the year 2005, the population in the country’s prisons was continuously rising (Garland, 2001). It is estimated that the law has brought an additional 8,000 inmates into the prison than there were in the year 2005 when it became fully operational (Feeley & Simon, 1992). This law has aggravated the situation within their prisons since a lot of time and resources are being spent by the prison officials in finding more spaces for the inmates who are being brought to them (Simons, 2007). The inability of the parole boards to effectively listen to all the appeals being brought before them has additionally played a great part in increasing the number of inmates who are languishing in the prisons. This move makes the conditions unbearable for many of the prisoners who suffer from disabilities in their mental along with physical conditions (Hillyard, 2004). In the main shift within the United Kingdom’s justice system towards increasing the control on crime in regards to their new penology system that was started by the Thatcher government. It enabled the creation of several policies governing privatization along with the regulation of the state’s role in exercising criminal law (Feeley & Simon, 1992). According to Foucault’s perception of the government’s exercise of criminal law, their creation of mental institutions as slow replacements for prisons as the major method of regulating people suffering from mental problems greatly expands their powers (2012). This, according to Foucault greatly contrasts the prime motive for establishing these centers which was controlling their society. He further states that prisons were initially established for the purpose of inflicting pain to the criminals who were being put in them though this has currently changed (Hillyard, 2004). The current institutions are being utilized for the purpose of reforming the soul along with minds of the offenders who have already been convicted. The efforts are mainly aimed at reducing the risk that the offenders pose to their communities (Simons, 2007). This therefore implies that the previous regimes within the United Kingdom utilized their prison facilities for the purpose of inflicting pain on the prisoners and deterring others from committing similar crimes (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). However, the current regime within the country is utilizing the prison facilities at their disposal for the purposes of rehabilitating the prisoners by disciplining them using alternative means that would help them in reforming (Garland, 2001). Foucault emphasizes that the governments should improve their inmates discipline through the use of surveillance systems that will enable them to control or manage these offenders in a better way (2012). The author, Foucault, attributes the establishment and growth of discipline within the prison system in the country to the fact that people have been able to gain new information regarding criminals along with their activities. According to Foucault, when an inmate inside a prison shows that he is self disciplined, then there would be less need to exercise power over him (Foucault, 2012). According to recent reports, the government within the United Kingdom has in recent times indulged in better comprehending the thoughts along with the knowledge that help in shaping their inmates behaviors, beliefs along with values (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). It is also training the inmates into making preferences between good or bad thoughts and deeds. This move enables the present and future inmates to make better choices regarding their behaviors, practices and their decisions in reference to the requirements of their governing bodies (Feeley & Simon, 1992). According to Cohen, the government traditionally indulged their operations in widening the net in their efforts of increasing their control on the society. This has however changed in the recent past with the introduction of new policies in their penology (Cornwell, McElrea, Blad & Cormier, 2006). Several measures have been introduced by the government for the purpose of keeping their youthful generations out of their juvenile system. The activities of mesh thinning according to Cohen have additionally facilitated the growth in the number of people who were previously being imprisoned by the authorities for their involvement in criminal activities (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). Feeley & Simon suggest that the people of the United Kingdom continuously lived in a ‘risk society’. They suggest that this happens because there is a great drift in the government’s public plans from inequalities in the distribution of wealth to the distributions along with controls of the risks they might encounter (1992). This therefore implies that the values held by the people who are unsafe within the society usually displace the values of their unequal society (Simons, 2007). However, the government within the United Kingdom has encountered several problems in their efforts of exploiting the former inmates for the benefit of their society (Hillyard, 2004). This is because the inmates leaving the prisons are mainly from the lower classes of people and go back to the streets with no formal skills to enable get proper employment (McLaughlin & Muncie, 2001). The difficulties they experience upon their release from prison make them go back into the criminal activities they undertook before their arrests so that they can earn a living (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). According to Garland several changes have been witnessed among the society living within the United Kingdom due to the changes that have been brought by their new penology rules. This includes the decline of rehabilitation programmes since the people’s perception of rehabilitation helping to reduce crime in their societies has greatly dropped (2001). There has also been an increase in the re-emergences of various punitive sanctions along with expressive forms of justice (Hillyard, 2004). Politicians within the country have recently been calling for punitive sanctions to be orchestrated against offenders to help in deterring their indulgence in criminal activities (Kleiman, 2010). This is because despite the efforts of previous efforts of rehabilitating offenders, there have been reported increases of their indulgence in criminal activities after their release from prison (Simons, 2007). The prison systems within the United Kingdom have also been re-invented with their government concerned with expanding the facilities in these institutions as this perceive the move as indicating success in their criminal justice systems (Feeley & Simon, 1992). The new penology policies being practiced within the UK has brought transformations on the people’s thoughts concerning criminology. This is because, criminology was previously perceived to be associated with faulty adaptations or communal injustices but the views have recently changed with more emphasis being laid on the criminal acts (Callaghan, 2009). Previously, more emphasis was laid on the criminal’s rehabilitation or treatment but in recent times the focus has largely shifted to preventing the criminal acts (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). Reports indicate that the government has increased its spending in welfare programs within the community living in the UK (Kleiman, 2010). This has been done to help in raising the standards of her people and in turn aid in preventing them from indulging in criminal activities (Callaghan, 2009). The infrastructures that help their communities in the prevention of criminal acts and promoting their safety have additionally been expanded to enhance the government’s policies that are aimed at preventing power (Hillyard, 2004). This includes the formation of organizations like Neighborhood Watch along with districts for business improvements. These organizations usually lay their focus on reducing their communities fear from harm, preventing losses while improving their security conditions (Feeley & Simon, 1992). In contrast, the traditional justice systems within the UK focused on improving their methods of tracking down criminal activities, making arrests and charging the offenders though insisted on reforming them rather than imprisoning their first time offenders (Morgan & Morgan, 2008). The introduction of the new penology within the UK has also facilitated the newer management styles along with work practices in the country’s prison systems. This has occurred due to the pressures of change that have been instituted by the government on the managements of these institutions (Callaghan, 2009). These pressures include the increased financial oversights of the government on these institutions and the creation of performance standards to regulate their activities. This is in addition to their introduction of concepts that are aimed at ensuring these organizations operate cost effectively (Hillyard, 2004). Finally, due to the introduction of the new penology systems within the UK, the gorvement and the prison authority’s fear there will be an impending crisis since the professionals in the field of handling criminals have increasingly been discredited (Kleiman, 2010). This has led members of their public along with many politicians within the UK to lose confidence in the system (Feeley & Simon, 1992). In conclusion, the paper described the crime control and process models that are practiced within the United Kingdom. It also provides my view concerning how true the shift towards crime control in the criminal justice system within the UK in regards to the new penology system is and its efficiency. References Callaghan, M, 2009, More Joy In Heaven, McClelland & Stewart, New York. Cornwell, D. J & McElrea, F.W.M., Blad, J. R & Cormier, R. B, 2006, Criminal Punishment And Restorative Justice: Past, Present And Future, Waterside Press, London. Feeley, M & Simon, J. S, (1992), The New Penology: Notes On The Emerging Strategy Of Corrections And Its Implications, Routledge, New York. Foucault, M, 2012, Discipline & Punish: The Birth Of The Prison, Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, London. Garland, D, 2001, The Culture Of Control: Crime And Social Order In Contemporary Society, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Hillyard, P, 2004, Beyond Criminology: Taking Harm Seriously, Pluto express, London. Hirsch, A. V & Ashworth, A, 2005, Proportionate Sentencing: Exploring The Principles, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Kleiman, M. A.R., 2010, When Brute Force Fails: How To Have Less Crime And Less Punishment, Princeton University Press, Princeton. McLaughlin, E, & Muncie, J, 2001, Controlling Crime, SAGE, New York. Morgan, F & Morgan N. A., (2008), Risk Assessment In Sentencing And Corrections, Routledge, New York. McNicol, L, 2011, The Effect Of The New Penology On Sex Offender Laws, Retrieved from http://www.promoteawareness.net/apps/blog/show/prev?from_id=7014026 [Accessed on 21/05/2012]. Pelovangu, R, 2010, The Crime Control And Due Process Models Of Justice, Retrieved from http://rolly-pelovangu.suite101.com/the-crime-control-and-due-process-models-of- justice-a236398 [Accessed on 21/05/2012]. Simons, J, 2007, Governing Through Crime: How The War On Crime Transformed The British Criminal System And Created A Culture Of Fear, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Read More