Dealing with Burglary Offences - Research Proposal Example

Research Proposal An investigation of public beliefs and attitudes towards sentencing practices of courts when dealing with burglary offences. Introduction: Explanation of the topic: It is necessary at the outset to understand the meaning of the term 'burglary' in its current context. The action of breaking into the edifice, or premises of another person is generally called burglary. The motive for the action is to commit felony - steal, rape, or murder. Thus the very act of trespassing into the house of another person with the intent to commit a crime is called burglary, whether any offense is committed or not. Over the years, it has been noticed that the concept of burglary in terms of public attitudes has undergone significant changes. While in the past, the retributive or punitive aspect has been a foremost element of burglary sentences, in recent times, this has been slowly evolving into a kind of restorative justice, or sentencing, aimed primarily at reparation of economic status of the victims, or seeking to put them in a position, had the felony not taken place. This is apparently aimed at providing material succor to the victims for the property lost or destroyed, due to the felonious act. Current studies show that, imparting from the charge of leniency in burglary pronouncements, the restorative and reparation part of sentencing practices of courts are gaining more currency, especially with regard to public attitudes and outlooks towards burglary crimes in United States of America. It is also being increasingly seen that punishment for felony needs to commensurate with levels of actual felony the culprit has indulged in. In public eye, the punishment need not be too severe. Main objectives of the study: to evaluate how public thinking and beliefs on the subject of sentencing by courts and juries in burglary cases in US has changed over time. Clarification of the topic: This proposal seeks to examine public opinion and beliefs towards sentencing practices by Judges and juries and how these have impacted felony cases. It needs to be appreciated that there are many influences that impact upon opinions. Impressions drawn from media coverage and how the general public view felony crimes and its final sentencing results also determines the formulation of opinions. The changing trends in legal pronouncement are also important since they would, to a large extent, set precedents for future trials and sentencing of defendants in burglary cases. Summary and evaluation of seven designs and methods used in previous research with similar objectives Summary: 1. Questionnaires presented to Senate Court Judges on cases of felony. 2. Interviews conducted with executive functionaries of correctional schools 3. Public surveys with selected respondents and responsible private citizens. 4. Interviews with prison wardens and jailers of juvenile homes 5. Conducting studies in prison settings housing criminals with recidivist occurrences of burglary, larceny and similar crimes 6. Information gathered from State police troopers and law enforcement departments. 7. Internet information gathered from US Department of Justice (DoJ) websites 1. Coming to the involvement of senate court judges, it transpires that the members of these juries are responsible for hearing trials and passing verdicts on crimes relating to burglary offences. Their wide ranging knowledge and experience would be important aspects for a study of this kind. 2. It is seen that in cases of burglary crimes committed by juveniles and young people, the courts would sentence them to detention or incarceration, in correctional or reformatory schools, depending upon the severity of the offence. Although forming a minority for the purpose of this survey, this would be useful for the purpose of this survey. 3. Since the public opinion or benefits are a significant part of this research study, it is but natural that this aspect needs to be considered. Therefore, a survey in the line of public research through online questionnaire, or video conferencing could also be used to determine the validity of the hypothesis. 4. Meetings and deliberations with people in charge of juvenile homes and rehabilitation centers could provide data and information on public opinion for this research study 5. Interviews with prison wardens housing criminals detained for burglary and other law enforcement officials felony or larceny crimes could throw sufficient light upon the present state of public opinion in the matter of this study. 6. The law enforcement departments and their personnel would be able to provide up-to-date and relevant data regarding burglary and how its sentencing could affect public opinion. 7. It is believed that a plethora of information could be gathered from appropriate Department of Justice (DoJ) websites and how public reactions regarding sentencing of burglary cases are viewed. Thus, it could be seen that the proposal needs to gather research design to assimilate data and research materials from different sources and contacts in order to bring out a meaningful research paper. Description of range of possible research designs Obviously, a research study of this kind requires observational studies, or behavioral or attitudinal studies into various aspects of the qualitative/quantitative impacts of sentencing in burglary cases in the United States on public opinion and benefits. This could also be seen in terms of a prospective or retrospective cohort study, based upon the settings of the study and the main objectives to be derived. It needs to be said at this stage that public opinion does, to a certain extent, impact sentencing and vice versa. The research design needs to consider the four important aspects of modern day sentencing, in terms of a robust deterrence for transgression of American Criminal Codes, need for equitable retribution to proven felons, the consistency and fairness in legal pronouncement in burglary cases, and finally, provide justification for deviation in consistent lines of judicial pronouncement, considering situation of the case. (Chapter 1: Public Opinion and Sentencing). The range of research design would need to be considered from point of view of severity, retributive aspects, recidivism and need for strong punishment for chronic offenders. The research design also needs to take in to account the fact that public opinion underpins sentencing in that the sentencing for the punishment needs to commensurate with the offence, and should not be too lenient, or too strict, to be really effective. Next, it is seen that retribution sentencing to serve as a preventive measure needs to be in line with public opinion. "For deterrence to be effective, public views of sentencing have to be related to actual punishments. Punishments regarded as too lenient arguably cannot serve as deterrents. To the extent that the public's views of just punishments are influenced by ideas of deterrence they become relevant." (Chapter 1: Public Opinion and sentencing, 2). This research design also needs to consider that public opinion, to a certain extent, does shape judicial sentences, although the latter may not be determined by the former. Justification and detailed description of preferred design and related data collection methods: The preferred design would be in terms of Cohort Study in correctional and rehabilitation centers for offenders sentenced in burglary cases by courts. Here the intended respondent is between 10-14 years, with, or without previous record of burglary or related offenses. A total of 75 respondents, drawn at random from a group of 500 inmates would be used for the purpose of research and their responses would be recorded live. There appears to exist a trend that current pronouncements veer towards constructive, correctional and restorative aspects of crimes, especially burglary, rather than enforce harsh and punitive treatment, that could exacerbate the situation and encourage more such crimes over time. Thus, this research design has been preferred over the others, in keeping with changing times and also to address the needs for creating responsibility and reform measures among young criminal minds. Prior permission from relevant authorities needs to be taken and all data would be treated with utmost privacy and confidentiality and in conformity with the Code of Ethics governing such studies. The names of the respondents would be changed for privacy reasons and to protect their future. All matters relating to this study would be used only by authorised persons. At the end of the study, the records would be kept in safe custody, with responsible persons in order to avoid undue publicity and negative reactions, from public or private quarters. The collection method would envisage personal interviews and group discussions, along with questionnaires to be responded by wardens of Correctional Centers. Before the actual survey takes place they would be briefed about the modus operandi of the study. Flow charts with associated dates for implementing the proposed research Background Research work (01.07.2009 to 05.07.2009) / Field survey work (06.07.2009 to 10.07.2009) / Initial preliminary research (11.07.2009 to 12.07.2009) / Interviews and data collection work (13.07.2009 to 14.07.2009) / Interviews and data collection work (15.07.2009 to 17.07.2009) / Data analysis and interpretations (18.07.2009 to 20.07.2009) / Interviews and data collection work (21.07.2009 to 24.07.2009) / Drafting and finalization of final Work and approval of client. (25.07.2009 to 28.07.2009) Detailed table summarizing the resources that would be required for implementing research design Serial Resources Achieved/not achieved (A/NA) evaluation report Conduct of the survey Clarity of objectives Design and incubation facilitates meeting of objectives Well- coordinated and structured conduct of survey plans and processes Presence of plans, project diary and preliminary reports Work carried out according to plans and established ideas end result evaluation Survey invokes utility value Succinct final report Results concur methodology Objectives met and in compatibility with contemporary research studies Dissemination of research results Matches premise of research Acceptable to all parties Could be the basis of future research Meets all research criteria Works Cited Chapter 1: Public Opinion and sentencing. 03 Jul. 2009. . Chapter 1: Public Opinion and Sentencing: Why Study the American Public's Views on Sentencing. 03 Jul. 2009. . Read More