Criminal Justice Ethics Theory and Practice

Question: Why are custodial sentences imposed? Critically analyze the role of the prison? Answer: A custodial sentence is also known as judicial sentence. This type of custody imposes mandatory safekeeping of the convict, in either some prison or some other therapeutic institution or educational institution, such as a rehabilitation or reformatory homes. The aim of the criminal justice system at the time of imposing punishment is to provide protection to the public. The focus should not always be the offender but also the victim, which may be an individual person or public at large (Bibas, 2012). In the United Kingdom, imprisonment is the most severe kind of punishment. When a serious offence is committed then custodial sentences are reserved for such kind of offences. According to the law of United Kingdom, when a crime is committed that is so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified for the offence. This is enumerated in Section 152 (2) of the Criminal Justice Act, 2003. Where the Court believes that it is necessary to protect the public, a custodial sentence may be imposed. The seriousness of the crime helps the Court in determining the length of the sentence and the penalty that is to be imposed (Jones, n.d.). The Parliament has introduced some serious offences for which minimum sentences will be awarded unless there are exceptional circumstances: For third class A drug trafficking a minimum sentence of seven years and in case of domestic burglary three years of imprisonment. For certain firearms offences a minimum sentence of five years For someone using a mind weapon a minimum sentence of five years. The Court at the time of deciding sentences may examine the seriousness of the crime, the culpability of the person who has committed the crime, the actual harm that is caused by the offence and the circumstances of the offender. These factors help in determining the purpose of sentence that is awarded by the court (Bibas, 2012). The main aim of awarding custodial sentences is to determine how effective the punishment will be in a particular offence. Sentences should not only aim at ensuring the effectiveness of punishing the offender but also in knowing the underlying reasons of offence (Jones, n.d.). The Court may choose to suspend the sentence for up to two years when it imposes a custodial sentence between 14 and two years. This means that the prisoner is not sent to the jail immediately but is given an opportunity to comply with the 12 requirements set by the Court. The requirements include doing work that is not paid, being impose to a curfew and going through a treatment programme for alcohol and drugs. This is known as suspended custodial sentences. In case of determinate custodial sentences, the Court fixes up a particular length of prison and is the most common type of sentence that is awarded by the Court of United Kingdom. Extended custodial sentences, is imposed by the Court when the offender is above the age of 18 and has committed an offence of sexual violence or the offender has already committed a crime that is scheduled in 15B of the Criminal Justice Act, 2003. When an offence is committed, which is very grave in nature then in such situations, the court may impose life custodial sentences. In each case, the factors determine the purposes of sentencing. Most sentences will meet many purposes while one may meet only one purpose. The Courts have claimed that the main purpose of custodial sentencing should be punishment. The punishment however, should be of such a nature that it should punish the offender and at the same time it should also ensure about the reasons that led to the behaviour of such nature. Although imprisonment is considered as a mean of sentencing someone, but too often it serves only to protect the public for a certain period. There are claims about sentencing that short period of custody and imprisonment are often most ineffective in reducing the crime rate. The most effective way to reduce crime rate is community punishment that is used mist widely as a means of punishing the criminals. Community sentencing has the ability to increase public confidence amongst people. Criminologists have been wondering about the effects of whether imposing custodial sentences can actually be effective in reducing the crime rate or is it the lenient method of imposing the crime that will be more effective. Retribution is the harsh method of imposing punishment. This form of imprisonment involves a harsh and a more strict way of addressing the imprisonment (Jones, n.d.). The main aim of imposing the retributory method of imprisonment is to do justice to the public by punishing the offender in a harsh way. Rehabilitation, on the other hand, focuses more on the reasons behind committing of such a crime. Research evidence suggests that custodial imprisonment is the most effective way of punishing a person. A heavy price is always paid even for a moderate reduction in crime. The greatest effect of custodial sentencing is because of their incorporation into a guideline that helps in achieving good results (Bibas, 2012). However, there are considerations regarding the impact on community of custodial offences. Court orders are often neglected because of delays in the proceedings of prosecuting a person accused with crime. If a prosecution does not start within the first 5 months of a person who is accused on assumption, then this will lead to ambiguity in the court proceedings. Offenders area unit solely allowed attending some programmes if they gift a danger level that contest the programmes level of strength and if deemed to possess the offending-related wants addressed by the programme. Eligibility and quality criteria suggests that the offenders should not be judged on a personal level, rather they should be judged on the ground on the wrong that they have committed. It is a belief of most of the theorists that sentences and imprisonment are the best form of custodial sentences. The main aim of providing custodial sentence to a criminal is that they should be more focused on thinking about community feelings rather than their own feelings and desires (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). Public appreciation is important as it suggests that the community sentences are not an easy way out from the action will always be effective. Many theorists have realized the importance of custodial sentences stating that they have often been more motivated with the custodial offences and non-community imprisonment. In the modern republic, society people have understood the importance of prison as a tool for correction of people (Bowen and Brown, 2012). When people break the laws that are against the society then they are to be punished in every way possible for not abiding by the rules of the community. The best way to punish people is to imprison them. It is the corrected individual who regulates his behaviour with regard to the lesson he has learnt behind the prison bar (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). Prison is more likely to act as a threat against the person who intends or actually breaks the rules that are set by society and government. A critic may always point out that a person merely serves as a lesson for those who break law but the fundamental question remains unanswered and that are, whether the government should include any harsher ways of punishing the offender for more severe crimes. The process of election is nothing but a darwinian means of planting new representatives who are part of the elite society (Bowen and Brown, 2012). A prison is an institute that is used for correction of people who have committed a wrong as against the society. A prison is always expected to adapt a changing role in a changing society. In the United Kingdom, the term prison means a little more than just a convenient designation for all the male offenders of the society (OlaÃÅ' solo, 2012). Institutions wherein people are kept for more than a year for changing their outlook about crimes and the way they commit crime can also be termed as prison in the United Kingdom. In other countries, the term prison may also include the reformatories or schools that teach people a lesson with regard to crimes. A person who has been in prison for more than fifty years may be found in any of the minimum of medium security institutions or units (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). In modern society, the role of prison is often termed as correctional institutions more than penal institutions for convenience. It is not possible to give an exact figure of the total number of prisons that was formed in the country of United Kingdom. The formation of the prison system is manifestation of the progress in the formation of the prisons. The progress was not merely the formation of the prisons for the rehabilitation of the prisoners but also promote effective rehabilitation of the prisoners (Bowen and Brown, 2012). With the help of scientific techniques, one can promote effective rehabilitation. As a commissioner of Mental Health is good that people who represent a wide variety of interests of the community should be a part of the discussion that relates to the functionality of a prison. Therefore, it may be concluded that a prison is thus a wide variety of instruments that society uses to prevent and control crime whereas, penology may be a more proper setting that as a sector in the field of criminology and the wider field of the social sciences. It is high time to realize that a prison should be considered as something more than just an instrument of societys retributive vengeance. This means that this is the basic philosophy that it is more correctional than punitive in nature (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). The prisoners are not to be considered as member of a zoo but men and women involved in a delicate and difficult operation. The prison is not merely a place where we dump people considering them as a scrap head but a place where scientific techniques should be used for curing the criminals. Curing of a prisoner is a total step of extracting, converting, refining the possibly valuable material that passes on a filled belt line through the courts and clinics (Bowen and Brown, 2012). The truth however, prevails that it is crime that has prevented the agencies and the programs that seek men and women to become delinquent, not alone by the forces used by the police officials, but also the services that enable the prisoners to correct themselves. The ordinary public does not consider these functions as preventive as all these services deal with the convicted offenders (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). If people start thinking as these agencies as preventive then it may mean that, it is expected to increase the risk of possible offenders through the fear of punishment. The primary function of a probation and parole is to reduce the number of crimes that are committed by the people in fear of prison. Sometimes it is also noted that a number of people who are repeatedly sent to jail for the same crime that they commit tend to become bitter with the crime that they commit and the same punishment they get for the same kind of crime every day. The question that arises here i s how one can be cured in a prison, by locking them up or by throwing the keys of the prison away. The answer to this question may be related back to the times when the uncivilized culture prevailed and people were subject to these kinds of punishments. As part of a civilized culture, one should deal with the prisoners more subtly and softly. They are not to be faced with a barbaric or inhuman punishment (MesÃÅ'Å’ko et al., 2013). It is therefore obvious, that prison no doubt provides people a sense of protection against people who have the potential drive for committing crimes. This solves a lot of problem that is associated with criminals without solving the problem of crime, in general. Imprisonment also in certain cases does not fulfill the purpose of providing a protective device unless they are confined for life (Bowen and Brown, 2012). Modern society has always looked for protection against life imprisonment of the criminals and the traditional society is always in support of life confinement depending upon the degree of crime that they have committed. Another contribution that prison can make to the society is to provide training and treatment with a view to rehabilitate the prisoners. The addition of the professionally trained personnel has resulted in adding considerable amount of information of scientific value and that some researchers have agreed to this also. Sometimes it is the least productive institutions that have given good results in way of changing the prisoners from a major criminal to a normal human being (OlaÃÅ' solo, 2012). Conclusively, it may be stated that both the prison and custodial sentence aims at protecting the society and maintaining peace and harmony in the society. The Government expects the society to be free from all crimes and that is why institutions such as prisons and custodial imprisonment are made. The motto of the society should be to maintain peace and harmony and ensure that there is peace prevailing all over the world. Reference List: Banks, C., 2012.Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice. Sage Publications. Bibas, S. (2012). The machinery of criminal justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bottoms, A. and Tankebe, J., 2012. Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice.The journal of criminal law and criminology, pp.119-170. Bowen, E. and Brown, S. (2012). Perspectives on evaluating criminal justice and corrections. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. Elbogen, E.B., Johnson, S.C., Newton, V.M., Straits-Troster, K., Vasterling, J.J., Wagner, H.R. and Beckham, J.C., 2012. Criminal justice involvement, trauma, and negative affect in Iraq and Afghanistan war era veterans.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology,80(6), p.1097. Emmerson, B., Ashworth, A. and Macdonald, A., 2012.Human rights and criminal justice. Sweet Maxwell. Jones, M. and Johnstone, P. (2012). History of criminal justice. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Maxfield, M. and Babbie, E., 2014.Research methods for criminal justice and criminology. Nelson Education. MesÃÅ'Å’ko, G., Sotlar, A., Greene, J. and Spence, P. (2013). Criminal justice and security - contemporary criminal justice practice and research. Ljubljana: Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security. Murray, J., Loeber, R. and Pardini, D., 2012. PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF YOUTH THEFT, MARIJUANA USE, DEPRESSION, AND POOR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE*.Criminology,50(1), pp.255-302. Reid, S. and Reid, S. (2012). Criminal justice essentials. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Reiman, J. and Leighton, P., 2015.The rich get richer and the poor get prison: Ideology, class, and criminal justice. Routledge. Tankebe, J. and Liebling, A. (n.d.). Legitimacy and criminal justice. Terrill, R.J., 2012.World criminal justice systems: A comparative survey. Routledge ings rather than their own feelings and desire