Knowt
The criminal justice system, punishment, surveillance, and social control
The Criminal Justice System: refers to all different agencies and organizations that are involved in law, order, crime, and punishment.
police, CPS, courts, prisons, probation services …
overseen by government departments - home office, ministry of justice, youth justice board
main means of identifying, controlling, and punishing offenders
four interrelated aims:
deterrence - in a ideal world, CJS is so effective that people who are tempted to commit crime are so afraid of being caught that they don’t
public protection - maintain public order, prevent crime, punish offenders
retribution - concerned with punishing criminals to make sure they get ‘just deserts’ for wrongdoing.
rehabilitation - alongside being punished, criminals should be rehabilitated/ reformed, to decrease chances of reoffending.
Changing approaches to criminal justice:
Garland (2001) - suggests that 20th century CJS was focused on rehabilitation and reform but since 1970s there’s been a growing emphasis on retributive justice - increase in imprisonment (number of prisoners in UK doubling between 1970 and 2014) accompanied by more rhetoric about ‘cracking down hard on crime’ from politicians.
there is also growing uncertainty over the extent to which deterrent and rehabilitation effects are working.
growing recognition that CJS should concern itself with protecting the rights and needs of the victim
Culture of control: recent shift from left realism to right realism -
left realism - focus on causes of crime rooted in social injustice and inequality
right realism - focus on consequences of crime, emphasise the need for more social control, stricter socialisation, and harsher punishment.
culture of control: concerned with controlling, preventing, and reducing risks of people becoming victims to crime rather than with rehabilitating criminals.
Restorative justice: process bringing together bringing together victims of crime and the offenders responsible, usually in face to face meetings to help repair harm done, restore dignity and self respect of victims, and make offenders take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
Braithwaite (1999) - restorative justice is most effective when it involves ‘reintegrative shaming’ - offenders not only face their victims but are publicly named and shamed
postmodernists draw attention to the growing detachment of the CJS from centralised control to more informal localised arrangements as it starts to take account of people’s different lifestyles and needs. This reflects the fragmentation of society.
The role of punishment in crime control and prevention:
Newburn (2007) - five reasons for punishing criminals:
to discourage them from reoffending and/or to deter other people from offending
to force them to make amends to victims for the harm they have done to them (restorative justice)
to protect society from those who are dangerous
to reinforce social values and bonds
to punish simply because they deserve punishing
punishment of offenders is part of state regulation of the behaviour of its citizens . Contemporary Britain favours private forms of punishment like life imprisonment rather than public and brutal punishment.
Changing form of punishment:
Postmodernist - Foucault: from sovereign power to disciplinary power -
relates decline in public physical punishment to the changing structures of power
public brutal punishment seen as demonstrations of supreme power of the monarch
this power has declined, replaced by state power over criminals - ‘disciplinary power’
criminals controlled and disciplined by surveillance - behaviour is constantly monitored and regulated
change of power is reflected in the change of punishment from physical and public to the development of the prison: “occasional bursts of bodily punishment of offenders were replaced by a system of control and regulation at all times”
panopticon - prisoners permanently visible to guards from a central tower but could not see guards or other prisoners. Because they were never sure whether the guards were watching them they exercised ‘self -surveillance’
disciplinary power of constant external monitoring through surveillance is internalised and transformed into self surveillance
Newburn - disciplinary society.
Marxist - Rusche and Kirchheimer: punishment, class domination, and control -
punishment is part of the system of social control and class domination in unequal societies
changing forms of punishment over time arises from economic interests of the dominant class
scale of brutality rose while labour was plentiful and decreased when there was a labour shortage
Sociological approaches to punishment:
precise form of punishment adopted in the CJS depends on the intended effects of punishment on the offender and society
Functionalist approaches - bolstering the collective consciousness:
societies can only exist if they have a system of shared beliefs and values that form moral ties, regulating the behaviour of individuals living withing them. Laws are an expression of this.
those who break laws are violating the collective conscience.
Retribution …
provides an outlet for public anger and outrage at violation of the collective conscience
reasserts the boundaries between right and wrong behaviour - re-establishes social order
reaffirms and strengthens collective values and the laws which are an expression of them
reinforces social regulation and social control
contributes to building social solidarity and social cohesion for the benefit of all
has been criticised for assuming that the law reflects value consensus and for ignoring the inequalities in wealth and power.
punishment may not re-establish social order but instead threaten it and make things worse - prisons can be institutions for the manufacture of crime.
Marxist approaches - maintaining the positions of the powerful:
laws are not an expression of collective values but of ruling class ideology
punishment is part of the repressive state apparatus
law and punishment are mechanisms of social control of the working class as a means of reinforcing ruling class power in unequal societies.
unequal distribution of power in societies is reflected by unequal distribution of punishment and the way some acts are criminalised.
rare for the wealthy and powerful to find themselves as the focus of the prosecution of punishment - either never called under legal question or escape without conviction of with lenient punishment.
however, it’s difficult to see all punishments as linked to the interests of the ruling class.
some argue WC conviction rate is higher, simply because their offending rate is higher.
Weberian approaches - the rationalisation of punishment:
modern societies have gone under a ‘process of rationalization’; based around laws, rules, and regulations.
legal-rational authority - punishment is based on impersonal rules and regulations and administered by complex bureaucracies or officials rather than arbitrary punishment handed out by monarchs
rules and regulations have some claim to legitimacy as they are based on legislation decided by elected and accountable governments
the entire CJS is now a huge and complex hierarchical organization with a range of professional groups dealing with offenders in a tightly managed impersonal process.
criticisms arise from issues surrounding the extent to which the rules and regulations are really fair and the extent to which officials actually follow those rules.
many cases of miscarriage of justice in which judges seem to discriminate unfairly against some groups - individual law enforcement officers have considerable discretion in making interpretations of the law
Does imprisonment prevent crime?
right realists see prison as a key way of deterring people people from offending by increasing the costs of crime - however, doesn’t actually seem to work well as a crime prevention measure.
nearly half of prisoners in 2010 had reoffended within the first year - even higher for juveniles at 70%
imprisonment isn’t stopping offending and high imprisonment levels aren’t making an impact on reducing crime.
Boorman and Hopkins found that re-offending prisoners were more like to have:
had chaotic childhoods
experienced abuse or violence in the home
been unemployed or homeless
prison make simply make existing problems worse
provide training grounds for further criminality and confirms criminality as ‘master status’ - Beck
this can make it difficult for released prisoners to re-enter conforming mainstream society successfully - increases likelihood of reoffending.
Surveillance and crime control and prevention:
surveillance as a key means of monitoring, controlling and changing behaviour of criminals - a form of disciplinary power.
surveillance extends across many contemporary institutions - ‘age of panopticism’
use of ‘technologies of power’ has become a means for the state and other institutions to exercise disciplinary power and control
Lyon (2009) - information and communication technologies enhance surveillance - in addition to those who may be suspects, ordinary people are now vulnerable to monitoring and intrusion. ‘Surveillance societies'.
Foucault - ‘carceral archipelago’: uses metaphor of prison consisting of several islands to describe society - every public location like a small panopticon in which everyone is subject to surveillance
governments have loads of data on everybody and use it not just to catch offenders but identify and prevent future crime
we live in a carceral culture - panoptic model of surveillance has been spread throughout society - we’re all monitored by the ‘judges of normality’ in order to undermine threats to social order through crime, disorder, or deviant behaviour
+: shows how power of surveillance can increase the power of the state
-: people can take steps to avoid surveillance if aware of it and it’s therefore questionable as to how much of an influence it has on their lives
-: some people welcome surveillance as it helps them feel safe, especially in areas that have recently experienced serious crime or have particularly high crime rates.
Theoretical approaches and social policies for crime control and prevention :
Realist theories: regard themselves as ‘real’ as they primarily concern themselves with practical policies to prevent the crimes that matter most to people and impact their daily lives.
Left realism:
recognize that both victims and offenders are found in the most disadvantaged communities and therefore emphasise the need to tackle material and cultural deprivation
Kinsey (1986) - police need to improve clear up rates and spend more time investigating crime to deter offenders - reaffirming to the public that it’s worthwhile to report crime
people don’t trust the police and the police resent that people don’t trust them
crime could be prevented through social policies such as:
building community cohesion
multi-agency working, variety of agencies work together with locals to tackle crime
more democratic and community control of policing - responsive to local needs and build public confidence
tackling social deprivation - improving community facilities to divert potential offenders from choosing crime.
intensive parenting support - getting parents and young offenders to work together to find solutions.
have been criticised for:
‘soft’ on crime, focus too much on the social causes and downplay the choice of the offender to commit the crime
majority of those living in deprived areas don’t commit crime
ignore white collar and corporate crimes
Right realism:
focus on individuals and the specific location of crime rather than wider social issues - emphasis on the fact that individuals choose to commit crime
‘broken windows thesis’ - if a broken window - social disorder - is not repaired then others will be broken and further neglect will follow. Unless ‘incivilities’ are kept to a minimum then anti-social behaviour will grow.
environments should be kept in good physical condition to prevent this
routine activity theory - Felson and Clarke (1998): crime occurs as a part of everyday routines when three conditions are present:
suitable target for the potential offender
no ‘capable guardian’ to protect the target
potential offender present who observes that the first two conditions are met and then makes a rational choice whether or not to commit the crime
rational choice and opportunity theory - offenders weigh up pros and cons before choosing to commit an offense - in order to prevent crime, opportunities should be reduced and potential costs increased.
the above theories have led to the development of two main approaches to crime prevention - situational crime prevention and increased social control.
Situational crime prevention - concerned with preventing crime in particular locations rather than catching offenders. ‘Designing out’ crime and ‘target hardening’ measures
CCTV
locks, alarms, bars, wire …
warnings of rules, surveillance, and potential consequences
has been criticised for:
removes focus from other forms of crime prevention such as looking at wider economic and social policies which cause crime
affluent able to afford target hardening methods whilst poor aren’t and are therefore even more vulnerable. ‘Hostile architecture’ targets the poor and limits their use of public spaces
simply displaces crime to other areas - potential offenders won’t not commit the crime, they’ll just commit it somewhere else against more vulnerable targets.
Increased social control - individuals are encouraged to choose conformity over deviance when there are strong social bonds integrating them into communities. Focus should therefore be on tighter family and community control and socialization. It is also possible to predict C&D by identifying high risk individuals - those with very few social bonds.
policies developed from increased social control include:
making parents take more responsibility for the supervision and socialisation of their children - parents of young offenders can be issued with parenting orders.
supervision of offenders - electronic tagging and curfews etc
heavier policing and more arrests, particularly targeted on high-crime areas to deter potential offending
has been criticised for:
zero tolerance policing and large police presence in high crime areas may lead to a waste of resources on trivial offences
ignore white collar and corporate crimes
fail to acknowledge wider social causes of crime that the left realists do
assumption that offenders always act rationally in choosing crime ignores the fact that a lot of crime is impulsive.
Feminism and the control and prevention of crime:
feminist approaches mainly focus on issues directly impacting women - largely relating to fear of crime. Regard patriarchy as the key factor in both crimes against women and women turning to crime.
Newburn (2007) - feminist solutions to the problem of crime:
highlighting forms of victimisation that have previously been ignored such as the extent of domestic violence
exposing the extent to which violence against women is primarily an issue of men’s violence against women, particularly in the home
recognising that sexual violence by men against women is primarily an issue of male power and in some cases of misogyny.
showing how a male dominated and patriarchal CJS holds stereotyped views of women and fails to respond appropriately to crimes against them
identifying those features of the CJS that lead to further victimisation of women
Walker points out that CJS may lead to further victimisation of women in rape trials where it is often the female victims rather than the male suspects who seem to be on trial.
Crimes committed against women:
liberal feminists emphasize improving circumstances that might encourage more women to report crimes against them
underreporting is partly due to unsympathetic approach of the police and other criminal justice agencies
police need more specialist training of officers to deal with offences such as rape and domestic violence
better street lighting, rape alarms, self defence classes …
Crimes committed by women:
more supportive welfare policies and well paid jobs are needed to avoid women getting trapped in debt-crime-drugs spirals
similar approach to left realist views of crime but with a clear focus on particular circumstances of women
Marxist feminist solutions highlight how economic inequality has hardest impacts on women
tackling female crime therefore = tackling social inequality
radical feminists - crime as a response to responsibility placed on women by a patriachal society
emphasise policies like opening more rape crisis centre and ‘resocialisation’ of men to stop them viewing women as sexual objects
Evaluation:
Marxist and radical feminist theories point to huge social change but also support short term measures
likely that taking measures proposed by feminists would convince men that crimes against women are increasingly dangerous due to higher risk of serious consequence.
Postmodernism and the control and prevention of crime:
regard crime as a social construction based on a narrow legal definition
the law is an outdated metanarrative that is simply an expression of a particular among those with power
Lea (1998) - postmodernist approach to crime reduction involves a need for the CJS to recognise the diversity of social groups and to respect their particular social identities
emphasis on fragmentation leads postmodernists to propose a more informal, localised arrangement of preventing and controlling harm
replacement of centrally managed formal CJS processes with localised community policing or private security firms
allows crime control to be customised to needs of a particular community
accompanied by growing control of entry to certain areas
crime is caused by complex individual motives, to reduce offending and the infliction of harm, justice needs to be individualised, reflecting the needs of the individual offender
sentencing should not follow national formulas but the circumstances of the individual
strengths:
attention to diversity of identities and lifestyle choices in postmodern societies and to the idea that a centralised CJS may not meet all needs
provides insight into the way contemporary developments like extensive surveillance can reduce harm - including fear - caused by crime and social disorder
weaknesses:
doesn’t recognise that decentralising crime control in order to cater to local identities is likely to benefit the most well-organized, articulate, and affluent middle-class groups who have the power and resources to get their needs attended to - needs of the poorest are likely to be neglected
doesn’t consider implications of the growing use of customised private ‘policing’ for people’s civil liberties and human rights
private security firms are not subject to the same controls as the police
fails to recognise that there may be a fairer, more equal distribution of justice for all through a centrally managed, publicly run and accountable CJS
everyone has - in theory - an equal opportunity for protection from harm, and for the same rules to be applied equally to all.