1 / 17

Sentencing Philosophies: Why do we sentence?

Sentencing Philosophies: Why do we sentence?. Contributed By: Evelyn Dormekpor. Retribution. Considers offenders to be malevolent individuals who disregard the rights of others Thus, criminals deserve to be punished

sakina
Télécharger la présentation

Sentencing Philosophies: Why do we sentence?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sentencing Philosophies: Why do we sentence? Contributed By: Evelyn Dormekpor

  2. Retribution • Considers offenders to be malevolent individuals who disregard the rights of others • Thus, criminals deserve to be punished • Retribution calls for revenge because the offender must suffer the same anguish as the victim • Retribution is based on lex talionis • Society punishes offenders to remove the advantages they wrongfully gained

  3. Retribution • It is a concept that implies the payment of a debt to society and thus the expiration of one’s offense. • Supporters say it is based on “just deserts,” that is, the punishment for crimes should be proportionate to the severity of the offense. • The punishment should fit the crime.

  4. Criticisms of Retribution • Retribution is viewed as outdated and barbaric • Setting up a satisfactory and fair punishment scale is nearly impossible

  5. Criticisms of Retribution • It does not address the underlying problems and cannot consider • Social • Physical or • Psychological factors

  6. Criticisms of Retribution • It shows no concern for the accused’s future or likelihood of rehabiliation and raises the question: • What if the punishment is “too much” for this offender or this crime?

  7. Incapacitation • It is the assumption that crime can be prevented if criminals are isolated from the rest of society. • The goal is to prevent offenders from committing crimes in the future. The goal is not to “punish” offenders so much as prevent them from continuing to commit crimes. • It does not always rely on incarceration

  8. Criticisms of Incapacitation • Isolating offenders without rehabilitation efforts may lead them to be more criminal when they are finally released. • Prisons can only provide temporary protection to the community. • Prisons and jails are costly to build and run. • Society must pay for the costs of keeping the prisoner (rather than the offender doing that) • Some prisoners continue to commit crimes while in jail!

  9. Deterrence • The theory that swift and certain punishment will discourage the offender and/or others from committing the same offense. • It seeks to deter/prevent potential offenders from committing crimes.

  10. Deterrence • Cesare Beccaria, an Italian reformer and criminologist, believed that deterrence results from making punishment certain and swift • He felt that humans use their free will to make the choice to commit crimes • Thus, rational criminal justice policies can discourage crime by making the costs (punishments) undesirable

  11. General Deterrence The idea that potential criminals will be discouraged from committing crimes because other criminals are punished. Specific Deterrence (AKA individual deterrence) occurs when punishing an offender deters that particular offender from committing future crimes. Two types of deterrence:

  12. Criticisms of Deterrence: • It is nearly impossible to set a fair scale of punishments that consistently deters • Setting penalties too high results in reduced convictions and thus reduced certainty • Under pure deterrence, innocent individuals may be punished “for the good of society” (…and other societally unacceptable outcomes)

  13. Criticisms of Deterrence: • Deterrence theory assumes that individuals are rational and exercise free will to commit crimes. What about crimes committed when an offender is under the influence of addictive substances? • Some people commit criminal acts before they think about their actions, thus making them hard to deter.

  14. Rehabilitation • The goal of rehabilitation is to return an offender to a crime-free lifestyle educational, vocational or therapeutic treatment programs. • Rehabilitation is based on the idea that the criminal is socially, psychologically and/or physically “sick” and needs to be cured • It focuses on identifying and addressing individual offender’s needs (e.g., drug/alcohol treatment, anger management courses, etc)

  15. Rehabilitation • Offenders are not punished. Instead, they receive sometimes exceptional opportunities and treatment programs • It is based on the assumption that the behavior of individuals can be changed, though some scholars argue that this is easier said than done.

  16. Criticisms of Rehabilitation • Even after being “rehabilitated,” a number of offenders continue to commit crimes. • Putting offenders into programs does not guarantee that they will be reformed • Prisoners may seek counseling, education, or other rehabilitation oriented services only to secure early release (rather than to make sincere changes in their lives)

  17. Criticisms of Rehabilitation • Some individuals worry that judges are surrendering their sentencing power to psychologists and social workers and wonder if this is a sound policy, especially when not all crime results from identifiable “sicknesses”

More Related