Race,Crime, and Criminal Justice

Fifty years ago, the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson did not frequently mention race and ethnicity in its discussion of and recommendations for the criminal justice system, but it did have a lot to say about race and crime. Through the use of arrest rates to measure racial differentials in criminal involvement, the Commission concluded that Blacks commit more crime as a consequence of Black people living in greater numbers in criminogenic “slum” conditions. To address racial differences, the Commission favored the Great Society programs of Johnson's War on Poverty. Contemporary criminologists continue to debate the racial distribution of crime, the causes of crimes, and the best policies to reduce crime and racial differentials. The Commission did not anticipate the current debate among scholars regarding how much racial disproportionality exists in the criminal justice system and its causes and consequences. The policies that led to mass incarceration have been significant drivers of continued criminal justice racial disparity. Those policies are inconsistent with the recommendation in The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (1967), upending the pursuit of a more fair and just system.     

The Politics of Racial Disparity Reform: Racial Inequality and Criminal Justice Policymaking in the States

Racial inequalities in criminal justice are pressing problems for policymakers. Prior literature suggests elected officials promulgate punitive, racially disparate criminal justice policies due to partisanship and racial fears, but scholarship has yet to explain how and why elected officials address racial problems in criminal processing. This article introduces the framework of racial disparity reform policymaking. A racial disparity reform is a policy that seeks to reduce distinctions in criminal justice institutions’ treatment of racial groups. Elected officials pursue these policies due to ideological beliefs in civil rights ideals and political interests in appearing to solve social problems. Using an original database of policy enactments, this article first presents the distribution and types of reform measures adopted by elected officials in all 50 states between 1998 and 2011. It then examines social and political explanations for when state legislatures and executives adopt racial disparity reforms. Policy enactment is predicted by worsening problems of racial disproportion in criminal processing, Democratic control of elected branches, and the absence of judicial efforts to improve racial fairness within a state’s criminal justice system. Similar dynamics encourage the development of different measures types within policies. Such ideological and problem-solving explanations for racial disparity reform show a potential for elected officials to forge more racially just criminal justice practices.     

Dealing with Juvenile Offenders in the Criminal Justice System

The treatment of juveniles within the criminal justice systems is a matter of great variety in the 11 European countries studied comparatively. The study focuses on the age of criminal responsibility, ways to divert juvenile offenders from the criminal justice system or avoid criminal justice responses to them, juvenile proceedings and special reactions and sanctions. In spite of different approaches there is a common trend towards preventing juvenile offenders from being treated by criminal courts and being sentenced to criminal sanctions.     

Toward an Interpretive Criminal Justice

This paper presents the academic field of criminal justice as an interpretive social science. The opening section discusses academic criminal justice from scientific and interpretive perspectives, arguing that the terminology of “justice” is essentially contested. The second section presents the key implication of a contested core terminology: that an interpretive approach is the best way to develop the academic field of criminal justice. Section three reviews central elements of the Gadamerian tradition, with an eye towards its application to the field of criminal justice. The fourth section considers two issues pertinent to an interpretive criminal justice—the problem of interpretation in a field where professional practice is destructive to other normative systems, and the contribution of an interpretive criminal justice to public policy.     

Racial Bias in the Criminal Justice System: Shifting the Focus from Outcome to Underlying Causes

Abstract Over-representation of minority offenders in all phases of the criminal justice system has been recognized as a problem in the United States. Much controversy surrounds the question of whether the criminal justice system is “racist.” This inquiry goes beyond the traditional emphasis on the symptoms of racial disparity within the system, and asks whether differences exist between racial groups in their exposure to psychosocial factors that are found to relate to delinquency. The purpose of the study was to expose possible personal, familial, and societal causes of racial over-representation rather than merely place blame on the criminal justice system. The study examined institutionalized delinquent offenders. Among the findings are ones that indicate that blacks report significantly less access to intermediary treatment resources such as psychiatric and drug treatment facilities, community treatment referrals, and placement in foster homes. Blacks were over-represented in the more serious offense levels for both current and prior offenses. Whites were over-represented in mental dysfunction measures of chronic alcohol and drug abuse, suicide attempts, institutionalization in psychiatric or drug treatment facilities, and running away from home. The difference in racial representation raises some critical questions of possible inequality in exposure to environmental factors related to criminal behavior and unequal access and referral to intermediate treatment services prior to incarceration.     

略论刑事诉讼中的公正与效率——以不起诉制度为范本

现代法治国家,公正与效率无疑是刑事诉讼法追求的两种价值,刑事诉讼的基本制度无不体现着此两种价值的冲突与融合.中德两国的刑事诉讼法均将公正摆在优先于效率的位置,但我国刑事诉讼法却更加突出了实体公正的重要性,忽视了诉讼效率的因素.文章以中德两国的不起诉制度为比较范本,进一步分析刑事诉讼中公正与效率的关系,从而在刑事诉讼的制度构建与实践中实现两者关系的合理定位.     

Racial Minority Women and Criminal Justice Responses to Domestic Violence

Racialized minority women’s experiences with Canadian specialized criminal justice responses to domestic violence have seldom been documented. Informed by an intersectionality framework, this qualitative study presents the struggles of 14 racial minority women from three Canadian cities and their experiences with the police and criminal court’s response to their partner’s acts of domestic violence. The results focus on how well specialized criminal justice responses address the needs of these women and protect them from further violence. Factors that facilitate or deter these women from approaching the criminal justice system for help are highlighted. The implications of these women’s narratives for criminal justice responses to domestic violence are discussed.     

The Hidden Arm of the Law: Examining Administrative Justice in Gun Carry Licensing

Responding to calls to “decenter” American penality beyond the carceral apparatus, this article ethnographically examines administrative process and dissects how it interlocks with criminal justice. To do so, it draws on an admittedly unusual, but theoretically generative, case: administrative gun boards, charged with issuing, denying, revoking, and suspending licenses to conceal carry a firearm. While scholars have examined gun ownership and gun carrying as a social practice, less attention has been paid to gun licensing as a state practice. Drawing on observations of over 900 cases from gun board meetings in two counties in Michigan, this paper examines how administrative process mimics, supplements, and facilitates criminal justice through three mechanisms: procedural pains, in which administrative process resembles criminal justice; parallel punishment, in which administrative process supplements criminal justice through withholding of benefits, entitlements or licenses; and valve‐turning, in which administrative process funnels, or threatens to funnel, claimants into the criminal justice system. Revealing how administrative process and criminal justice become mutually reinforcing, the findings extend and integrate scholarship that shows the material, symbolic, and psychic implications of criminal justice contact, on the one hand, with the increased tendency of administrative contexts to resemble criminal justice institutions, on the other.     

How Is Criminal Justice Related to the Rest of Justice?

Are principles of criminal justice derived from a broader conception of justice, or does criminal justice involve some of its own distinctive principles such that it is not—for example—an aspect of distributive justice? Examining considerations regarding luck and desert provides an illuminating approach to this issue. The notion of desert has largely been excised from a great deal of recent political theorizing, and in particular, it has been eliminated from many influential conceptions of distributive justice. It is widely held that the pervasiveness of luck renders desert inappropriate to contexts of distributive justice, and incompatible with the freedom and equality of persons in a just political community. Should considerations of desert also have a minimal role in criminal justice—where they seem to still be important? Are considerations of desert in the context of criminal justice consistent with persons being free and equal participants in a just political community? How are principles of criminal justice related to principles of distributive justice and political justice in an overall just society? Many scholars agree that criminal justice presupposes an adequately just society. Still, that leaves open just how criminal justice relates to justice overall. That is the present topic.     

Personal and Vicarious Experience with the Criminal Justice System as a Predictor of Punitive Sentencing Attitudes

This study examined the impact of prior personal or vicarious experience with the criminal justice system on sentencing attitudes. Existing research on sentencing attitudes has examined factors such as race, gender, income level, political affiliation, and education level, but few research studies have focused on actual contact with the criminal justice system and its influence on perceptions of sentencing as either too harsh or too lenient. The current study utilized data collected by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Over 1,500 respondents were surveyed nationwide in 2006 regarding sentencing attitudes. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to assess the impact of factors of interest on sentencing attitudes. Results indicated that individuals who had been charged with a crime (personal experience), or who had an immediate relative or close friend who had been charged (vicarious experience), were more likely to perceive the criminal justice system as too harsh, regardless of race/ethnicity.     

刑法司法公信力:从基础到进退

与司法公信力和司法公众认同之间的关系相对应,刑法司法公信力与刑法司法公众认同也互为表里,且后者构成了前者的基础。刑法司法公信力与刑法司法公众认同之间的关系有着心理学基础和规范有效性基础,并蕴藏着有效控制犯罪以达致维护社会和谐稳定的最终法治效果。如果想确保并提升刑法司法公信力,则必须致力于刑法司法公众认同,包括刑法解释公众认同、司法定罪公众认同和司法量刑公众认同。刑法司法解释公众认同、司法定罪公众认同和司法量刑公众认同先后构成了刑法司法公信力的环节性基础,从而确保了刑法司法公信力的环节性实现。刑法司法公信力以价值衡量为进,以法治底线为退。     

论刑事法的历史分析

历史分析，作为法学重要的研究方法之一，对于刑事法研究具有积极意义。对中国当代刑事法进行历史分析，并非去发现所谓的“民族精神”，而是寻找刑事法律制度得以形成的脉络，以及在法制演进中的政治、经济和文化因素。在刑事法学研究中运用这种分析方法，具体表现为历史比较研究、历史的社会研究以及历史的价值研究。对中国刑事法发展作历史研究，应区分不同时代，并有目的性地进行研究，进而挖掘其中可为当代刑事法发展利用的有益因素。     

全球化和刑事司法

刑事司法的全球化正在逐步成为现实。而且全球化的进程旨在在世界范围内采取联合行动预防和惩治某些特定的犯罪。然而,刑事司法全球化的构建需要建立在统一的刑事司法文化基础上,与修正的报应模式和法律与秩序模式不同的是,刑事司法全球化必须有整合一致的人权文化。提高个体、政治、社会和经济人权的整体文化,是保障建立刑事司法全球化的最佳途径,它服务于国际公共价值和秩序,同时还致力于社会公正,确保相关人员,特别是被害人和被告人的权利保障。     

Designing Programming and Interventions for Women in the Criminal Justice System

Women are the fastest growing segment of the criminal justice population, yet the majority of research on criminal justice populations has been focused on men. Programming and interventions that reduce women’s involvement in the criminal justice system and ameliorate the negative consequences associated with criminal justice involvement are urgently needed. The overall aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive framework for developing evidence-based, gender-specific programming and interventions to reduce criminal justice involvement and its associated consequences among women in the criminal justice system. The first section of the paper offers a conceptually guided review of the three primary factors that facilitate and complicate women’s involvement in the criminal justice system: victimization; mental disorders; and substance use. In the second section of the paper, findings from focus groups conducted with women on probation or parole identify strategies to engage this population in psychosocial interventions. The third and final section of the paper provides comprehensive recommendations for designing programming and interventions for women in the criminal justice system.     

Integrated Administrative Data & Criminal Justice Research

Using integrated administrative data from criminal justice and social service systems can harness information in meaningful ways that transcend traditional “silos” and allow communities to focus collective attention on important social issues that cross systemic boundaries. Despite recent advances in use of integrated administrative data, practical information to promote adoption by new users is lacking. Here we provide an introduction to potential uses of integrated administrative data for criminal justice researchers, including general benefits of using integrated data as well as implications for innovative research design. We describe a case example of data integration through a state data warehouse for a federally funded project on impact of incarceration on families. The project utilizes data from eight agencies (corrections, juvenile justice, mental health, substance use, social services, health, education, and environmental control) and includes development of an Online Analytical Processing cube. We draw from lessons learned to provide specific recommendations for developing researcher-practitioner partnerships that use integrated administrative data to improve translational criminal justice research and evidence-based practice and policy.     

论中国传统刑事司法的"泛侦查主义"

在中国传统刑事司法活动中,审判人员围绕着"事实真相",以侦查为审理主要内容,侦查与审判合一,认识与证明合一,认识过程占据了整个刑事司法的中心、挤压了证明过程的绝大空间。这成为中华法系刑事审判的一个重要特点。     

Technology and Criminal Justice

The extent and use of technology in the British criminal justice system is uneven. Two areas are examined; first where technology is used in prisons or by the police, and secondly when it is used to develop new sanctions, as with electronic monitoring, or as attachments to existing sanctions such as drug testing. Technology in prisons is mainly in the form of perimeter security, and in the police through CCTV cameras or databases. In the second the emphasis is on tracker systems which gives the supervisor greater control. Technological development in criminal justice is not without its critics. Some regard existing technological developments with suspicion, seeing them as a means of enhancing control, or as an attack on traditional liberal values, or more importantly as an extension of a form of behaviourism which is concerned only with the observable act. Others note the expensive failures of technology where systems fail to work or are delivered late. It is suggested a Government study is required to examine existing technologies and its likely future impact whether on the criminal justice system generally or on those working within it or as inmates.     

Criminal justice scholarship: The southern dimension

This paper reports an empirical assessment of the current status of criminal justice scholarship within the southern region of the United States. The data reflects stratification both of scholarly productivity within the discipline of criminal justice and across the various disciplines that contribute to the literature on crime and justice. The data should be particularly useful for identifying weaknesses in scholarly productivity and, hence, directions for growth within the discipline of criminal justice.     

Changes in the Most-Cited Scholars in 20 Criminology and Criminal Justice Journals Between 1990 and 2015 and Comparisons with the Asian Journal of Criminology

The main aim of this article is to assess the most-cited scholars in 20 criminology and criminal justice journals in 2015 and to compare them with the most-cited scholars in these journals in 1990–2010 and with the most-cited scholars in the Asian Journal of Criminology (AJC) in 2015. Five American criminology journals, five American criminal justice journals, five international criminology journals, and five international criminal justice journals have been studied since 1990. The most-cited scholars tended to be those who carried out research on developmental and life-course criminology. Most of these highly cited scholars were also highly cited in previous years, showing the persistence of scholarly influence. Generally, the most-cited scholars in criminology and criminal justice journals overlapped considerably, as did the most-cited scholars in American and international journals. Also, the most-cited scholars in AJC in 2015 overlapped considerably with the most-cited scholars in these other categories of journals. We conclude that there is considerable agreement in American, Asian, and international criminology and criminal justice on the most-cited, and therefore most influential, scholars.