THE YOUTH CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

In April 2003, the face of Canada's youth criminal justice system changed considerably. The Young Offenders Act (YOA) was repealed and the substitute legislation, the principle-laden Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), came into effect. It is not an entirely new act but was designed to build on the strengths of the YOA and address its weaknesses. The biggest criticism of the YOA was its lack of clear legislative direction; through the numerous principles and additional provisions, the YCJA proposes a remedy. The focus of this article is on two areas of the Act in particular, extrajudicial measures and sentencing, as these areas experienced the most change in the process of reforming the legislation. Specifically, these sections of the Act are analyzed in relation to four of the perceived problems under the YOA, all of which tie into the lack of clear legislative direction. If the provisions contained in these segments of the YCJA are adhered to in the manner and sentiment intended and if the principles are made a priority, then 1) the rate of youth incarceration in Canada should decrease, 2) the courts should no longer be overused, 3) there should be proper distinction between various degrees of seriousness of crimes, and 4) there should be more consistency in youth sentences across the country.     

EXAMINING THE PREVALENCE OF CRIMINAL DESISTANCE*

Criminological theorists and criminal justice policy makers place a great deal of importance on the idea of desistance. In general terms, criminal desistance refers to a cessation of offending activity among those who have offended in the past. Some significant challenges await those who would estimate the relative size of the desisting population or attempt to identify factors that predict membership in that population. In this paper, we consider several different analytic frameworks that represent an array of plausible definitions. We then illustrate some of our ideas with an empirical example from the 1958 Philadelphia Birth Cohort Study.     

CRIMINOLOGY, CRIMINAL JUSTICE, AND THE WAR ON CRIME

This detailed assessment reviews the nation's “war on crime” during the past ten years, examines what has heen accomplished in that period, and outlines the likely prospects for the future. Although important and tangible progress in improving criminal justice has been made. it has not produced relief from high crime rates. In fact, “things are worse than ever.” For the future, there will be both more advances and frustrations in the war on crime. It is emphasized that the progress achieved so far has been to create a more efficient and fairer rystem of justice and that we should take pride in this. If not eclipsed by the quarterly release of crime statistics, we can maintain our momentum and gain even more significant improvements in the next decade.     

SELF-INTEREST,EQUITY, AND CRIME CONTROL: A GAME-THEORETIC ANALYSIS OF CRIMINAL DECISION MAKING

Employing the analytic technique of game theory, we attempt to answer questions about how individuals with different proclivities to use crime to accomplish ends, and different beliefs about society's fairness, are likely to respond to different incentives and disincentives that are derived from strain and neoclassical deterrence theories. Our analysis indicates that the crime control policies typically recommended by adherents of both theories are often logically invalid, given the premises upon which they are supposedly based. For example, our analysis suggests why punishment strategies like “three strikes and you're out” and “entitlement strategies” such as welfare and other short-term redistributive payment programs fail to deter crime. Finally, after including notions of equity with traditional rational choice assumptions, our analysis identifies a mix of theoretically derived strategies that may more effectively deter crime.     

ON AMBIGUITY IN PERCEPTIONS OF RISK:IMPLICATIONS FOR CRIMINAL DECISION MAKING AND DETERRENCE*

Deterrence theorists and researchers have argued that the critical dimension of sanction certainty is its level—increasing the certainty of punishment from a lower to a higher level will inhibit criminal conduct. However, the true certainty of punishment is rarely known with much precision. Both Sherman (1990) and Nagin (1998) have suggested that ambiguity about the level of punishment certainty is itself consequential in the decision to commit or refrain from crime. Here, we investigate this proposition. We find some evidence that individuals are “ambiguity averse” for decisions involving losses such as criminal punishments. This finding means that a more ambiguous perceived certainty of punishment is a greater deterrent of some crimes than a nominally equivalent but less ambiguous one. However, this effect depends on how large an individual's risk certainty perception is initially. That is, we find evidence for “boundary effects” (Casey and Scholz, 1991a, 1991b) in which this effect holds for lower probabilities but reverses for higher ones. For higher detection probabilities, individuals become “ambiguity seeking” such that a less ambiguous detection probability has more deterrent value than a nominally equivalent but more ambiguous detection probability. Results are presented from two distinct, but complementary, analysis samples and empirical approaches. These samples include a survey to college students with several hypothetical choice problems and data from the Pathways to Desistance study, a longitudinal investigation of serious adolescent offenders transitioning from adolescence to young adulthood.     

TRAITS AND STATES: INTEGRATING PERSONALITY AND AFFECT INTO A MODEL OF CRIMINAL DECISION MAKING*

We propose and test a model of criminal decision making that integrates the individual differences perspective with research and theorizing on proximal factors. The individual differences perspective is operationalized using the recent HEXACO personality structure. This structure incorporates the main personality traits, but it carries the advantage of also incorporating Self‐Control within its personality sphere, and an additional trait termed Honesty‐Humility. Furthermore, the model offers a new perspective on proximal predictors, “states,” of criminal decisions by adding affect (i.e., feelings) to the rational choice–crime equation. The proposed model is tested using scenario data from a representative sample of the Dutch population in terms of gender, age, education level, and province (N = 495). As predicted by the model, personality was both directly and indirectly related to criminal decision making. Specifically, the traits Emotionality, Self‐Control, and Honesty‐Humility were mediated by both affect and rational choice variables. Conscientiousness operated only indirectly on criminal decision making via rational choice. Together, the findings support a trait‐state model of criminal decision making.     

暴力与屠杀:刑法上的“敌人”还是刑法上的“不人道”

法律对屠杀问题的回应,始终在两种模式之间徘徊:一种是以国家刑法为给养来源的刑法上的敌人模式,另一种是源于国际刑法的刑法上的不人道模式。后者更适合屠杀的定性标准,它暗示了在大量死难者面前,对人性的否定。建立刑法上的不人道模式需要回应三个方面的问题:第一,罪的含义;第二,归责;第三,惩罚的实质。首先,根据《国际刑事法院规约》第7条,我们至少可以认为反人道模式中被保护的人性包含着两个相辅相成的要素:每个人的特殊性,以及每个人都平等地归属于人类共同体。其次,在归责问题上,我们不能满足于只制裁处于权力链条最顶端的人,还必须考虑等级体系的所有级别。最后在惩罚实质上,我们不仅要在刑罚制裁上考虑惩罚的本质,而且还需要从修复以及协商的角度看待这一问题。文章最后指出,刑法上的不人道模式成为一个可以实现的、普世的理想,尚需国际法与国内法的合作以及各个学科之间的协力。     

HOW JUDGES THINK ABOUT RACIAL DISPARITIES: SITUATIONAL DECISION‐MAKING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM*

Researchers have theorized how judges’ decision‐making may result in the disproportionate presence of Blacks and Latinos in the criminal justice system. Yet, we have little evidence about how judges make sense of these disparities and what, if anything, they do to address them. By drawing on 59 interviews with state judges in a Northeastern state, we describe, and trace the implications of, judges’ understandings of racial disparities at arraignment, plea hearings, jury selection, and sentencing. Most judges in our sample attribute disparities, in part, to differential treatment by themselves and/or other criminal justice officials, whereas some judges attribute disparities only to the disparate impact of poverty and differences in offending rates. To address disparities, judges report employing two categories of strategies: noninterventionist and interventionist. Noninterventionist strategies concern only a judge's own differential treatment, whereas interventionist strategies concern other actors’ possible differential treatment, as well as the disparate impact of poverty and facially neutral laws. We reveal how the use of noninterventionist strategies by most judges unintentionally reproduces disparities. Through our examination of judges’ understandings of racial disparities throughout the court process, we enhance understandings of American racial inequality and theorize a situational approach to decision‐making in organizational contexts.     

CRIMINAL CHILDREN

Law and Philosophy -     

尸体检验照片的模板化编辑与标准化打印

《刑事照相制卷质量要求》既适用于各类刑事案件现场照片、治安案件和灾害事故现场照片的制卷,也适用于刑事案件检验照片和其他证据照片。因此,在司法鉴定中,尸体检验照片的制作方法应依照这一标准。＂刑事数码图像标准化技术＂应用软件用于尸体检验照片的制卷工作,可以方便和快捷地实现模板化编辑和标准化打印的目标。     

MODELING CRIMINAL CAREERS*

A stochastic model of criminal careers embodying the assumptions of Gottfredson and Hirschi (1986, 1988) is used as a tool to examine the arguments and claims that have been raised in the recent debate over the nature of criminal careers. The model is used to fit aggregate career data in different jurisdictions and to explain racial and sex patterns in recidivism data. Some of the arguments that have been deployed on both sides of this debate are shown to lack validity. Nullius in verba. —Motto of the Royal Society