The impact of higher education on crime orientations

The formulation of crime policy is as complex as the phenomenon of crime itself. Numerous orientations to crime vie for consideration in the policy process, and the result is usually a confounding mixture of concepts and policies. It is the purpose of this study to analyze four prevalant orientations to crime and to assess the impact of a college education on student attitudes toward the different orientations. The findings suggest that criminal justice education and higher education, in general, have a significant impact on individuals' perceptions of the causes of crime and the functions of the criminal justice system. Given the increased emphasis on higher education within the justice system, the educational process is likely to play an important role in the evolution of criminal justice policies.     

Local Governance and Redistributive Policy: Explaining Local Funding for Public Defense

In many American states, public defense is provided at the county rather than state level (Langton & Farole 2009 ). Local governments have discretion over implementing and funding the right to counsel, resulting in considerable variability in programs and funding levels. Placing this issue in the theoretical context of redistributive policies and politics, we investigate decisions on funding this service across upstate New York counties. Using as a point of departure Paul Peterson's classic explication of community politics, we first model variation in funding as a function of counties' fiscal capacity, need for services, and costs of supplying legal representation. We also test Peterson's prediction that local political factors will play little if any role in budget decisions. Second, through interviews with program administrators we explore the characters of twelve defender programs in which expenditures departed from the model's predictions. We find that three factors—which we term “influence,” “infrastructure,” and “ideas"”—also vary directly with levels of funding. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for theoretical thinking about due process policies and local politics, and for policy debate over how best to ensure adequate counsel in criminal court.     

Community Safety and Social Policy

This article examines community safety policy. In many countries community safety has become a replacement discourse for situational crime prevention, although in some countries such as the UK, it too is threatened with replacement by the narrower concerns of crime reduction. Community safety represents the apparent merging of the concerns of criminal justice and social policy, specifically over questions of social inclusion and exclusion. Focusing in the main upon UK policy, but also drawing upon experience elsewhere, this article scrutinises the policy of community safety, arguing that while it offers an inclusionary vision of crime control, its practice may be something rather different. More specifically, and in common with the trajectory of much advanced liberal social policy, in practice community safety may have an exclusionary effect. Thus, while community safety may represent the convergence of social and criminal justice policies, it does so on neoliberal rather than welfare liberal terms. It also means that community safety has a closer connection to policies of punitive sovereignty – particularly sentencing policies of mass incarceration – than might often be assumed.     

What Could a New Crime Commission Accomplish?

Even though the crime rate in the United States has dropped since the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson issued its report in 1967, the total number of serious crimes in the nation has increased, and public concern about the subject remains high. The 1960s Commission did not fully consider several major subjects that have emerged after it reported, including mental illness, immigration, cybercrime and other white collar crimes, indigent defense, crime victims, and evidence‐based crime policy. Many observers believe that the need to deal with these subjects in addition to those discussed by other researchers in this volume warrants an examination of crime and justice by a new commission. Congress has considered proposals for such a study for nearly a decade, but they are yet to be acted on amid ideological disputes over other criminal justice issues. If Congress fails to establish a new commission, it is still possible that one could be formed with the support of state, county, and local governments, as well as with the support of private foundations.     

Criminal justice policy and the psychology of peacemaking

Psychology which once was a primary influence on the development of criminal justice policy has, in recent decades, lost much of its ability to inform how laws and policies are made that concern punishment and social control. The reason for psychology's loss of inluence can be traced to the war on crime political rhetoric adopted by politicians and criminal justice administrators. This paper argues that an emerging peacemaking perspective in the criminal justice system allows the discipline of psychology to once again inform the discourse on criminal justice policy. Issues such as drug abuse, gun control, and capital punishment are appropriate subjects for a psychological perspective in the national debate on criminal justice policy.     

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.     

The Siren’s Song: Federalism and the Cops grants

The federalization of crime control has become a focal point for criminal justice researchers. Because the federal government is limited in how it can affect crime, it often assumes the role of funding agent to state or local governments and places restrictions on the use of these monies. Generally, no consideration is given to state or local concerns. As a result, national crime control policy often becomes mired in issues of federalism. One unintended consequence is the creation of a Siren’s Song, where state and local agencies simply pursue funding dollars to expand their budgets rather than to adopt beneficial policies or make meaningful changes. This paper illustrates this point by examining the federal “100,000 Cops” initiative in one rural West Virginia jurisdiction.     

Victims and the restorative justice ambition: a London case study of potentials,assumptions and realities

Restorative justice is coming out of the shadows and in Europe this interest grows alongside a stronger victims’ movement with a domino effect on EU member states’ laws. In the UK, legislation now allows restorative justice at all stages of the criminal justice system, and as part of these developments, new restorative justice services that will be ‘victim-led’ are being funded. This paper questions this ‘kind’ of restorative justice, using unpublished findings from a research project that was conducted in 2017 in London. The project involved a survey with 66 victims and 44 offenders, followed by 11 in-depth victim interviews and a focus groups with 7 victims and practitioners. The data point out a number of assumptions and caveats, which must be addressed in order to ensure that further investment in restorative justice will yield benefits to all those whose lives are blighted by crime. The conclusions are relevant to anyone practising restorative justice internationally including policy makers and funders.     

The “Tough on Crime” Competition: a Network Approach to Understanding the Social Mechanisms Leading to Federal Crime Control Legislation in the United States from 1973–2014

The increase in punitive sentiment in America over the last four decades is frequently attributed to changes in criminal justice policies and programs. While scholars have studied the impact of legislation and policy on justice system outcomes, less attention has focused on the role of political actors in legislative bodies who are largely responsible for enacting criminal justice legislation. The current study addresses this gap by examining the social organization of federal crime control policy in the U.S. Congress over a forty-two year period (1973–2014). Drawing from research on social network mechanisms, we examine whether crime control legislation was more politically attractive relative to other legislative topics, and whether Democrats and Republicans pursue these policies by working together or competing against each other. Our results provide novel insight into the mechanisms that contributed to the punitive movement at the federal level.     

论宽严相济刑事政策的定位

宽严相济的刑事政策是惩办与宽大相结合刑事政策的继承和发展。刑事政策根据其指导功能的不同,可分为刑事立法政策、刑事司法政策、刑事执行政策。宽严相济对司法领域而言,可以说是刑事司法政策;但它也指导刑事立法、刑事执行,因而也是刑事立法政策、刑事执行政策。刑事政策根据其所处层次的不同,可分为基本刑事政策和具体刑事政策。宽严相济是基本刑事政策,"严打"、"少杀、慎杀"等是具体刑事政策,后者都是前者的组成部分。说宽严相济是刑事司法政策,并不否定宽严相济是基本刑事政策。     

Patient inducement, provider priorities, and resource allocation in public mental health systems

Public mental health systems are increasingly facing demands from the criminal justice system and social services agencies to provide services and support in cases in which mental illness contributes to crime, homelessness, or poverty. In this article we analyze how policies from outside public mental health systems affect resource allocation within these systems, using examples from criminal justice. These policies use two types of mechanisms: inducing patients to consume treatment (by offering rewards or imposing penalties) and inducing clinicians to provide treatment (by creating priorities). We propose a classification of these social policies based on whether they affect demand through rewards or penalties or supply through priorities. We then relate the classification to data on patients treated in public systems to evaluate the current prevalence and potential for growth in these outside demands. These inducements impose a set of nonobvious costs on other patients who are not targeted by the policies. Furthermore, they create incentives for both patients and providers to modify their behavior in order to take advantage of rewards, avoid penalties, or better compete for resources with prioritized patients. We consider some policy implications for avoiding unintended consequences of these policies.     

“重重”：世界范围内教育刑主义的反动

面对严重危及社会生存与发展、民众安宁与秩序的一些严重犯罪,"重重"是世界范围内的一种刑事政策选择现实与趋势."重重"绝非一种重刑主义政策,其核心含义与要求是严密法网并严格责任.其基本的理论假定是:既然刑罚的矫治罪犯、回归犯罪人并预防犯罪的目的对有些犯罪与犯罪人难以达到,那么起码有一点能够做到,那就是,让刑罚发挥其能够起到的惩罚犯罪的作用,从而更好地保护社会.     

PUNITIVE SENTIMENT

Scholarship has long noted the importance of understanding the changes that occur over time in aggregate public support for punitive criminal justice policies. Yet, the lack of a reliable and valid measure of this concept limits our understanding of this aspect of the criminal justice system. This research develops a measure of public support for punitive policies from 1951 to 2006 using 242 administrations of 24 unique survey indicators. It argues that punitive sentiment is politically constructed via frames focusing on the permissiveness of the criminal justice system. Punitive sentiment is estimated with an error‐correction model showing both the short‐ and long‐term relationships between punitive sentiment and presidential framing of crime, public dissatisfaction with social welfare policies, and perceptions of racial integration. The results highlight the complex dynamics responsible for the change over time in punitive sentiment as well as the possibilities of obtaining public support for alternative solutions to crime.     

论共同过失犯罪

关于共同过失犯罪问题,刑法理论界和司法实践部门聚讼颇多,特别是围绕共同过失犯罪能否成立共同犯罪的问题,国内外刑法理论界更是长期存在着肯定与否定之争,难以形成基本的共识。面对我国现代社会发展的新形势,立足于刑事司法实践,借鉴于前人的研究成果,应从正确贯彻刑事政策、完善刑法理论、正确理解共同过失的构造、正确追究刑事责任、兼顾诉讼便利等方面确认共同过失犯罪应当成立共同犯罪。     

美国环境犯罪严格刑事责任的演化与评析

为了确保食品、药物及环境等涉及公共福利领域的安全,美国法院发展并确立严格刑事责任制度,该制度包括公共福利犯罪原则和有责任的公司管理人员原则。确立环境严格刑事责任的目的是确保刑法在保护环境和促进环境法遵守方面的效率。公共福利犯罪原则和有责任的公司管理人员原则减轻了美国起诉部门的证明责任,降低了司法成本,同时提高了犯罪的成本,增强了刑法的威慑力。这体现了美国环境刑事政策的价值取向是社会利益保护优先和效率优先。     

犯罪被害人的经济救济

在打击犯罪和保障人权的双重要求下,犯罪人成为传统刑事政策关注的重点,对犯罪被害人的救济尤其是经济方面的救济被忽略。随着现代刑事政策的发展,人们意识到犯罪被害人地位的提高、权利范围的扩展等也应相应的纳入到刑事政策的视野中,加强对犯罪被害人的经济救济就是其核心内容。以现代刑事政策为出发点,应着力提倡三种主要的犯罪被害人救济方式:犯罪人赔偿、国家补偿以及恢复性司法模式下对犯罪被害人的经济救济,说明对犯罪被害人实行有效的经济救济是一种理想和有效的刑事政策。     

Criminal Justice Statistics—An Evolution

The origins of the Bureau of Justice Statistics and criminal justice statistics in general go back 150 years, but the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in 1967, along with subsequent panels and commissions, added urgency and specificity to the work to be done to improve our understanding of the operation of the criminal justice system and of crime. Criminal justice statistics have the potential to be used to shape and evaluate specific policies and programs when the statistics are timely, accurate, and relevant to the decisions being made for policy formulation or evaluation. The full development of effective criminal justice statistics on crime and the administration of the justice system can provide for informed decision making and more insightful resource allocation. In this article, I summarize the historical progressions and evolution of criminal justice statistics in light of the changes affecting the justice environment and propose future work.     

刑事政策的精神:惩治犯罪与促进社会发展的统一

惩治犯罪与促进社会发展的统一是刑事政策的精神。新中国成立以来,随着情势变迁,刑事政策审时而变。新中国的基本刑事政策经历了由"镇压与宽大相结合"至"惩办与宽大相结合",再至"宽严相济"的演进历程。镇压与宽大相结合刑事政策,主要针对反革命分子适用,其精神内涵是:镇压反革命,巩固新政权;恢复国民经济,保障三大改造。惩办与宽大相结合刑事政策则适用于所有的犯罪分子,并成为新中国第一部刑法典的立法指针,其精神内涵是:惩治各类犯罪,保障改革开放。在构建"和谐社会"的语境下,宽严相济的刑事政策应运而生,其精神内涵是:打击犯罪与保障人权相统一;以宽济严,构建和谐社会。三种基本刑事政策,不仅仅是在时间上的接续,而且就具体精神内涵而言,后者都是对前者的传承与超越,但总体精神都是惩治犯罪与促进社会发展相统一。     

Why Do the Finns Trust the Police?

Ideological trends in the criminal policy of the Nordic countries since the 1960s are analysed. Although criminal policy in these countries is not unified, one can argue for the existence of a 'Scandinavian criminal policy' characterized by several common features concerning historical tradition, intensive cooperation and a similar approach to crime prevention and control. The following trends and characteristics are examined in some detail: the cycle from criticism of the treatment ideology to a reappraisal of the role of the criminal justice system and the function of penal sanctions; the differentiation of criminal policy strategies (e.g. social and situational crime prevention, cost-benefit thinking, criminal law policy, sanctions policy). Discernible tendencies towards more unified or, at least, more harmonized criminal policies on the international and European level are also examined. Active participation in this developmental process is encouraged to ensure that the fundamental principles of Scandinavian criminal policy are properly utilized.     

Spatial justice and criminal victimization

Spatial variation in crime rates generally has been attributed to differences in culture, economic status, and the social organization of communities. Rarely have policies and practices of criminal justice professionals been examined as causes of this variation. If these policies and practices do place citizens at a higher risk of victimization, a sense of fairness requires that all communities in a region share equally in this increase. This article examines the spatial justice resulting from sentencing practices in Pennsylvania. It demonstrates that certain locations in Philadelphia bear an unequal burden because of these practices. The relatively high crime rates of these areas are due partly to decisions made by criminal justice professionals.