Crime and Justice Through History PDF

NCRMP: video: ​ Less than 1%of people with a CRMP reoffend with a violent offence. ​ A variety of outcomes from being mentally ill: ○​ You can be confined ​ There are to be period assessments to see if a person is still a risk. This reassessment is to...

NCRMP: video: ​ Less than 1%of people with a CRMP reoffend with a violent offence. ​ A variety of outcomes from being mentally ill: ○​ You can be confined ​ There are to be period assessments to see if a person is still a risk. This reassessment is to ensure they can be discharged. BE AWARE of the different logic at play here compared to the criminal justice system: TREATMENT not punishment. ​ Concerns are seen as a health issue not a crime issue that deserves punishment of justice. ○​ A conditional discharge ○​ Or an absolute discharge. Shifts today: ​ Drug use ○​ Now they are seen as a health problem. Except very recently the line has shifted again to criminalization. ​ Police property ​ The police are not the best body to be dealing with these complex problems CHAPTER 3: DEMONIC AREA: ​ Looking at the European context from the middle ages and onwards. ​ MAIN TAKEAWAY: ideas around crime and sin were very closely related. It was a view of social order dominated by religious notions. ​ Clergy and religious ideas influence how more mundane crimes are dealt with. VIDEO: ​ If you were suspected of a crime you were subjected to a ritualized test: God would help the innocent but not the guilty. If you failed you were punished. ​ Ordeals were supervised by the clergy. ​ Priest called upon God to not hurt the innocent but only the guilty. ​ Water: sinking indicated innocence and floating was a sin. ​ Factors that determined what sent you to an ordeal: ○​ No factual proof, or evidence ​ Ordeals were often used as a threat to get people to confess. Trial by combat The things that connects these ordeals together:  ​ Even though you might have two people in trial by combat fighting, or fire, or water- the logic is that God is going to decide: a divine judgement and interference that is going to reveal if this person is guilty or not. You are ultimately standing in the eyes of God who will determine the outcome. THE SOCIAL CONTRACT: ​ Thomas hobbes; in the absence of a state, everyone will pursue their own interests. ○​ A depiction of a society without a recognized authority. ​ People will come together to agree to give up some of their freedom in exchange for protection from the sovereign. The state is there to protect and represent the social body. ​ Locke: rosier view. He thought we were blank slates: tabula rasa. He also saw a role for the state to take action for the good of everyone. Often attributed to being the founder of liberalism. ENLIGHTENMENT-ERA ​ An increasing emphasis on people exercising free will and making decisions on a rational basis. ○​ Elevating rationalism as a form of action. THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY: -​ Two main figures: credited with forming the classical school of criminology -​ This school of criminology provides a more rational basis of justice and deterrence. 1.​ Cesare Beccaria a.​ To limit the exercise of power: the justice system is an overreach: and unjust. Should only be reduced to what is necessary and applies. Only to how severe the crime is. b.​ If the sovereign overreaches, they are going to be seen as illegitimate. The sovereign makes laws but does not actually judge whether they break the law. c.​ The principle of deterrence: punishment should be formulated for the purpose of deterrence: i.​ And punishment has to be proportional: SWIFT And CERTAIN d.​ Punishment should fit the crime 2.​ Jeremy Bentham The strange case of the law video: What the criminal justice system used to look like ​ Emphasis on harsh punishment: will lead to lawful behaviour and preventing criminality. ​ All numbers of offences punishable by death. More than 200 offences punishable by death by the end of the century. ○​ System was named the bloody code.  ​ The idea that the accused had a right to a defence wasn't a thing yet. They believed the innocent could prove themselves innocent with no issue. ​ Pious perjury: the role of the jury to render the liability of suspects down so as not to charge them with a criminal offence; and hence the death sentence. ASSESSING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL: ​ Inflexible laws can result in injustice ○​ So context matters; we shouldn't focus on the act but also what was happening in the person's head. ​ Equal treatment is good when everyone is equal, but that's not the case. JUSTICE AND REASON: -​ Rational and reasonable conduct as something we should aspire to. LIMITATIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL: -​ Punishment is rarely swift and certain -​ And we are not always rational individuals making choices like that. Neoclassical theory -​ Rejected the notion of free will -​ Recognized that there can be other factors; so he fought for more context and flexibility and motive. -​ More of a focus on the person rather than the crime itself. Lombrosian atavism to modern biocriminology: -​ Pushed against classical school assumptions and rejected the free will argument. -​ Took a very scientific approach. -​ Influence from Darwin and the theory of evolution: we can be either less or more evolved. -​ Criminals are lower on this progressive evolutionary scale. -​ Biology causes crime according to this view; and therefore its not your fault if you are a criminal. -​ Anytime someone needs to make generalizations about criminals; you got look at people in jail. IDEAS OVERALL: -​ You are born as a criminal so you shouldn't be punished for it. We havent moved past this yet, there are many modern ideas of how this is happening today. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CRIME:  -​ Focus on the individuals SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY: -​ We learn to commit crimes based on what we see: we model and imitate ​ -​ Has very little scientific support