Justice, in its broadest context, includes both the attainment of that, just and the philosophical discussion of that, just. The concept of justice is based on numerous fields, many differing viewpoints and perspectives including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, law, religion and fairness; the general discussion of justice is divided into the realm of social justice as found in philosophy and religion, procedural justice as found in the study and application of the law. The concept of justice differs in every culture. Early theories of justice were set out by the Ancient Greek philosophers Plato in his work The Republic, Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics. Throughout history various theories have been established. Advocates of divine command theory argue that justice issues from God. In the 1600s, theorists like John Locke argued for the theory of natural law. Thinkers in the social contract tradition argued that justice is derived from the mutual agreement of everyone concerned.
In the 1800s, utilitarian thinkers including John Stuart Mill argued that justice is what has the best consequences. Theories of distributive justice concern what is distributed, between whom they are to be distributed, what is the proper distribution. Egalitarians argued. John Rawls used a social contract argument to show that justice, distributive justice, is a form of fairness. Property rights theorists take a consequentialist view of distributive justice and argue that property rights-based justice maximizes the overall wealth of an economic system. Theories of retributive justice are concerned with punishment for wrongdoing. Restorative justice is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of offenders. In his dialogue Republic, Plato uses Socrates to argue for justice that covers both the just person and the just City State. Justice is a harmonious relationship between the warring parts of the person or city. Hence, Plato's definition of justice is. A just man is a man in just the right place, doing his best and giving the precise equivalent of what he has received.
This applies both at the universal level. A person's soul has three parts – reason and desire. A city has three parts – Socrates uses the parable of the chariot to illustrate his point: a chariot works as a whole because the two horses' power is directed by the charioteer. Lovers of wisdom – philosophers, in one sense of the term – should rule because only they understand what is good. If one is ill, one goes to a medic rather than a farmer, because the medic is expert in the subject of health. One should trust one's city to an expert in the subject of the good, not to a mere politician who tries to gain power by giving people what they want, rather than what's good for them. Socrates uses the parable of the ship to illustrate this point: the unjust city is like a ship in open ocean, crewed by a powerful but drunken captain, a group of untrustworthy advisors who try to manipulate the captain into giving them power over the ship's course, a navigator, the only one who knows how to get the ship to port.
For Socrates, the only way the ship will reach its destination – the good – is if the navigator takes charge. Advocates of divine command theory argue that justice, indeed the whole of morality, is the authoritative command of God. Murder must be punished, for instance, because God says it so; some versions of the theory assert that God must be obeyed because of the nature of his relationship with humanity, others assert that God must be obeyed because he is goodness itself, thus doing what he says would be best for everyone. A meditation on the Divine command theory by Plato can be found in Euthyphro. Called the Euthyphro dilemma, it goes as follows: "Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?" The implication is that if the latter is true justice is arbitrary. A response, popularized in two contexts by Immanuel Kant and C. S. Lewis, is that it is deductively valid to argue that the existence of an objective morality implies the existence of God and vice versa.
For advocates of the theory that justice is part of natural law, it involves the system of consequences that derives from any action or choice. In this, it is similar to the laws of physics: in the same way as the Third of Newton's laws of Motion requires that for every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction, justice requires according individuals or groups what they deserve, merit, or are entitled to. Justice, on this account, is a universal and absolute concept: laws, religions, etc. are attempts to codify that concept, sometimes with results that contradict the true nature of justice. In Republic by Plato, the character Thrasymachus argues that justice is the interest of the strong – a name for what the powerful or cunning ruler has imposed on the people. Advocates of the social contract agree that justice is derived from the mutual agreement of everyone concerned; this account is considered further below, under'Justice as fairness'. The absence of bias refers to an equal ground for all people
In law, a trial is a coming together of parties to a dispute, to present information in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court; the tribunal, which may occur before a judge, jury, or other designated trier of fact, aims to achieve a resolution to their dispute. Where the trial is held before a group of members of the community, it is called a jury trial. Where the trial is held before a judge, it is called a bench trial. Hearings before administrative bodies may have many of the features of a trial before a court, but are not referred to as trials. An appellate proceeding is generally not deemed a trial, because such proceedings are restricted to review of the evidence presented before the trial court, do not permit the introduction of new evidence. Trials can be divided by the type of dispute at issue. A criminal trial is designed to resolve accusations brought against a person accused of a crime. In common law systems, most criminal defendants are entitled to a trial held before a jury.
Because the state is attempting to use its power to deprive the accused of life, liberty, or property, the rights of the accused afforded to criminal defendants are broad. The rules of criminal procedure provide rules for criminal trials. A civil trial is held to settle lawsuits or civil claims—non-criminal disputes. In some countries, the government can both be sued in a civil capacity; the rules of civil procedure provide rules for civil trials. Although administrative hearings are not ordinarily considered trials, they retain many elements found in more "formal" trial settings; when the dispute goes to judicial setting, it is called an administrative trial, to revise the administrative hearing, depending on the jurisdiction. The types of disputes handled in these hearings is governed by administrative law and auxiliarily by the civil trial law. Labor law is the body of laws, administrative rulings, precedents which address the legal rights of, restrictions on, working people and their organizations.
As such, it mediates many aspects of the relationship between trade unions and employees. In Canada, employment laws related to unionized workplaces are differentiated from those relating to particular individuals. In most countries however, no such distinction is made. However, there are two broad categories of labour law. First, collective labour law relates to the tripartite relationship between employee and union. Second, individual labour law concerns employees' rights through the contract for work; the labour movement has been instrumental in the enacting of laws protecting labour rights in the 19th and 20th centuries. Labour rights have been integral to the social and economic development since the industrial revolution. There are two primary systems for conducting a trial: Adversarial: In common law systems, an adversarial or accusatory approach is used to adjudicate guilt or innocence; the assumption is that the truth is more to emerge from the open contest between the prosecution and the defense in presenting the evidence and opposing legal arguments with a judge acting as a neutral referee and as the arbiter of the law.
In several jurisdictions in more serious cases, there is a jury to determine the facts, although some common law jurisdictions have abolished the jury trial. This polarizes the issues, with each competitor acting in its own self-interest, so presenting the facts and interpretations of the law in a deliberately biased way; the intention is that through a process of argument and counter-argument, examination-in-chief and cross-examination, each side will test the truthfulness and sufficiency of the opponent's evidence and arguments. To maintain fairness, there is a presumption of innocence, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Critics of the system argue. Further, the results are to be affected by structural inequalities; those defendants with resources can afford to hire the best lawyers. Some trials are—or were—of a more summary nature, as certain questions of evidence were taken as resolved. Inquisitorial: In civil law legal systems, the responsibility for supervising the investigation by the police into whether a crime has been committed falls on an examining magistrate or judge who conducts the trial.
The assumption is that the truth is more to emerge from an impartial and exhaustive investigation both before and during the trial itself. The examining magistrate or judge acts as an inquisitor who directs the fact-gathering process by questioning witnesses, interrogating the suspect, collecting other evidence; the lawyers who represent the interests of the State and the accused have a limited role to offer legal arguments and alternative interpretations to the facts that emerge during the process. All the interested parties are expected to co-operate in the investigation by answering the magistrate or judge's questions and, when asked, supplying all relevant evidence; the trial only takes place after all the evidence has been collected and the investigation is completed. Thus, most of the factual uncertainties will be resolved, the examining magistrate or judge will have resolved that there is prima facie of guilt. Critics argue that the examining magistrate or judge has too much power in that he or she will both investigate and adjudicate on the merits of the case.
Although lay assessors do sit as a form of jury to offer advice to the magistrate or judge at the conclusion of the trial, their role is subordinate. Further, because a professio
A prison known as a correctional facility, gaol, detention center, remand center, or internment facility, is a facility in which inmates are forcibly confined and denied a variety of freedoms under the authority of the state. Prisons are most used within a criminal justice system: people charged with crimes may be imprisoned until their trial. In simplest terms, a prison can be described as a building in which people are held as a punishment for a crime they have committed. Prisons can be used as a tool of political repression by authoritarian regimes, their perceived opponents may be imprisoned for political crimes without trial or other legal due process. In times of war, prisoners of war or detainees may be detained in military prisons or prisoner of war camps, large groups of civilians might be imprisoned in internment camps. In American English and jail are treated as having separate definitions; the term prison or penitentiary tends to describe institutions that incarcerate people for longer periods of time, such as many years, are operated by the state or federal governments.
The term jail tends to describe institutions for confining people for shorter periods of time and are operated by local governments. Outside of North America and jail have the same meaning. Common slang terms for a prison include: "the pokey", "the slammer", "the can", "the clink", "the joint", "the calaboose", "the hoosegow" and "the big house". Slang terms for imprisonment include: "behind bars", "in stir" and "up the river"; the use of prisons can be traced back to the rise of the state as a form of social organization. Corresponding with the advent of the state was the development of written language, which enabled the creation of formalized legal codes as official guidelines for society; the best known of these early legal codes is the Code of Hammurabi, written in Babylon around 1750 BC. The penalties for violations of the laws in Hammurabi's Code were exclusively centered on the concept of lex talionis, whereby people were punished as a form of vengeance by the victims themselves; this notion of punishment as vengeance or retaliation can be found in many other legal codes from early civilizations, including the ancient Sumerian codes, the Indian Manusmriti, the Hermes Trismegistus of Egypt, the Israelite Mosaic Law.
Some Ancient Greek philosophers, such as Plato, began to develop ideas of using punishment to reform offenders instead of using it as retribution. Imprisonment as a penalty was used for those who could not afford to pay their fines. Since impoverished Athenians could not pay their fines, leading to indefinite periods of imprisonment, time limits were set instead; the prison in Ancient Athens was known as the desmoterion. The Romans were among the first to use prisons as a form of punishment, rather than for detention. A variety of existing structures were used to house prisoners, such as metal cages, basements of public buildings, quarries. One of the most notable Roman prisons was the Mamertine Prison, established around 640 B. C. by Ancus Marcius. The Mamertine Prison was located within a sewer system beneath ancient Rome and contained a large network of dungeons where prisoners were held in squalid conditions, contaminated with human waste. Forced labor on public works projects was a common form of punishment.
In many cases, citizens were sentenced to slavery in ergastula. During the Middle Ages in Europe, castles and the basements of public buildings were used as makeshift prisons; the possession of the right and the capability to imprison citizens, granted an air of legitimacy to officials at all levels of government, from kings to regional courts to city councils. Another common punishment was sentencing people to galley slavery, which involved chaining prisoners together in the bottoms of ships and forcing them to row on naval or merchant vessels. From the late 17th century and during the 18th century, popular resistance to public execution and torture became more widespread both in Europe and in the United States. Under the Bloody Code, with few sentencing alternatives, imposition of the death penalty for petty crimes, such as theft, was proving unpopular with the public. Rulers began looking for means to punish and control their subjects in a way that did not cause people to associate them with spectacles of tyrannical and sadistic violence.
They developed systems of mass incarceration with hard labor, as a solution. The prison reform movement that arose at this time was influenced by two somewhat contradictory philosophies; the first was based in Enlightenment ideas of utilitarianism and rationalism, suggested that prisons should be used as a more effective substitute for public corporal punishments such as whipping, etc. This theory, referred to as deterrence, claims tha
The rights of civilian and military prisoners are governed by both national and international law. International conventions include the International Covenant on Political Rights. In the United States, the Prison Litigation Reform Act, or PLRA, is a federal statute enacted in 1996 with the intent of limiting "frivolous lawsuits" by prisoners. Among its provisions, the PLRA requires prisoners to exhaust all executive means of reform before filing for litigation, restricts the normal procedure of having the losing defendant pay legal fees, allows for the courts to dismiss cases as "frivolous" or "malicious", requires prisoners to pay their court fees up front if they have three previous instances of a case having been dismissed as "frivolous." Amnesty International Death in custody LGBT people in prison November Coalition Penal Reform International Preservation of the Rights of Prisoners Prisoners' Union Prison abolition movement Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners Sentencing disparityPrisoners' rights in international law Prison Strike Prisoners' rights in New Zealand Prisoner rights in the United StatesHuman right of prisoners in Israel Organizations working for prisoners' rights: American Civil Liberties Union on prisoners' rights Human Rights Watch Amnesty International Prison Activist Resource Center Lawyer for prisoner And its conditions
Organized crime is a category of transnational, national, or local groupings of centralized enterprises run by criminals who intend to engage in illegal activity, most for profit. Some criminal organizations, such as terrorist groups, are politically motivated. Sometimes criminal organizations force people to do business with them, such as when a gang extorts money from shopkeepers for "protection". Gangs may become disciplined enough to be considered organized. A criminal organization or gang can be referred to as a mafia, mob, or crime syndicate. European sociologists define the mafia as a type of organized crime group that specializes in the supply of extra-legal protection and quasi law enforcement. Gambetta's classic work on the Sicilian Mafia generates an economic study of the mafia, which exerts great influence on studies of the Russian Mafia, the Chinese Mafia, Hong Kong Triads and the Japanese Yakuza. Other organizations—including states, militaries, police forces, corporations—may sometimes use organized-crime methods to conduct their activities, but their powers derive from their status as formal social institutions.
There is a tendency to distinguish organized crime from other forms of crime, such as white-collar crime, financial crimes, political crimes, war crime, state crimes, treason. This distinction is not always apparent and academics continue to debate the matter. For example, in failed states that can no longer perform basic functions such as education, security, or governance, organized crime and war sometimes complement each other; the term "Oligarchy" has been used to describe democratic countries whose political and economic institutions come under the control of a few families and business oligarchs. In the United States, the Organized Crime Control Act defines organized crime as "he unlawful activities of a organized, disciplined association ". Criminal activity as a structured process is referred to as racketeering. In the UK, police estimate that organized crime involves up to 38,000 people operating in 6,000 various groups. Due to the escalating violence of Mexico's drug war, a report issued by the United States Department of Justice characterizes the Mexican drug cartels as the "greatest organized crime threat to the United States".
Patron-client networks are defined by fluid interactions. They produce crime groups that operate as smaller units within the overall network, as such tend towards valuing significant others, familiarity of social and economic environments, or tradition; these networks are composed of: Hierarchies based on'naturally' forming family and cultural traditions. Bureaucratic/corporate organized crime groups are defined by the general rigidity of their internal structures, they focus more on how the operations works, sustains itself or avoids retribution, they are typified by: A complex authority structure. However, this model of operation has some flaws: The'top-down' communication strategy is susceptible to interception, more so further down the hierarchy being communicated to. While bureaucratic operations emphasize business processes and authoritarian hierarchies, these are based on enforcing power relationships rather than an overlying aim of protectionism, sustainability or growth. An estimate on youth street gangs nationwide provided by Hannigan, et al. marked an increase of 35% between 2002 and 2010.
A distinctive gang culture underpins many, but not organized groups. The term “street gang” is used interchangeably with “youth gang,” referring to neighborhood or street-based youth groups that meet “gang” criteria. Miller defines a street gang as “a self-formed association of peers, united by mutual interests, with identifiable leadership and internal organization, who act collectively or as individuals to achieve specific purposes, including the conduct of illegal activity and control of a particular territory, facility, or enterprise." Some reasons youth join gangs include to feel accepted, attain status, increase their self-esteem. A sense of unity brings together many of the youth gangs. "Zones of transition" are deteriorating neighborhoods with shifting populations. In such areas, co
Recidivism is the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have either experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been trained to extinguish that behavior. It is used to refer to the percentage of former prisoners who are rearrested for a similar offense; the term is used in conjunction with criminal behavior and substance abuse. For example, scientific literature may refer to the recidivism of sexual offenders, meaning the frequency with which they are detected or apprehended committing additional sexual crimes after being released from prison for similar crimes. According to an April 2011 report by the Pew Center on the States, the average national recidivism rate for released prisoners is 43%. According to the National Institute of Justice, about 68 percent of 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were arrested for a new crime within three years of their release from prison, 77 percent were arrested within five years. Beginning in the 1990s, the US rate of incarceration increased filling prisons to capacity in bad conditions for inmates.
Crime continues inside many prison walls. Gangs exist on the inside with tactical decisions made by imprisoned leaders. While the US justice system has traditionally focused its efforts at the front end of the system, by locking people up, it has not exerted an equal effort at the tail end of the system: decreasing the likelihood of reoffending among incarcerated persons; this is a significant issue because ninety-five percent of prisoners will be released back into the community at some point. According to a national study published in 2003 by The Urban Institute, within three years 7 out of 10 released males will be rearrested and half will be back in prison; the study says this happens due to personal and situation characteristics, including the individual's social environment of peers, family and state-level policies. There are many other factors in recidivism, such as the individual's circumstances before incarceration, events during their incarceration, the period after they are released from prison, both immediate and long term.
One of the main reasons why they find themselves back in jail is because it is difficult for the individual to fit back in with ‘normal’ life. They have to reestablish ties with their family, return to high-risk places and secure formal identification. Many prisoners report being anxious about their release. At the most direct and personal level, those who have the greatest stake in recidivism are: the incarcerated person. More broadly, recidivism affects everyone. Crime is a problem in every community and anyone can be a victim. Victimization can take many forms—from being directly injured in a violent crime, to being robbed, to having your sense of safety violated as result of living in an area where crime exists. Furthermore, all taxpayers are impacted by the economic costs of crime. Of US federal inmates in 2010, about half were serving time for drug offenses and many others committed crimes under the influence of one or more drugs, over drug-related disputes, or in order to obtain money to buy drugs—factors which were not cited in their charges.
It is estimated. Over 70 percent of prisoners with serious mental illnesses have a substance use disorder. Only 7 to 17 percent of prisoners who meet DSM criteria for alcohol/drug dependence or abuse receive treatment; those involved in the criminal justice system have rates of substance abuse and dependence that are more than four times higher than the general population and fewer than 20 percent of federal and state prisoners who meet the criteria receive treatment. Effectiveness studies have shown that inmates who participate in residential treatment programs while incarcerated have 9 to 18 percent lower recidivism rates and 15 to 35 percent lower drug relapse rates than their counterparts who receive no treatment in prison. Furthermore, inmates who receive aftercare have an greater chance of not recidivating; when combined with treatment, given during incarceration aftercare can be a useful tool in recidivism reduction. Some offenders have had a reduced risk of recidivism of up to eighty percent after undergoing aftercare treatment.
Recidivism rates in the United States are hard to measure. Data collectors have to decide if recidivism means a new arrest, a new conviction, or a new incarceration, all of which mean different things. Recidivism rates obscures variety in the type of post-release offense: it indicates no difference between a new conviction for a violent crime and one for a non-violent crime, for example; as reported on BBC Radio 4 on Monday, 2 September 2005, the recidivism rates for released prisoners in the United States of America is 60% compared with 50% in the United Kingdom. The report attributed the lower recidivism rate in the UK to a focus on rehabilitation and education of prisoners compa
Uniform Crime Reports
The Uniform Crime Reports compiles official data on crime in the United States, published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. UCR is "a nationwide, cooperative statistical effort of nearly 18,000 city and college, state and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily reporting data on crimes brought to their attention". Crime statistics are compiled from UCR data and published annually by the FBI in the Crime in the United States series; the FBI does not collect the data itself. Rather, law enforcement agencies across the United States provide the data to the FBI, which compiles the Reports; the Uniform Crime Reports program began in 1929, since has become an important source of crime information for law enforcement, policymakers and the media. The UCR Program consists of four parts: Traditional Summary Reporting System and the National Incident Based Reporting System – Offense and arrest data Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted Program Hate Crime Statistics Program – hate crimes Cargo Theft Reporting Program – cargo theftThe FBI publishes annual data from these collections in Crime in the United States, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, Hate Crime Statistics.
The UCR Program was based upon work by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Social Science Research Council throughout the 1920s to create a uniform national set of crime statistics, reliable for analysis. In 1927, the IACP created the Committee on Uniform Crime Reporting to determine statistics for national comparisons; the committee determined seven crimes fundamental to comparing crime rates: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault and motor vehicle theft. The early program was managed by the IACP, prior to FBI involvement, done through a monthly report; the first report in January 1930 reported data from 400 cities throughout 43 states, covering more than 20 million individuals twenty percent of the total U. S. population. On June 11, 1930, through IACP lobbying, the United States Congress passed legislation enacting 28 U. S. C. § 534, which granted the office of the Attorney General the ability to "acquire, collect and preserve identification, criminal identification and other records" with the ability to appoint officials to oversee this duty, including the subordinate members of the Bureau of Investigation.
The Attorney General, in turn, designated the FBI to serve as the national clearinghouse for the data collected, the FBI assumed responsibility for managing the UCR Program in September 1930. The July 1930 issue of the IACP crime report announced the FBI's takeover of the program. While the IACP discontinued oversight of the program, they continued to advise the FBI to better the UCR. Since 1935, the FBI served as a data clearinghouse; the UCR remained the primary tool for analysis of data for the next half century. Throughout the 1980s, a series of National UCR Conferences were with members from the IACP, Department of Justice, including the FBI, newly formed Bureau of Justice Statistics; the purpose was to determine necessary system revisions and implement them. The result of these conferences was the release of a Blueprint for the Future of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program release in May 1985, detailing the necessary revisions; the report proposed splitting reported data into two separate categories, the eight serious crimes and 21 less reported crimes.
In 2003, FBI UCR data were compiled from more than 16,000 agencies, representing 93 percent of the population in 46 states and the District of Columbia. While nationally reporting is not mandated, many states have instituted laws requiring law enforcement within those states to provide UCR data; each month, law enforcement agencies report the number of known index crimes in their jurisdiction to the FBI. This includes crimes reported to the police by the general public, but may include crimes that police officers discover, known through other sources. Law enforcement agencies report the number of crime cases cleared. For reporting purposes, criminal offenses are divided into two major groups: Part I offenses and Part II offenses. In Part I, the UCR indexes reported incidents of index crimes which are broken into two categories: violent and property crimes. Aggravated assault, forcible rape and robbery are classified as violent while arson, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft are classified as property crimes.
These are reported via the document named Return A – Monthly Return of Offenses Known to the Police. Part 1 crimes are collectively known as Index crimes, this name is used because the crimes are considered quite serious, tend to be reported more reliably than others, are reported directly to the police and not to a separate agency that doesn't contribute to the UCR. In Part II, the following categories are tracked: simple assault, curfew offenses and loitering, embezzlement and counterfeiting, disorderly conduct, driving under the influence, drug offenses, gambling, liquor offenses, offenses against the family, public drunkenness, sex offenses, stolen property, vandalism and weapons offenses. Two property reports are included with the Return A; the first is the Property Stolen by Classification report. This report details the number of actua