![Скачать презентацию European Union Operational Programme Administrative Capacity Public Opinion Скачать презентацию European Union Operational Programme Administrative Capacity Public Opinion](https://present5.com/wp-content/plugins/kama-clic-counter/icons/ppt.jpg)
ade3375925a4c901aa3127ee6801a993.ppt
- Количество слайдов: 24
European Union Operational Programme Administrative Capacity Public Opinion, Crime and Criminal Justice Sofia March 26, 2009 Julian Roberts Faculty of Law, University of Oxford
What I want to do § Summarise findings from 30 years of research on attitiudes towards, and knowledge of criminal justice; § Highlight methodological problems; § Describe 3 specific simple research studies which show the “true public opinion” in the area of legal punishment; § Draw some conclusions The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Overview: Why study public opinion? § Poor knowledge leads to negative attitudes, unrealistic expectations and low confidence – Low confidence associated with disengagement from system, public less willing to serve as jurors, witnesses, report crimes – Negative attitudes puts pressure on judges to impose tougher sentences – Public criticism encourages “get tough” policies that have little effect The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Public Misperceptions that undermine confidence in CJS § § § § crime trends recidivism rates % of crime involving violence Severity of sentencing practices Ability of sentencing to control crime Leniency of parole system (over-estimates) Prison life The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Public confidence/ performance ratings of CJ professions § Same hierarchy in all countries in which surveys have been conducted; § Police at top – rated most positively; courts and parole authorities most negatively; § Confidence levels same as performance ratings The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
BCS: % saying “good or excellent job” 199 19 20 200 6 9 0 1 2 8 0 / / 0 0 2 3 Police 64 60 53 47 48 Prison 38 s 32 30 26 25 Magist 27 rate s 29 26 Judge s 20 23 21 29 25 CPS 23 Source: Nichola and Walker (2004) N/ 23 27 23 The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund. A
Why are the public misinformed? § § § Biased media coverage; Politics of punishment; Criticism of system by criminal justice professionals; § Complexities of the Criminal Justice system – make the system hard to understand – parole for example; § Psychology of attitude formation. The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Public Opinion Research: some warnings § Polls are often designed to influence as well as to measure public opinion; § Surveys seldom offer a clear choice or attach costs to competing criminal justice policies; § Public knowledge of criminal justice is seldom measured or considered The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Example of Misuse of Polls § Question: “Should there be a reform of our justice system placing greater emphasis on the needs of victims, providing restitution and compensation for them and imposing minimum sentences and hard labour for all serious offenders? ” The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Effect of Information on Opinion: 3 international research examples § § § Sentencing burglars in UK Home Confinement in Canada Parole for murder in Canada The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Attitudes to sentencing § Poll: between 70 and 80% of public believe courts too lenient at sentencing: UK; US; Australia; Canada; Belgium; Barbados; New Zealand. § But do polls tell the whole story? The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Result changes when people given an actual case to sentence § “A man aged 23 is convicted of domestic burglary. He broke into a house belonging to an elderly man while the victim was away. The offender has previous convictions for the same crime (burglary), stole a videoplayer and damaged a TV set. ” § Court outcome: 3 years in prison reduced on appeal to 2 years. § How do the public react? The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Public Reaction to Home Confinement in Canada § Canadian example: terms of custody of up to 2 years may often be served at home with home confinement or a curfew: – Offender sentenced to 12 months for assault goes home – what do the public think about this? The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Effects of providing information to Public: An Illustration § Representative survey of public § Random assignment to condition A or B § All respondents asked to consider case of burglary: § “An offender is to be sentenced for break and entering into a hardware store and stealing £ 1, 500. He has committed similar offences in the past”. The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Condition A § “The judge is trying to decide between a 6 -month prison sentence or 6 months to be served in the community as a community-based sentence of imprisonment (conditional sentence)”. § Which do you favor? The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Condition B § The judge is trying to decide between a 6 -month prison sentence or 6 months to be served in the community as a community-based sentence of imprisonment (conditional sentence). If the offender receives the conditional sentence he will have to pay back the money, perform community work and report to authorities twice a week. § Which do you favor? The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Public Sentencing Preferences Condition A Condition B Prison 72% 35% Home Confinement 28% 65% The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Methodological Lessons § Public seldom given adequate amount of information about an issue such as the use of custody or mandatory sentencing; § When asked about specific cases, little detail is ever provided; § The consequence is that surveys elicit a punitive attitude; § Multi-method approach necessary: consider polls in light of qualitative and experimental research findings The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Early parole for murderers in Canada § The law: jury reviews applications received after prisoner has served 15 years of a 25 year minimum sentence; § Polls on public attitudes to parole for murderers; § Results of jury reviews to date; § Lessons learned The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Summarizing Public Attitudes to Sentencing § Members of public: – Know little about sentencing practices – Have unrealistic expectations of sentencing – Are aware of the limitations of custody – Support community penalties – Public favour punitive response but … – Respond more like judges when given more than a newspaper headline to consider The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
How to respond to public opinion § Competing Models – Ignore public – Follow public opinion (referenda) – Incorporate public opinion directly: sentencing by juries – Incorporate public opinion in a limited fashion: examples: Federal Sentencing Commission (US); Sentencing Advisory Panel (UK); Sentencing Commission (Canada); Sentencing Council (Victoria). The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
Thanks for your time and attention! The project is implemented with the financial support of Operational Programme “Administrative Capacity”, co-financed by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
ade3375925a4c901aa3127ee6801a993.ppt