Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project "A Failing Justice System"
Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project "A Failing Justice System" By Oguzhan Atay 9/I Ms. Silvana Vazquez 29/04/2004 Analysis & Explanation of the Year Project In the year project, I really tried to do a good job, and for I am interested in this subject I enjoyed it very much. It wasn't a burden for me to research why people commit crimes. In my opinion, I was successful, because I did my best, and I used all the methods that I knew to gather information. Though it has lasted a long time to finish the project, I accomplished to complete it without great difficulty. As for the only obstacle, it was the weather. Untimely snow caused me to delay the project for a while. First of all, I decided to search the books in the "Suna Kiraç Library." Although I found the books in the program "card catalog", when I went to get the books, I was very disappointed. The reason for it was that the sources that card catalog show as books on criminology, in fact, was just fun publications on how detectives find evidence to find the guilty. I found only one very useful booklet, "Kriminoloji1" by Georges Picca. I started to read it, and it provided me to find the thesis very easily. Secondly, I searched my thesis on internet, but the sources were very useless. I didn't give up and continued until finding Crime & Society Research Association web address, because it helped very much to
Ambiguity and the Lexicon: Some Observations On Polysemy.
AMBIGUITY AND THE LEXICON: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON POLYSEMY Introduction Background information Recent development of artificial intelligence (AI) has push the discussion of polysemy onto the front stage \brought considerably much more attention to this formerly neglected phenomenon We believe that it is acceptable for a semantics to be based on the notion of word sense as used by traditional lexicography in constructing dictionaries. To put the matter another way, the inability of programs to cope with lexical ambiguity was a major reason for the failure of early computational linguistics tasks like machine translation. Yet it does follow from that failure that the lexical ambiguity distinguished by conventional dictionaries has any real significance for e.g. in the claim that a word such as play has eight senses that are then distinguished and described? The point can perhaps be put most clearly by considering the suggestion that there never was lexical ambiguity until dictionaries were written in roughly the form we now have them, and that lexical ambiguity is no more or less than a product of scholarship: a social product, in other words. Translation between languages, as well as more mundane understanding tasks has been going along for millenia before such scholarly products and therefore cannot require them. This suggestion would be very much to the taste of
Critically examine the criminal justice process to identify both discriminatory practice and good practice in the area of
Critically examine the criminal justice process to identify both discriminatory practice and good practice in the area of gender. This essay will identify good and discriminatory practices throughout the criminal justice system with specific reference to gender and identify circumstances and research evidence that shows the unequal treatment (both discriminatory and favourable) of men or women. Possible reasons for any inequality will be discussed and references to existing theories and past research will be made. Details of rates and patterns of offending between males and females will be included to illustrate the extent to which unequal treatment is afforded to males or females. A brief overview of the theories of gender inequality will be included, drawing on feminism, the late 19th century research of Lombroso and Ferrero, the chivalry hypothesis, the 2002 report 'Statistics on women in the criminal justice system' and an examination of the four key elements involved when discussing women offenders and the reasons behind differing treatment of them. It is evident even in the initial stages of this essay that a gender bias has appeared. When discussing gender, it becomes apparent that women are discussed in reference to men, including offending rates, conviction rates and patterns and inequalities, rather than visa versa or women being discussed independently of men.
The criminal law harms rather than helps victims of sexual violence
Although statistics show that rape counts for only 1% of all crimes reported between 2008- 20091, 'sexual offences, in particular rape are among the most unreported crimes'2. With between 75% and 95% of rapes not reported to the police3. In this essay, I seek to discuss the reasons why the law on 'sexual harms' and the system which implements has lead to such a low conviction rate, being only 5.6% of reported rapes4 and the harm victims experience whilst involved in the criminal justice system. The majority of research used in discussion refers specifically to rape, despite this, the problems found in the reporting and conviction of rape, apply more generally to 'sexual harms'. In order to understand whether the criminal law and the system which implements it causes more harm than healing to the victim, it is essential to first understand what type of harm. Clearly, a return verdict of 'not guilty' will cause the victim significant distress, it is not however simply this which we are to discuss in relation to harms to the victim. The victim may feel humiliated by part of the process; they may be put through stress in having to come to court to give evidence. Most notably a victim can themselves feel as though they are on trial themselves when giving evidence as Madigan and Gamble aptly put it a 'second rape'5. Before discussing how the Law and the system it operates in
The given quotation immediately summons in my mind the picture of a suspect on the street or at the police station or ana ccused before a court, whether he will be treated equally by the neutral legal factors, if he is a member of the black community. ...
ANSWER TO THE Q: NO: 2 INTRODUCTION The given quotation immediately summons in my mind the picture of a suspect on the street or at the police station or an accused before a court, whether he will be treated equally by the neutral legal factors, if he is a member of the black community. It was examined and expressed for a number of years by various researchers in this field that black people are more likely to become entangled with the web of criminal justice than white people1. In order to discuss, the quotation will be divided into two parts. First, it will be examined, whether the evidences show that law enforcement really targets black people. In the second part, it will be considered whether such targeting has happened because of bias or impartial application of criteria that work to the disadvantage of black people TARGETING THE BLACK PEOPLE There was a considerable body of research on race and criminal justice, which suggested that the police do target some ethnic minority groups and that this may have the effect of drawing them in through the 'gates' of the criminal justice system disproportionately either to their numbers in the population or to their involvement in crime. Also a wide public perception is that certain groups were being treated unfairly by the police and the criminal courts. In constructing the answer it will be sought to build up a picture of the
The aim of this project is to explore and analyse the role of the victim during criminal proceedings. The project aims at analyzing the interaction of the victims with the constituent elements of the criminal justice system ie. the police, lawyers and cou
* Table Of Cases . Bhagwant v. Commissioner of Police, AIR 1985 SC 1285. 2. Bodhisattvwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty, AIR 1996 SC 922. 3. Challa Ramakonda Reddy v. State, AIR 1989 Andhra Pradesh 235. 4. Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v. Union of India, (1995)1 SCC 14. 5. Gudalure M.J Cherian v. Union of India, (1995) Supp.(3) SCC 387. 6. Hari Kishan and State of Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh, AIR 1988 SC 2127. 7. Kasturi Lal v. State of UP, AIR 1965 SC 1039. 8. Pandit Paramanand Kaara v. Union of India, AIR 1989 SC 2039. 9. Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086. 0. Sebastian M. Hongray v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 1026. 1. State of Punjab v. Gurmeet Singh, AIR 1996 SC 1393. * Table Of Statutes . Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. Constitution of India, 1950. 3. Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. 4. Indian Penal Code, 1860. 5. Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. * Introduction "For too long, the law has centred its attention more on the rights of the criminal than on the victims of crime. It is high time we reversed this trend and put the highest priority on the victims and potential victims" - President Gerald R. Ford1 The available historical work in the field of criminal law relating to the role of the victim in criminal proceedings reveals a steady evolution away from the "private," or individual, sphere to the "public" or societal one.
Representing Unpopular defendants
Diana Klimiuk European Legal Studies Representing unpopular defendants Can lawyers pick and choose who they wish to represent? Client selection is one of the most important issues for lawyers. Once the lawyer is decided to take on the case of a particular client, he or she cannot simply abandon them because of the special relationship that is made between the defendant and their representative (lawyer). There are two very important issues related to the ethical problem in the question. First of them is a hesitation if an obligation to take unpopular cases exists and the second is whether it is professionally responsible to refuse certain cases.1 Theoretically the duty to take unpopular cases is imposed on all barristers in general. This is because of the so-called 'cab-rank rule'. The cab-rank rule is the obligation to a barrister to accept any type of work that comes along in a field in which he is recognised competent to practice.2 The rule can be found under paragraph 602 of the Code of Conduct of the English Bar. The Bar supposes that all advocates that profess themselves competent to practice in any of the legal fields should be under the obligation to take on the cases they are authorised to take and by any means must not select cases to shun unpopular clients. Moreover, according to the Bar, no practicing barrister should have a right to refuse along-coming
Problem Question on Homicide.
Problem Question on Homicide This case is a murder case as a human being has been killed, this offence has no statutory definition and carries a sentence of life imprisonment. The definition is 'unlawfully killing a reasonable person who is in being'. The actus reus and the mens rea are satisfied in this case with intent to cause the victim injury. In this problem considering the facts of the case, the conviction of murder may be brought down to the charge of manslaughter, which is an unlawful killing without malice aforethought. It has a lesser degree of blameworthiness. There are two classifications of manslaughter which are 'involuntary' and 'voluntary'. Voluntary manslaughter does not require the necessary malice aforethought for murder, it is regarded as less blameworthy as in this problem case provocation is present. The fact of intent is not brought up in this problem as Sandra instantly grabs a marble statuette and hits it over Peters head killing him. Sandra was provoked by Peter hitting her on various occasions and this has caused her to become clinically depressed. Peter hitting and telling Sandra that she is a hopeless wife and inadequate mother is enough to provoke her behaviour. It was ruled in the case of Doughty (1986) that the continuous crying of a baby is enough to provoke a person. Provocation comes under the Homicide
The police work effectively to reduce and prevent crime - Critically examine this statement in the light of the available evidence.
The police work effectively to reduce and prevent crime. Critically examine this statement in the light of the available evidence. The police is the area of the Criminal Justice System which is under the most scrutiny, almost always because they are perceived as ineffective. My aim is to establish whether or not the police deserve this tarnished reputation by investigating their effectiveness of reducing and preventing crime. I shall be looking into many different aspects of the police, starting with a brief history of the police and how their roles and responsibilities have changed since the beginning of the 19th century. I shall then go on to look at some statistics from the 2001 British Crime Survey in order to attempt to determine the effectiveness of the police in terms of crime reduction. Other investigative matters include police accountability, which takes me neatly to the question of police conduct and complaints- in order to gain an insight into the other side of policing where the so-called 'good guys' are in fact the 'bad guys.' I shall also be looking into the resources available to the police, and thus whether or not they are good enough and how they may be improved. The police, once upon a time, had the image of perfection- in the early 1800s the local 'bobby' was someone who was glad to help out wherever possible, someone who was there for his community, was
Justifying Punishment
Justifying Punishment In Chapter 1 we argued that the most crucial factor in the current malaise in the penal system is the 'crisis of legitimacy'. A social institution is 'legitimate' if it is perceived as morally justified; the problem with the penal system is that this perception is lacking and many people inside and outside the system believe that it is morally indefensible, or at least defective. We need to investigate whether such moral perceptions are accurate, if only to know what should be done about them. If they are inaccurate, then the obvious strategy would be to try to rectify the perceptions, by persuading people that the system is not unjust after all. But if the perceived injustices are real, then it is those injustices which should be rectified. This chapter accordingly deals with the moral philosophy of punishment and attempts to relate the philosophical issues to the reality of penal systems such as that of England and Wales today. The basic moral question about punishment is an age-old one: 'What justifies the infliction of punishment1 on people?' Punishing people certainly needs a justification, since it is almost always something which is harmful, painful or unpleasant to the recipient.2 Imprisonment, for example, causes physical discomfort, psychological suffering, indignity and general unhappiness along with a variety of other disadvantages (such as
