Current Trends in criminal justice

The topic under discussion is current trends in criminal justice. There are intense discussions between those who base their beliefs on biological and genetic

reasons of crime and those who blame criminality on environmental and societal issues,

making criminology an interdisciplinary discipline. The objective of this study is to explore

the existing advancements in criminal justice, as well as the defects and issues that go along

with them.

Annotated Bibliography.

Harrendorf, S. (2018). Prospects, problems, and pitfalls in comparative analyses of criminal

justice data. Crime and Justice, 47(1), 159-207.

The official crime and criminal justice statistics are influenced by a variety of

variables, including substantive, legal, and statistical considerations. This makes it more

difficult to compare items from different countries. The United Nations Crime Trends

Survey, Eurostat’s crime data, and the European Sourcebook of Crime and Criminal Justice

Statistics all have the same overarching goal: to broaden the scope of comparison and to zero

in on any remaining gaps. The survey conducted by the United Nations and Eurostat both

make use of the International Classification of Crimes for Statistical Purposes, which has

great promise but has not yet been utilized in an effective manner. The European Sourcebook

offers the most extensive and well checked information of the three sources. Even after being

modified, statistics still need to be compared with the utmost care. Crime rates are not a

reliable measure of the severity of crime in other nations, with the potential exception of

murders committed on purpose and which are successful. The quantity of police activity,

which may vary widely, is the primary factor that determines overall crime rates.

Annotated bibliography 3

Comparisons of crime trends, assuming that the crimes being compared are not categorized

too differently from one another, have a lower risk of causing confusion. It is easier to make

comparisons between indicators when they are stated as ratios of many system-based

variables. It is not feasible to compute worldwide or European average crime rates due to the

enormous differences in crime rates and other factors that are involved in the criminal justice

system. Construction of country clusters requires the closest attention to detail.

Cashmore, J., Taylor, A., & Parkinson, P. (2020). Fourteen-year trends in the criminal justice

response to child sexual abuse reports in New South Wales. Child

maltreatment, 25(1), 85-95.

For the purposes of this attrition research, we looked at scenarios in which the complainant

was above the age of 18 when the incident happened, as well as situations in which

the complainant was younger than 18 when the event took place. Based on an

investigation of the administrative police and court statistics in New South Wales,

Australia, over a period of 14 years (2003–2016). Twenty-one percent of cases, which

is equivalent to one out of every five, got to trial. Criminal procedures were more

likely to be started when the claimed victim was between 7 and 12 years old at the

time of the incident and the offender was at least 10 years older than the alleged

victim. A conviction was reached in the outcome of 55.5 percent of the cases that

were heard in court. Greater courts, in comparison to inferior courts, had a lower

proportion of cases that were dismissed and a higher rate of cases that resulted in

guilty pleas and trial convictions. It is claimed that just 12% of crimes that have been

reported to the police in the last 14 years have resulted in a conviction. These findings

are in line with those found in previously conducted research.

Annotated bibliography 4

Kovera, M. B. (2019). Racial disparities in the criminal justice system: Prevalence, causes,

and a search for solutions. Journal of Social Issues, 75(4), 1139-1164.

Inconsistencies in treatment of people of different races by the legal system are well-

documented and frequently discussed. In the system that was investigated for this research,

there exist racial disparities in the composition of the police force, the inmate population, and

the jury pool. One possible explanation for these discrepancies is that they are the result of

implicit racial bias. The fact that so many people are involved in making the decisions that

lead to these disparities makes it possible that unconscious prejudice is to blame for these

discrepancies; however, educating people to overcome implicit bias is a difficult task, and it

is possible that this endeavor will not be successful. On the other hand, treatments that aim to

eliminate or restrict the operation of implicit or explicit prejudice may be less successful at

decreasing gaps in racial outcomes than policies that aim at lowering or eliminating

problematic outcomes for all people, regardless of race. This may be the case because

policies aim at lowering or eliminating problematic outcomes for all people, regardless of

race.

Pickett, J. T. (2019). Public opinion and criminal justice policy: Theory and research. Annual

Review of Criminology, 2, 405-428.

This article indicates that public opinion has an effect on judicial decisions, the policy

on the use of the death sentence, the budget for the correctional system, and the number of

people who are incarcerated. Additionally, research on the elements that have influenced

popular support for criminal punishment throughout the course of history are discussed and

analyzed. The vast majority of this material comes from sources that are not associated with

our line of work. There are two different reasons why someone could be unable to see the

relationship between opinion and policy. In the field of political science, significant headway

Annotated bibliography 5

has been made in the study of public policy sentiment, parallel opinion movements,

majoritarian congruence, and dynamic representation. Unfamiliarity is one of these

contributing elements. Cross-sectional research and our fixation with comparing the amounts

of support offered by various inquiries (global vs specialized) and under varying settings are

two examples of this phenomenon (uninformed versus informed). Because of these results,

we have created an artificial peak in our knowledge of public opinion and the link between

policy and opinion.

Rappaport, J. (2020). Some doubts about” democratizing” criminal justice. The University of

Chicago Law Review, 87(3), 711-814.

The problems with the American criminal justice system are so well-known that they

don’t need to be mentioned again: racial disparities in incarceration and police who seem to

anger and hurt the communities they are sworn to serve and protect. Because the underlying

causes are so complicated, it is hard to diagnose and even harder to fix these kinds of big

social problems. There are many “democratizers” in the legal academy, and they all point to

the same problem: the loss of local democratic power in favor of a bureaucratic “machinery”

that is disconnected from public values and the local population. Neighborhood police, who

are “of” and “responsible to” the community, are hesitant to draw their weapons or detain a

local teen just because they have a hunch about where he is. But our most powerful

institutions are made up of bureaucrats and experts who are driven by less-than-ideal rewards.

The people who want to make criminal justice more democratic say that the influence of the

local laity is balancing, equalizing, and, in the end, legitimate. Participatory democracy can’t

fix the criminal justice system on its own, but it is our best hope.

Annotated bibliography 6

Papalia, N., Shepherd, S. M., Spivak, B., Luebbers, S., Shea, D. E., & Fullam, R. (2019).

Disparities in criminal justice system responses to first-time juvenile offenders

according to indigenous status. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(8), 1067-1087.

This research examined how law enforcement responded to 53,632 first-time juvenile

offenders in Australia based on their Indigenous background, gender, and age. Indigenous

offenders are more likely than non-Indigenous offenders to acquire a court summons after

their first crime, even after adjusting for gender, age, and the number of charges filed. Age,

gender, and native status had minimal impact. Offenders with a history of one to two violent

offenses and those who had their first experience with law enforcement after the Young

Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) less commonly received court summonses. Indigenous children

should not join the criminal justice system without community-based early intervention.

Annotated bibliography 7

Reference

Cashmore, J., Taylor, A., & Parkinson, P. (2020). Fourteen-year trends in the criminal justice

response to child sexual abuse reports in New South Wales. Child maltreatment, 25(1), 85-

95.

Harrendorf, S. (2018). Prospects, problems, and pitfalls in comparative analyses of criminal justice

data. Crime and Justice, 47(1), 159-207.

Kovera, M. B. (2019). Racial disparities in the criminal justice system: Prevalence, causes, and a

search for solutions. Journal of Social Issues, 75(4), 1139-1164.

Papalia, N., Shepherd, S. M., Spivak, B., Luebbers, S., Shea, D. E., & Fullam, R. (2019). Disparities

in criminal justice system responses to first-time juvenile offenders according to indigenous

status. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(8), 1067-1087.

Pickett, J. T. (2019). Public opinion and criminal justice policy: Theory and research. Annual Review

of Criminology, 2, 405-428

Rappaport, J. (2020). Some doubts about” democratizing” criminal justice. The University of

Chicago Law Review, 87(3), 711-814.