The Ethics and Dilemmas of Preventive Detention

<p>There has been a considerable increase in the use of preventive sentencing in New Zealand since the mid-1980s. It has become widely accepted across Western society that preventive sentencing and supervision regimes are needed to protect the public from dangerous offenders. This thesis examines whether the development and use of preventive sentencing regimes is ethically justified, and if not what changes need to be made in order to alleviate some of the ethical dilemmas associated with indeterminate sentencing regimes. Preventive detention practices in Australia the UK and the US are reviewed to establish general practice regarding the development of legislation, use of risk assessment and the detention of dangerous offenders. This is compared to New Zealand practices, through research and analysis of three preventive detainee case files. The files confirm that the ethics of preventive detention has shifted from protecting the rights of individual offenders to protecting the public from them.</p>

The Ethics and Dilemmas of Preventive Detention

<p>There has been a considerable increase in the use of preventive sentencing in New Zealand since the mid-1980s. It has become widely accepted across Western society that preventive sentencing and supervision regimes are needed to protect the public from dangerous offenders. This thesis examines whether the development and use of preventive sentencing regimes is ethically justified, and if not what changes need to be made in order to alleviate some of the ethical dilemmas associated with indeterminate sentencing regimes. Preventive detention practices in Australia the UK and the US are reviewed to establish general practice regarding the development of legislation, use of risk assessment and the detention of dangerous offenders. This is compared to New Zealand practices, through research and analysis of three preventive detainee case files. The files confirm that the ethics of preventive detention has shifted from protecting the rights of individual offenders to protecting the public from them.</p>

22. Specific Types of Sentence and the Plea in Mitigation

This chapter explains specific types of sentence and provide guidance on how a defence solicitor might prepare and deliver a plea in mitigation. It discusses when discretionary custodial sentence can be imposed; custody between the ages 18 and 21; length of custodial sentence; suspended sentence of imprisonment; concluding remarks on discretionary custodial sentences; fixed length sentences; sentencing dangerous offenders; community sentences; community sentences under the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 2003; guilty plea credit and community orders; enforcement of community orders under the CJA 2003 in the event of breach; deferring sentence; fines; compensation orders; conditional discharge; absolute discharge; bind over; ancillary orders; structuring a plea in mitigation; advocacy and the plea in mitigation; and professional conduct.

25. Prosecuting Young Offenders

Where a prosecution is commenced against a child aged 10 to 13 years or against a young person aged 14 to 17 years, the general rule is that he will be tried and sentenced in the youth court. The youth court adopts more informal and less adversarial procedures to deal with the needs and vulnerabilities of young defendants. However, there are exceptional situations (grave offences and dangerous offenders) where they will be tried in the Crown Court or when jointly charged with an adult sometimes in the adult magistrates’ court. This chapter discusses the rules for deciding where a young person is to be tried; the rules for trying a young person in the Crown Court; the rules for trying a young person in the adult magistrates’ court; the young defendant’s right to court bail; and the procedure in the youth court.

Governing Through Remorse: The Discursive Framing of Dangerous Offenders in Canada

This article examines the emotional terrain and discursive frames that govern the constitution of those subject to the “dangerous offender” (DO) designation in Canada. Focusing on the emotion of remorse, we discuss four narratives involving individuals who went through the DO hearing process, gaining significant media attention. Asking what role Indigeneity and other factors play in how the media discuss the emotional comportment of DOs, we examine the persistence of particular discursive frames in these narratives, and the counter-frames that challenge or disrupt dominant understandings of what it is appropriate to feel. The expression of emotion, and its interpretation, can be critical to the outcome of cases, criminalized people/survivor stigmatization, and normalization of punishment and may also motivate community mobilization and prompt policy change. Yet, emotion, and how it may be performed and interpreted differently, is not well understood or discussed in these narratives.

An Exploration of Correctional Officer Victimization

The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the often-overlooked victimization experienced by correctional staff, specifically corrections officers. Corrections officers are particularly vulnerable to on-the-job victimization as they interact daily with potentially dangerous offenders in often crowded conditions. This chapter examines the types of victimization experienced by corrections officers, the personal characteristics of those victimized, the effect of prison context on correctional officer victimization, and the toll of victimization on COs. Lastly, it provides several policy implications to promote correctional officer safety.

25. Prosecuting Young Offenders

Where a prosecution is commenced against a child aged 10 to 13 years or against a young person aged 14 to 17 years, the general rule is that he will be tried and sentenced in the youth court. The youth court adopts more informal and less adversarial procedures to deal with the needs and vulnerabilities of young defendants. However, there are exceptional situations (grave offences and dangerous offenders) where they will be tried in the Crown Court or when jointly charged with an adult sometimes in the adult magistrates’ court. This chapter discusses the rules for deciding where a young person is to be tried; the rules for trying a young person in the Crown Court; the rules for trying a young person in the adult magistrates’ court; the young defendant’s right to court bail; and the procedure in the youth court.