Criminal Law Purpose

Purposes of Criminal Law
Introduction
The question as to what the criminal law aims to accomplish is one that cannot be easily answered as criminal law has a wide variety of purposes that work individually to manage different aspects of society. These purposes are split into two categories, instrumental and non-instrumental that together aim to accomplish a healthy balance between justice and equality for both criminals and citizens (Daly 2012, 390). In saying that, criminal law does serve a number of purposes that vary considerably in regards to their effectiveness and importance as well as who they are targeted towards, but ultimately these varied purposes all work towards the same goal that criminal law seeks to accomplish. This essay will
There is very much a romantic view of what people believe deterrence mechanisms do to deter potential offenders and the wider community for committing crimes as well as how effective they really are (Kennedy 2009, 10-12). As pointed out above, the idea of deterrence is based on rational choice theory, yet this theory has not taken into account the irrational side to crimes i.e. those that are instinctive or unexpected (e.g. king hits). These sort of crimes have been seen to be highly unfazed by the notion of deterrence because of the unexpectedness of the situation (Sentencing Advisory Council 2011). Studies by Ghasemi (2015) as well as Buonanno and Montolio (2008) concluded that deterrence variables have little to no influence on individuals who commit violent crimes and minimal influence of those committing non-violent offences (e.g. property crimes). Additionally, a study by McGrath (2009) questioned juveniles on their experience dealing with the CJS and whether they found it a deterrent. The study concluded that juveniles who felt stigmatised by the experience and had prior convictions did not find it a deterrent and were likely to reoffend in the future, whereas those who do not feel stigmatised and accepted their sentence felt
Originally retribution was understood as methods of vengeance and revenge, dealt with in villages or between just the victim’s family and offender’s family in private matter. These matters usually (depending on the severity) settled with compensation of money or asset (Johnstone and Ward 2010, 30-32). With the rise of the Crown’s involvement and criminal law institutions, the understanding of private matters transitioned into a state-controlled matter with set solutions for offences. This, in turn, introduced this notion of public retribution dealt with by the state (Johnstone and Ward 2010, 35-36). In today’s society victims receive retribution in the way of their offenders being punished for their wrongdoings i.e. through incarceration or community services and in some cases through money compensation (Konigs 2013). Retribution is seen as a non-instrumental purpose of criminal law as it is protecting society from itself through a system of public justice i.e. keeping people from seeking out revenge/retaliation and beginning a cycle of violence (Daly 2012, 389-390). In regards to the importance of retribution to criminal law, without some form of retribution, people would result back to the notion of vengeance and take matters into their own hands (Carlsmith 2006). Additionally, if there is no appropriate form of retribution, victims and the wider