police culture

Police Culture Number 8 powerpoint
(Definition)The knowledge, attitudes, expectations, behaviours and rituals that exist amongst police, or which more broadly, characterize a police force.
Police Culture affects: how police see themselves and their role as police • how they see the world around them, how they police (how policing is performed). Differences exist within and between police cultures. Police officers, as individuals, will not all equally adopt or adhere to the dominant police culture. Police culture cannot be divorced from the social, political, economic, legal and organizational context of policing. Police cultures can change.
Police Culture: Characteristics Sense of Mission: ‘the thin blue line’ A crucial, dangerous but thankless job ,Not just a job, but a way of life
• Policing thought of as protecting the weak from the strong (not at all political, relating to power within society).
• ‘Us versus them’ mentality evident Law enforcers and law abiders versus law breakers
Action Orientated: ‘Real Policing’ Emphasis on ‘real policing’ as that which occurs in the public sphere and which involves dangerous or potentially dangerous situations and confrontations.
(ie. responding to reports of crime, raids, shoot outs, car pursuits and so on).Greatest status attached to Homicide Squads and Tactical Response Units. Cynicism and Pragmatism Required to obey law, yet see law as limiting and naïve Must go beyond the law, to do their job and get results. Favour expedience over due process These characteristics of police culture have been related to various negative behaviours: Unlawful detention
- The improper use of force
- Breaches of proper interview processes - Corruption
- Dismissal of some crimes/victims
- Commission of some offences Isolation and Solidarity Feel different from other people based on work and work-related experiences. Sense of isolation intensified by problems socializing with non-police due to others reactions, difficulties turning off, shift work. Closest bonds forged with other police Very loyal to, and protective of, other officers MasculinistDominance of masculinist perspectives and practices. Reiner has described police culture as an ‘old – 
fashioned world of machismo’. ‘Real policing’ associated with confrontation, physical strength, danger Male-dominated composition of police forces has contributed to this. Racism Widely documented evidence of suspicion, hostility and prejudice in police dealings with racial and ethnic minorities. Evidenced in well-known instances (ie. Rodney King) through to everyday policing practices. Once again partly attributable to historical composition of police forces. Also relates to their role acting on behalf of states to administer racially- 
based laws and policies (segregation, removal of indigenous children).
7. Conservatism
• Social and politically conservative. Emphasis upon maintaining the status quo. Once again, partly a consequence of historical composition and role of police

Approaches to policing and the community Number 9 Traditional Policing- (as developed with rise of modern police forces).
Community Policing (developed over past 30, largely in response to concerns raised over the methods and outcomes of traditional policing.)
Traditional Policing: Police seen as separate from the community ,Role of the police is to respond to crime. ,Police effectiveness is measured by changes in crime rates and arrest rates. Concerned primarily with the policing of public sphere, rather than private sphere. Use of force is viewed as legitimate and necessary to 
preservation of order – militarization of police over past 40 y ears with rise of law and order.
Community Policing The development of community policing was based upon recognition that a lack of familiarity and respect between police and specific communities sometimes resulted in negative and repressive policing practices being used, and the fostering of mutual suspicion and antagonism between police and communities. Young people,, gays and lesbians, indigenous people, ethnic and racial minorities recognized as particularly affected.
What is Community Policing? No universally accepted definition of community policing. As an approach to policing, it can best be described as consisting of a broad range of strategies designed to improve policing by connecting police more closely to local communities and supporting relationships. Includes programs such as:  Neighbourhood Watch  Crime Stoppers
 Blue-light Discos School Education Programs Development of specific community policing units
The appointment of Liaison Officers (such as: YLOs /
MLOs ) and committees involving police and community members .Formalised relationships with other community agencies
(for example, sexual assault and domestic violence services, ambulance services, welfare service).Reform of procedures for dealing with some types of offences – SOCIT (Secual Offences and Child Abuse Investigation Teams Increased police presence, visibility and availability (for example, police on bicycles, shop fronts) Use of media to involve public in policing and crime prevention Police organising and hosting activities and programs – particularly for young people (such as the Ropes Program) Police learning and demonstrating the ‘art of negotiation’ with difficult groups Police taking a more gentle/balanced approach to policing Community Policing Compared to the traditional approach to policing, community policing Aims to be more pro-active and pre-emptive. More concerned with peacekeeping and conflict resolution than crime fighting
• Based on complexities of local context and on building relationships Envisages police as part of the community and as needing to be responsive and answerable to it.
Community Policing: Benefits to Police - Greater efficiency / more effective knowledge, gathering Less stressful / more predictable Increased community legitimacy / support Increased community willingness to provide info Increased responsibility placed on community role in crime fighting Improved image of police
Community Policing Ideal Benefits Two way exchange of cultural understanding Better responses to crime and treatment of victims Less resistance to police / greater trust of police Less suspicion / Greater awareness of the cultural differences that may lead 
to misunderstandings 
Problems Increased police presence & surveillance (even during activities) Power imbalance still intact (and not addressed) therefore how much of a 
genuine two-way exchange is possible Police tend to place greater expectation of change on the community than 
on themselves – still see the community as the problem and seem to have 
difficulty reflecting on their own role Improves police image more than substance Localised impacts - overall police approach & culture still intact Perhaps ‘in effect different tactics to exercise police authority to the same ends’? (Smith & Reside 2009: 2) in Victoria as elsewhere, we see aspects of both approaches to policing being used.
Community Policing: Critical Issues
Police Culture ,The persistence of conservative e police cultures still threatens to undermine the importance and effectiveness of community policing strategies. Still a danger that they are not seen as ‘real policing’ and that those who undertake community policing f unction’s are marginalized within police forces.
Police Discretion:
This refers to the power police officers exercise in the performance of their duty. Police continually exercise discretion every time they decide what they will do in the course of their duties. Often there is considerable scope available to them to make choices. Discretion may be exercised so that practices fall within the law, but it can also be exercised with more negative results. For example, it can contribute to over-policing and under policing. Police culture is one of many factors that can affect how police exercise their discretion.
Community Policing: Critical Issues The Composition of Police Forces, The need to increase diversity in police forces (in terms of gender, ethnic background and so on) via the adoption of inclusive recruitment strategies continues to be exist if police forces are to be reflective of the communities they police. A lack of diversity threatens to undermine community-policing strategies. The pace and degree of diversification varies between police forces, but is considered important as a means of counteracting the negative aspects of police culture and enhancing community-police relations.
Community Policing: Critical Issues Resource Issues Lack of adequate ongoing funding – often programs are expensive, rely on short term grants Difficulties in attracting sufficient recruits
• Lack of adequate training for recruit and police generally.

Jude’s and judging (sentencing) Number 10 PowerPoint

What is Sentencing? Sentencing refers a specific stage in the criminal justice process. It is when a penalty is determined and handed down to an individual who has either plead guilty or been found guilty of an offence by a court. In considering sentencing, it is important to note that it is part of a much broader process and that it is affected by what precedes it, as well as what is anticipated as following on from it. Sentencing stands between prosecution and the administration of punishment .
Why Sentencing Matters There are two crucial reasons: In sentencing individuals, courts are exercising the power of the state. They can deny a person their liberty, and in some places, can deprive a person of his or her life. Sentencing is crucial to the law’s appearance and to its acceptance.
Factors that contribute to making sentencing a contentious and controversial issue The adversarial system As the quotes evidence, sentencing is the end point in a process that involves a range of players, often with different emotions and standpoints. These tend to be intensified by the pitting of one side against the other. Criminal Cases = the State vs the Accused (Defendant)Claims are made that the law can produce outcomes that are both correct and just. But what justice is remains subject to different views.
2. Perceptions of the Judiciary Judges who are responsible for sentencing are often viewed as aloof, elite, and as out of touch with the community. Controversial comments by members of the judiciary in some cases, and also instances of sentencing that appear less harsh than they might be, have tended to exacerbate that view. Important to note that in Australia, judges cannot in the public domain individually explain themselves or their decisions. They are not allowed to speak to the media about cases – the effect of that is to again reinforce a view that they are distant from the rest of the community and uncaring.
3. Changing and not-so-transparent processes Development of technocratic justice Practices intended to promote the efficiency of court systems but which may result in justice not so readily being ‘seen to be done’. For example, diverting cases through specific channels so that they do not come to court (PERIN Court) 
Great use of plea bargaining – process that occurs outside the formal courtroom and reduces the need for long and expensive trials.
The judiciary and the courts have constantly been depicted as lenient; A harsher approach to sentencing has been advocated as an essential response to dealing with crime; As a consequence, penalties have been increased and judicial iscretion decreased .Examples: Rise of mandatory sentencing laws since early 1990’s; Gradual removal of suspended sentences from the Victorian sentencing regime
The adoption of ‘Law and order’ strategies has also placed unprecedented demands on the system, increasing the numbers of people going through the system, creating backlogs, and fuelling questions about the efficiency of the system.
5. The Victim Rights Movement This development partly reflects the lack of input that victim’s previously had in relation to criminal justice matters, and their perceptions or experiences of injustice. The Victims Rights Movement has contributed to the introduction of various reforms in courts Victim Impact Statements
Changes to rules of evidence and procedure Have also pushed for harsher sentencing, in some instances in the wake of high profile cases. The emergence of Victimology as a discrete area within Criminology is further evidence of the greater focus on victims and victimization.
6. The Rise of Mass Media. Over 200 years, punishment was gradually removed form the public to the private sphere. One consequence of this is that now it is at the sentencing stage that justice is most obviously seen to be doneornot one. Today, rather than witnessing the dispensing of justice first-hand, werely on the media. Differing Views within the Community Sentencing is intended to reflect community standards, however ,what counts as an appropriate punishment - like what counts as justice generally - is not commonly agreed upon. Nor is there agreement over what the primary purpose of sentencing should be. Sentencing can therefore never accurately or entirely reflect every individuals view.
2. Prosecution Processes
There are variations in prosecution and sentencing processes across jurisdictions, according to the constitution of different criminal justice systems and the way crimes are categorized. Distinctions are generally drawn between crimes in terms of their nature and seriousness These factors generally determine the court a case will be heard in and the possible sanctions that may be handed out if the defendant person pleads or is found to be guilty.
3. Types of offences: Victoria
Summary Offences:
Heard before a single Magistrate, no jury
Traffic offences, public disturbances, theft, some kinds of assault Tried by a police prosecutor representing the State Indictable Offences:
Tried before a Judge (County Court) or Justice (Supreme Court), with or without jury
Most serious criminal offences – murder, manslaughter, sexual offences, arson, culpable driving, commercial crime and fraud
Tried by a Crown prosecutor or solicitor from the Office of Public
Prosecutions Indictable Offences tried Summarily (hybrid):
Less serious indict table offences
Maximum $100,000 or 5 years imprisonment
Obtaining property by deception, handling stolen goods, selling drugs, obtaining unregistered firearm Tried by a police prosecutor representing the State
4. Fairness and Trials
The Fairness principle was enunciated in the Dietrich case in 1992 when Mason CJ and McHugh J held that “the right of an accused to receive a fair trial according to law is a fundamental element of our criminal justice s ys tem” Rules regarding a fair trial include a presumption of innocence, issues as to the standard and burden of proof, right to remain silence and provisions on the exclusion or inclusion of certain evidence.
5. Aggravating and Mitigating factors
Aggravating factors (these increase culpability) and may include offence being committed as part of a a group, the vulnerability of victim, premeditation, breach of trust).
Mitigating factors (reduce culpability) and may include remorse, offender’s youth, absence of prior convictions, testifying against co-accused.
6. Sentencing principles
Over a period of time the appellate courts have developed precedents to guide sentencing discretion. These include: The parsimony principle – ensures that the sentence be the least severe required to meeting the purposes of sentencing The disparity principle - requires that the sentencing of a co-defendant needs to be considered Proportionality principle – requires proportional relationship between the seriousness of the crime and the punishment
7. Factors influencing Sentencing
The penalty allowable under law for that offence The court in which the case is heard
Whether the accused pleads guilty or not guilty. Judicial consideration of
◦ aggravating and mitigating factors, ◦ sentencing aims and principles,
◦ sentencing tariffs (patterns)
◦ guideline judgments
8. Sentencing Principles - Victoria
1. Just Punishment
2. Deterrence (General and Specific) 3. Rehabilitation
4. Denunciation
5.Community Protection
(1) Just Punishment:
Punishing the offender to an extent and in a manner which is just in all of the circumstances Exam p l e:
• George Williams (2007)
• One count trafficking commercial quantity of methamphetamines • Sentence: 41⁄2 years, minimum 20 months imprisonment ‘The sentence imposed must be moderated due to your ill health, and the hardship that may occasion to you in the prison
system, but it does not in any way eliminate the need for appropriate punishment...I intend to impose a sentence of imprisonment to be served immediately. To impose a wholly suspended sentence, I would have to be of the view that a sentence of three years is sufficient punishment for the offence that you have committed, and I do not believe that to be correct’
(2) Deterrence:
Deterring the offender (specific deterrence) and deterring other persons (general deterrence) from committing offences of the same or as similar character Exam p l e:
• Robert Farquhar son (2007)
• Three counts of murder
• Sentence: Life with no parole (later over-turned) ‘The protection of the law arrives too late for these three children. However, punishment of the offender is justified and hopefully deterrence of others will flow from that punishment. That is the operational premise upon which the principle of general deterrence is founded’
(3) Denunciation: To denounce the type of conduct engaged in by the offender Example:
• Bao Huynh (2010)
• Intentionally causing serious injury – stabbed wife 6 times • Sentenced: 7 years, 5 years minimum imprisonment ‘I take into account the need to pass a sentence which will act in denunciation of your conduct...The sentence imposed must signal to the community that acts of violence, including domestic violence, are not tolerated and warrant punishment’
4. Rehabilitation: the sentence must allow for conditions where by rehabilitation may be facilitated Example:
• Cameron Dawson (20), Nathan Stevens (21) (2010)
• Assault causing serious injury
• Sentences: 12 month CBO, 80 hours unpaid community service, alcohol treatment,$700fine Great emphasis can be placed on rehabilitation. In this case, both young offenders have good prospects of growing into well qualified, law-abiding, contributing members of society. It is far better for those prospects to be encouraged ,rather than have them detained in custody with the possibility of their chance of rehabilitation being reduced’
5) Protection: To protect the community from the offender Example:
• Leigh Robinson (2010)
• Murder of his girlfriend
• Sentence: Life without parole ‘In determining the length of your sentence I must regard protection of the community from you as the principal purpose for which the sentence is imposed...There is a pressing need to permanently protect the community from you’
Sentencing Options
Custodial orders – Imprisonment Periodic Detention
Home detention Suspended sentences
Supervised release - probation
- community based order supervised bonds
Monetary penalties - fine
- compensation or restitution Unsupervised release –
- recognizance or good behavior bond admonition and discharge
- dismissal without conviction

Prison and punishment Number 11 PowerPoint
Factors taken into account at sentencing Factors relating to criminal justice system the nature of the offenc e and the law’ s relating to it, the power of the partic ular c ourt that has heard the c ase, relevant sentencing patterns and guideline judgements.
• General sentencing principles ie. proportionality, parsimony 
b) Other factors that relate to the offender
ie Offender’s culpability, guilty plea, remorse, history of offending 
Aggravating factors: increase culpability (level of premeditation, group attack, vulnerability of victim) 
Mitigating factors: reduce culpability (remorse, age, prior abuse)
Factors taken into account at sentencing Victorian Sentencing Principles
Deterrence – general and specific
Rehabilitation – of primary importance when sentencing youth
Community Safety -Underpinned by notions of risk/ dangerousness
Denunciation –Expression of community’s disapproval of the crime.
Just Punishment– Punishment to be ‘just’ having taken all of the factors into account. Expression of state’s right to inflict reciprocal punishment on an offender.
Different Types of Punishments Punishments vary across jurisdictions and can be categorized in different ways.
The most common forms of punishment are:
a) Monetary orders (fines)
b) Non-Custodial Orders Various types of community-based orders (may include: curfews and restrictions on movement and behaviour; requirements relating to reporting; drug testing; treatment/counselling; doing community work
c) Custodial Sentences
• Imprisonment (Full time or periodic), Home Detention,
The Aims of Punishment Generally, punishments are justified by their aims - what they are intended to achieve. Consequentialis t Aims (focus on practical ends): • Deterrence
• Rehabilitation
• Incapacitation Expressive Aims (largely symbolic in nature) • Denunciation
• Retribution/ Just Deserts
The rise of‘ Risk’: DiscourseandPractice
The concept of risk come to dominate discourses around crime and punishment over the past 20 years.It has come to shape priorities and practices in a host of areas that focus on people and social ‘problems’:
Social Work
Physical health
Mental health
Drug and alcohol
Crime Prevention
Corrections
Defining ‘Risk’ Oxford English Dictionary defines risk as:
‘(Exposure to) the possibility of loss, injury, or other adverse or unwelcome circumstance; a chance or situationinvolving such apossibility.’ Mathematically: RISK = (probability of a harmful event occurring) X
(estimate of the harm that will be caused by it)
The Concept of Risk In the late C20th, we see a shift in emphasis in the way that ‘risk’ is regarded and utilized. The emphasis now extends beyond reducing the harm caused by a negative event, to reducing or eliminating the likelihood of that event occurring in the first place. A “Preventative logic’ now dominates much thinking in relation to crime and punishment. It has contributed to harsher penalties being imposed, increased surveillance and at time the preventative detention of individuals. (Consider legislation concerning sex offenders)
Deploying Risk
There are various ways in which ‘risk’ and the methods to reduce or eliminate it come into play in dealing with crime.
Identification and intervention at various levels
Risk assessments
Programs in prisons
Electronic Monitoring
Restrictions on community orders
Data collection and registration
Dissemination of information to public via media 
and WEB
‘Social policing and punishment’ – vigilantism.
Limiting of Parole and suspended sentences
Critical Concerns - Risk
1. RISK a) The demand that society can be protected from harm, is at the end of the day, impossible.
Life is risky.
To what lengths are we willing to go to contain risk?
b) Particular concern have been raised in relation to trying to predict ‘risk’ or the ‘dangerousness’ of an offender.
Measuring this is notoriously unreliable, with success prediction ranging from about 30% to 50%.
Critical Concerns - Risk
c) Undermining of Law The difficulties associated with prediction are even more serious when the measures that can be used to reduce risk are considered .Some basics of legal principles and punishment that have stood since the enlightenment period, are at risk of being undermined: • the principle that no-one should be imprisoned without having committed an offence• the notion of proportionality the balance of power between the state and the individual citizen, enshrined through due process and protection of civil rights.

Engaging critically with crime and criminology PowerPoint 13

Our aim in CCR has been to introduce you to criminology as:
- a discipline that is concerned with crime, criminality, criminalization and the criminal justice system
- a discipline that deals with some of the most difficult and emotive issues in contemporary society
‘Are we experiencing a crisis of law and order, or a crisis of perspective?’ (Hogg and Brown, 1998)
- Is there a real crisis of ‘law and order’ or are we experiencing a crisis in the way we think about and respond to crime?
- Are ‘law and order’ policies addressing the ‘crime problem’ or making it worse?
How canweaccount for criminology’s failureto ‘solve’ the ‘problem’ of crime?
Is this a sign of:
- criminology’s limitations? - crime’s complexity?
- the futility of this goal?
Such questions point to the importance of engaging critically with crime and criminology
1. To engage with criminology in any meaningful way it is necessary to look beyond the assumptions and stereotypes that so often dominate popular thinking
2. Necessary to recognise that criminology is not a static or unified discipline
- it consists of a range of different and competing perspectives.
What crime is and how it is to be explained and responded to is a subject of furious debate within criminology
3. Necessary to recognise that criminology, as a discipline and a practice, is socially
constr ucted
- it is a product of its social, economic, political and historical context
- it is a product of human endeavour
4. Need to keep in mind that criminological perspectives have consequences for criminal justice and social policy
Criminological theories are important because they guide criminal justice practice
5. Criminological perspectives need to be open to being critically evaluated. The interrogationof criminological knowledge, its assumptions, practices and effects is a necessary and ongoing process
6. Reflexivity, the process of interrogating one’s own position and practice is crucial at an individual level. Criminologists must be alert to the implications of their positions and actions.
7. Criminologists need to be awareof the power that they hold as ‘experts’ and the potential that carries for use and abuse.