The effect of complainant age on outcomes in the criminal justice system: case tracking from report to conviction

 The thesis explored child sexual abuse in the criminal justice system and how victim age predicted case outcomes, including disclosures, charges and convictions. The findings highlighted that adolescent victims may experience unique challenges. Further, the relationships between victim age, case characteristics and evidence are crucial to explaining case outcomes.

Correctional psychology and the desistance paradigm: commentary for the special issue of Criminal justice and behavior

Let me begin this commentary by suggesting that many of the ideas contained in this special issue will be important to the future of correctional psychology. Although each of the authors offer different perspectives on the role that the criminal justice system has to play in the process of desistance from crime, they all identify the importance of a valueoriented analysis to effective offender rehabilitation. Their focus is on promoting desistance at all points of the justice process; from how the legal system can promote therapeutic outcomes through to the provision of post-release support services and the need for community engagement. By approaching the tasks of both rehabilitation and reintegration from a values perspective, they have been able to identify a range of novel and innovative approaches that have the potential to make a real difference. Even more encouragingly, these draw on resources that may already be available to correctional psychologists and yet are often underutilized. In addition, the confidence, and indeed the optimism, expressed in these articles provides a refreshing counter to suggestions that contemporary correctional practice has become pre-occupied with the need to “manage” offenders and for professionals to focus on fulfilling their administrative obligations (see Hardy, 2014).

Identifying the characteristics of child sexual abuse cases that exit the criminal justice system before the forensic interview

Most child sexual abuse cases do not result in conviction; rather, they result in attrition at an earlier point in the system. Although research has looked at case characteristics associated with attrition at later stages of the system (i.e. the laying of charges and prosecution stages), to date, no research has studied the case characteristics associated with attrition as soon as a report has been made to authorities. The aim of this study was to determine the case characteristics (child complainant, suspect and additional case characteristics) associated with attrition when a case first enters the criminal justice system before a forensic interview is conducted. All child sexual abuse incidents reported to police in one jurisdiction of Australia in 2011 were examined. Three case characteristics were found to predict attrition: previous disclosure, abuse frequency and the child complainant’s age. Specifically, cases were more likely to result in attrition when the child had not previously disclosed the abuse to an adult, the abuse was a single incident rather than repeated, and a curvilinear relationship was found for child age. Cases involving children aged 7–12 years were less likely to result in attrition than cases involving younger (0–6 years) and older (13–15 years) children. This information should assist professionals and researchers in developing interventions to reduce the attrition when necessary during this early stage of the criminal justice system.

Queer penalities: the criminal justice paradigm in lesbian and gay anti-violence politics

Building upon the renewed attention to the ways in which criminology may be ‘queered’ (or not), this article explores how a criminal justice paradigm has influenced lesbian and gay politics through an investigation of anti-homophobic research and lobbying focused on violence and harassment. It asks: What place does criminal justice occupy within sexual politics? Using the Australian state of Victoria as a case study, the article examines how the lesbian and gay anti-violence movement has utilized criminal justice theories, methodologies and approaches to explain and attempt to remedy ‘homophobic hate’. It provides three inter-connected examples of the permeation of criminal justice logics: (1) the victimization survey method, (2) the focus on police reform, and (3) elements of a punitive public discourse surrounding homophobic hate crime. These examples are nevertheless complicated by the persistence of institutionalized violence and state failure to ‘protect’ lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) lives. These discursive practices contribute to ‘queer penalities’, a term used to describe the ways in which lesbian and gay movements shape and contest the social meaning of terms such as ‘crime’, victimization and punishment.

Is a 24 hour ban such a bad thing?

A key element in Australian policing in recent years is the growth of police-imposed discretionary summary justice. The rise and impact of on-the-spot fines, infringement notices, exclusion orders and move-on powers enable police-initiated resolutions and punishments to be imposed, often without legal or judicial intervention. These operational policing mechanisms reflect underlying pressures to reduce costs, ease the burden on the court system, and speed up the decision-making process, but when viewed from a human rights perspective the potential consequences are significant. Focusing on the legislative development of banning notices in Victoria, this article highlights the impact of such a police-imposed punishment upon individual due process procedural protections. Banning notices deny the recipient the right to conduct a defence, undermine the presumption of innocence, and conflate notions of pre-emption and punishment. The rhetoric upon which the banning notice legislation is predicated obviates meaningful scrutiny of the diminution of individual rights that are implicit in its enactment. A perceived ‘need’ to control disorder and ‘re-balance’ justice to prioritise community protection is used to legitimise any consequential impact upon the principles of criminal law, due process and human rights.

“People’s law” and restorative justice: the success of circle sentencing in New South Wales

Informal sentencing procedures in remote Indigenous communities of Australia have been occurring for some time, but it was in the late 1990s that formalization of the practice began in urban areas with the advent of Indigenous sentencing and circle courts. These circle courts emerged primarily to address the over-representation and incarceration of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system. The first Indigenous urban court was assembled in Port Adelaide, South Australia in June 1999 and was named the Nunga Court. Courts emerging since in other states are based on the Nunga Court model, although they have been adapted to suit local conditions. The practice of circle sentencing was introduced in New South Wales (NSW) in Nowra in February 2002.

New criminal sanctions-inflicting pain through the denial of employment and education

Imprisonments and fines are the standard sanctions employed by most western countries in punishing offenders.  Where neither of these penalties is appropriate, the courts normally have a variety of indeterminate sanctions at their disposal.  However the general effectiveness of these sanctions is questionable.  This paper argues that the criminal justice system has been too slow and unimaginative in developing efficient and effective methods of punishing offenders.  There are ways of inflicting pain on offenders that do not encroach on their liberty or affect their material wealth.  It is suggested that new sentencing options should include the annulment or suspension of an offenders academic qualifications and the making of orders preventing an offender from working or being enrolled in an educational or vocational pursuit.

What sort of mandatory penalties should we have?

The argument in favour of a widespread fixed penalty regime - adopting a primary rationale for punishment would facilitate a more coherent and exacting approach to sentencing - the central objections against fixed penalties are that they are too severe and lead to unfairness because they are unable to incorporate all the relevant sentencing variables - by adopting a utilitarian ethic as the primary rationale for punishment, these problems can be circumvented - no utilitarian justification for disproportionate punishment, and penalties should not exceed the seriousness of the offence - no foundation for most sentencing considerations - by disregarding irrelevant considerations, the remaining can be incorporated into a fixed penalty system - the way would then be open for a coherent sentencing law system in which criminal justice is governed by pre-determined rules and principles as opposed to the intuition of sentencers.

Crime stories: posnerian pragmatism, Rawlsian pure procedural justice, and the fictional problem

There are many different ways in which law and truth may be said to be related. It is perhaps in the criminal trial that connections between them are of most significance. An orthodox way of describing a criminal trial is that the criminal procedure is seeking to establish the truth concerning some past event, and that success of the procedure is measured by how close its outcome converges with that truth. Criminal justice presents the community with challenging dilemmas in this regard, such as those arising from the notion of double jeopardy. This paper discusses the Rawlsian notions of 'imperfect', 'perfect' and 'pure' procedural justice, and suggests against Rawls that it is pure procedural justice that best represents what we want from a criminal justice system. Good procedure makes good criminal law. A comparison is made with the writings of Habermas and Posner, and given that pure procedural justice eschews transcendental truths, some brief comments are made on the convergence of that position with the realm of the fictional.

Models of understanding criminal behaviour and the sentencing process : a place for criminological theory?

The method by which a sentencing court understands the reasons for the commission of a criminal offence is crucial to the framing of the ultimate disposition imposed in all of the circumstances of the offence and the offender. Under Australian criminal law the insights of criminology are rarely. if ever. used in the discharge of the sentencing function. In particular, theories of crime causation evident in schools of criminological thought are not relied upon even though ostensibly such theories would appear to have a degree of relevance to the sentencing task. In this article, a short sketch of contemporary criminological theory is provided. This is followed by a survey of the use of criminological theory under Australian criminal law and what role, if any, it plays in contemporary  criminal justice administration. Finally, consideration is given as to whether or not criminological theory would be of assistance in the discharge of the  sentencing task in relation to not only understanding the reasons for the commission of the offence by the offender, but also in the determination of the appropriate sanction.

In search of coherent jurisprudence for international criminal law : correlating universal human responsibilities with universal human rights

I. The Evolution of International Criminal Law International criminal justice concerns breaches of international rules entailing the personal criminal liability of individuals (as opposed to the State for which the individuals may act as agents or organs), and presently includes acts such as genocide, torture, crimes against humanity, aggression and terrorism. ... A rule stating: any act of armed conflict which directly causes the death of a civilian is a war crime unless it can be shown that the military advantage gained by the attack outweighs the harm. ... Thus, so far as international criminal law is concerned any act during armed conflict which results in the death or injury to a person who does not pose a direct threat to the life of the accused should be a war crime. ... Pursuant to the Rome Statute and as a matter of customary international law torture is a war crime when performed in the context of an armed conflict, and a crime against humanity when it is part of systematic criminal conduct. ... Torture can also constitute an individual international crime, even where it does not satisfy the criteria of a war crime or crime against humanity. ...

An empirical study on the relationship between intellectual ability and an understanding of the legal process in male remand prisoners

Research conducted in Australia and around the world in the last decade has shown that people with significant intellectual impairments are over-represented in all areas of the criminal justice system. They are particularly over-represented in remand populations appearing before court. Previous research has suggested that as many as one-quarter of offenders facing sentencing in court have difficulty in understanding court procedures and it is suspected that a majority of these individuals suffer a significant intellectual impairment. The purpose of this study was to establish whether remandees with significant intellectual impairments (IQ < 70) have an accurate understanding of the court system. Seventy-four remand prisoners took part in the study. Remandees with an IQ of less than 70 demonstrated a significantly poorer understanding of the court system than those remandees with an IQ of 70 and above. The implications of these results are discussed in relation to the need for law reform and diversionary practices for this population of remandees.

Retribution, deterrence and reform : the dilemmas of plagiarism management in universities

Universities face constant scrutiny about their plagiarism management strategies, policies and procedures. A resounding theme, usually media inspired, is that plagiarism is rife, unstoppable and university processes are ineffectual in its wake. This has been referred to as a 'moral panic' approach (Carroll & Sutherland-Smith, forthcoming; Clegg, 2007) and suggests plagiarism will thwart all efforts to reclaim academic integrity in higher education. However, revisiting the origins of plagiarism and exploring its legal evolution reveals that legal discourse is the foundation for many plagiarism management policies and processes around the world. Interestingly, criminal justice aims are also reflected in university plagiarism management strategies. Although universities strive for deterrence of plagiarism in a variety of ways, the media most often calls for retribution through increasingly tougher penalties. However, a primary aim of the justice system, sustainable reform, is not often reported in the media or visible in university policies or processes. Using critical discourse analysis, this paper examines the disjunction between media calls for increased retribution in the wake of moral panic and institutional responses to plagiarism. I argue that many universities have not yet moved to sustainable reform in plagiarism management.

The right to an impartial hearing trumps the social imperative of bringing accused to trial even 'down under'

Accused persons who are subjected to a saturation level of negative media coverage may be denied an impartial hearing, which is perhaps the most important aspect of the right to a fair hearing. Despite this, the courts have generally held that the social imperative of prosecuting accused trumps the interests of the accused. The justification for an impartial hearing stems from the repugnance of convicting the innocent. Viewed dispassionately, this imperative is not absolute, given that every legal system condones procedures which result in the conviction of some innocent people. While the importance of guarding against wrongful convictions has been overstated, the imperative to bring to trial all accused has been even more exaggerated. The legal system has displayed a capacity to deal with cases where the guilty walk free. The institutional integrity of the criminal justice system would be significantly compromised by convictions that are tarnished by pre-judgment. Confidence in the criminal justice system is more important than individual criminal accountability. The inability to receive an impartial hearing should result in a permanent stay. The only exception is where the alleged crime has the capacity to cause widespread fear or social unrest. This only applies in relation to serious acts of terrorism. This article focuses on recent legal fair trial developments in Australia, however, the analysis, reasoning and conclusion applies in relation to all jurisdictions where juries determine guilt and innocence.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence, juvenile justice and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child : do they coexist?

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provides children and young people with over 40 substantive rights, the five outcomes of which are living a healthy lifestyle, staying safe, enjoying and achieving, making a positive contribution, and economic wellbeing. Moreover, Article 3 dictates that all organizations concerned with children should work towards what is best of each child. It is not clear how these rights translate to the care of children and young people who come before the courts (particularly those who are subsequently incarcerated). A review of the literature suggests that while best practice guidelines for the treatment and rehabilitation of adult offenders has moved forward, there is little consensus about how this might be achieved for young people. Therapeutic Jurisprudence (TJ) needs to extend beyond its current considerations of the rights of children and young people, and to expand its focus to the extent to which international human rights standards are complied with in the cases of juveniles in the criminal justice system. This presentation will (a) explore the extent to which current practices in juvenile justice are consistent with the UN's Convention and (b) whether the adoption a rehabilitative and treatment approach based on a TJ framework might serve to improve outcomes for young people and ensure their rights are not being violated.