REGULATION FORMS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

REGULATION FORMS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

ABSTRACT.

Quite a considerable change has occurred in the strategies used to control crime within the last few decades of the 20^th century. These changes have caused the emergence of a new penology system, thus replacing the old penal system. Crucial debates have been opened by analyzing techniques, objectives, and new discourses over the cast of nature of risk community and the current trend in criminal justice. In this paper, we will show the difference between the old and the new penology and analyze areas where the new penology has spread that are not covered in the article read. Also, we shall evaluate whether risk assessment fits comfortably into the criminal justice system and what should be regulated in a particular order. We will also explain whether the problems in risk assessment are practical or theoretical.

The disparity in the old and new penal system

The old penology was mostly focused on the establishment of guilt and evaluating the appropriate treatment of the accused, which is not the case with the modern penal system. The new penal system accepts that crime is widespread, and thus it takes it for granted. The system is bothered by identification, classification, and management of groups separated on the level of dangerousness rather than traditional philosophies of reforming, transformation and reintegration. The article shows that the penal system has shifted from concentration on moral character and criminal motivation to management of mean crime rates by use of risk assessment technology. Generally, the new penal system focusses on managing vulnerable populations by controlling actions of the underclass through criminalizing poverty (Feeley & Simon, 1992).

The risk posed by offenders is assessed and managed by devices such as offender classification, preventive detention, life sentences, and parole decisions. However, the scale of these transformations ranges from policing in streets to judges passing sentences. There is a vast debate on how ‘new’ the trends are and the level to which they have replaced the ‘old’ concerns and ignorance of vengeance with punitive language.

Criminal justice system and risk assessment programs

The courts and review boards are seeking the answer to the possibility of re-incarceration of discharged criminals. Clinicians’ report on prediction of risk of future behavior of mentally ill prisoners released from prison being violent is right in a third of the cases as unstructured risk judgment by professionals are wrong. Efforts have been put the focus on the improvement of tools of structured risk to predict risks more accurately. Besides, risk assessment is also used by probation officers, police, psychiatrists, and psychologists in assessing a range of criminals in many countries. The implication is that risk assessment is quite a vital tool in the criminal justice system; therefore, it fits quite well.

Regulation in the criminal justice system

The criminal justice system is responsible for the management of conduct of individuals in society; thus, it provides sanctions against offenders. The criminal justice system regulates crimes such as sexual assault by the use of laws that clarify and modernize crimes such as incest, child pornography, and sexual servitude. The system also devises a scheme of sentencing, which is standard or instance in 2017 the government introduced legislation which reformed the Victoria sentencing laws.  Risk assessment arouses legal and policy questions as a result of equity in protection clauses in the fourteenth amendment. The concerns outline a couple of best practices in the U.S which ensure that the criminal justice system is deployed while promoting transparency, accountability, and fairness.

Problems resulting from risk assessment algorithms

The risk assessment systems raise two major legal concerns: the potential that the presence of variables could constitute fair protection of violation and effect on a person’s right to due process. In the anticipated process, the challenge is the right to review and verify the sentence information (Kehl & Kessler, 2017). Traditionally judges consider several factors about a suspect indiscretion, such as prior criminal record. Under the equal protection issues such as explicit discrimination due to technocratic framing and use of race as a variable arise. Also, socioeconomic status sometimes occurs as a result of risk assessment algorithms. Therefore, the problems are quite practical.