Attitudes to Crime
| DOI | 10.1177/026455050004700210 |
| Published date | 01 June 2000 |
| Date | 01 June 2000 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
137
.
Joined-up
policy-making,
i.e.
consistent
criminal
justice
and
social
policy
objectives,
with
an
explicit
emphasis
on
the
reduction
of
social
exclusion.
Building
on
these
principles,
any
punishment
would
aim
to
reconcile
the
joint
aims
of
’reprobation’
(harsh
treatment
where
necessary
as
long
as
it
is
proportionate
to
the
seriousness
of
the
offence);
reparation
(to
victims
and
the
community);
and
reintegration
(to
minimise
long
term
stigmatisation
and
social
exclusion).
Thus
both
custodial
and
community
sentences
would
be
accompanied
by
programmes
&dquo;designed
to
facilitate
the
reintegration
of
women
offenders
and,
where
appropriate,
their
dependants,
into
a
sustainable
and
non-
offending
lifestyle&dquo;.
Recommendations -
The
report
concludes
with
some
thought-provoking
and
radical
recommendations.
The
most
fundamental
of
these
is
the
establishment
of
a
’National
Women’s
Justice
Board’,
a
statutory
commissioning
body
resembling
the
National
Youth
Justice
Board.
This
authority
would
be
responsible
for
establishing
and
managing
local
’Women’s
Supervision,
Rehabilitation
and
Support
Centres’
to
provide
services
for
those
women
serving
community
sentences,
and
would
establish
a
new
system
of
geographically
dispersed
custodial
units
to
replace
existing
prisons.
The
level
of
analysis
in
this
impressively
argued
and
researched
report,
properly
reflects
the
complexity
of
the
practice,
policy
and
ethical
issues
involved.
For
those
with
an
interest
in
this
area,
reading
the
full
report
is
strongly
recommended.
Justice
for
Women:
The
Need for
Reform,
The
Report
of
the
Committee
on
Women’s
Imprisonment,
Chaired
by
Professor
Dorothy
Wedderburn,
Prison
Reform
Trust,
2000.
Available
from
the
PRT,
15
Northburgh
Street,
London
ECIV
OJR.
Tel:
020
7251 5070. E-mail:
prt@prisonreform.demon.co.uk,
£10.
Attitudes
to
Crime
The
1996
British
Crime
Survey
demonstrated
a
public
’crisis
of
confidence’
in
the
Criminal
Justice
System,
partly
due
to
widespread
ignorance
about
the
reality
of
crime
and
sentencing.
In
spite
of
stated
government
objectives
to
increase
confidence,
the
1998
survey
shows
little
signs
of
improvement.
The
more
recent
study
additionally
gauged
opinion
on
youth
justice
and
young
offenders.
Main
findings:
Knowledge
of
Crime
and
Criminal
Justice
-
More
people
were
aware
that
recorded
crime
was
falling,
but
around
half
still
held
the
mistaken
belief
that
it
had
&dquo;increased
a
lot&dquo;
between 1995
and
1997.
The
use
of
immediate
custody
for
offences
of
burglary
and
rape
was
still
greatly
underestimated
and
the
occurrence
of
violent
crime
greatly
overestimated.
In
common
with
the
1996
survey,
when
given
a
case
example,
sentencing
preferences
were
generally
more
lenient
than
sentencing
guidelines.
Opinions
of
the
Criminal
Justice
System -
The
police
were
the
best
regarded
agency
and
prisons
the
worst;
27%
of
respondents
considered
that
the
latter
were
doing
a
poor
job,
compared
to
only
6%
for
the
former.
Although
judges’
ratings
improved,
80%
still
thought
they
were
&dquo;out
of
touch&dquo;.
Probation
staff
had
a
marginally
better
rating
than
in
1996.
The
most
popular
solution
to
overcrowded
prisons
was
the
creation
of
tougher
penalties
mid-way
between
prison
and
probation.
Young
Offender -
The
study
found
a
lower
level
of
confidence
in
the
juvenile
courts
than
in
any
other
part
of
the
system,
probably
linked
to
a
particularly
poor
knowledge
of
juvenile
crime
and
sentencing
practice.
Juvenile
involvement
in
crime
was
widely
overestimated
and
around
three-quarters
of
interviewees
thought
that
young
offenders
were
treated
too
leniently.
However,
when
asked
what
alternative
measures
they
would
introduce,
To continue reading
Request your trial