TREATING OFFENDERS WELL

Treating Offenders Well

Treating Offenders Well

Introduction

"Treating victims well, better or sympathetically does no damage to the defendant. The reverse implication is also true: treating offenders well, better or sympathetically does no damage to the victim" (Michael Tonry).

I totally agree with Michael Tonry on the sympathetic treatment of the lawbreakers, as it does not damage any of the victims. Critics of petition negotiation depict the practice more ominously as a structure that extracts a trial penalty from wrongdoers who choose to exercise the trial rights to which they are entitled, and coerces unconvictable and even innocent wrongdoers to plead guilty.

Discussion

Regardless of whether post-petition verdicts are seen as discounts, or post-trial verdicts as inflations, a separate consideration is the question of what drives the discrepancy between the two. The standard account in support of petition negotiation specifically when it reflects both likely trial and sentencing conclusions. It reflects trial conclusions because a prosecutor's incentive to compromise and a wrongdoer's power to demand consideration in exchange for his petition will depend on the strength of the government's evidence against the wrongdoer. It reflects sentencing conclusions because whatever discounts the wrongdoer is in a position to confer is subtracted from his likely post-trial verdict, considering the severity of the offense and the wrongdoer's criminal history and need for verdict (Smith 2008, pp. 23-33).

Although probable trial and post-trial verdict conclusions are reflected in petition negotiation, they are not determinative. Code of retribution is undoubtedly open to the questions in the modern context, but essentially, it's based on the benefits which can be morally acceptable, particularly the decision through which to express the feelings of society towards the defendant (Ormerod 2005, pp. 41-53). This is deterrent to criminal acts of others publicly condemned, and standardized way to define the parameters, and to prevent by providing a victim of revenge, desire to meet the collective mechanism of personal revenge. Other than this argument works on specific offenders are considered to get their 'reward' the code; the ruling must fit the crime. In this case, decisions concerning these mental illnesses have little effect because few people would feel satisfied that, these people are not really responsible for their actions or any resulting conviction. It should be noted, however, which is specialized in the heart of ethical issues, there are other possible approaches. Suggestion of a criminal defence based on victim liability, or the victim's contribution to the crime, elicits shocked, horrified, even vitriolic responses. (Murphy 2000, pp. 14-49)

Blaming the victim is nearly universally considered wrong and inconsistent with act punishable by law theory and goals. The concept of victim blaming brings to mind horror stories of defence attorneys brutally cross-examining rape victims about their dress or past sexual habits, police officers ignoring battered women, or society blaming the Central Park jogger for her imprudent dusk exercising (Clarke & Eck 2003, Pp.72-96). Victim blaming conjures up images of political advertisement slogans criticizing the official who allows criminals to sue victims for injuries the ...