Unit Overview: Crime and Punishment Essentials

You'll be diving into three main areas that form the backbone of our criminal justice system. First, you'll explore how laws are created - from government green papers all the way to royal assent, plus how judges shape law through their decisions.

Next, you'll examine the key organisations that make everything work - police, courts, prisons, and probation services - and discover how they're supposed to work together (spoiler: it doesn't always go to plan!).

Finally, you'll analyse whether these agencies actually achieve effective social control. Think about it: if the system works so well, why do we still have crime? You'll investigate the limitations, funding issues, and real-world barriers that prevent our justice system from being as effective as it could be.

Quick tip: This unit is packed with case studies and real examples, so focus on understanding the practical applications rather than just memorising definitions.

How Laws Are Made: From Ideas to Reality

Ever wondered how something becomes illegal? The law-making process starts with consultation documents called green papers, followed by white papers with firm proposals. Bills then go through multiple readings in Parliament, committee stages, and finally receive royal assent to become law.

But Parliament isn't the only source of law. Judicial precedent means judges create law too - when higher courts make decisions, lower courts must follow them. The famous Donoghue v Stevenson case (the decomposed snail in ginger beer) created our modern law of negligence, showing how one dodgy drink can change legal history forever!

When laws are unclear, judges use different approaches to interpret them. The literal rule takes words at face value, the golden rule chooses the least absurd meaning, and the mischief rule looks at what Parliament was trying to fix. Each has advantages and disadvantages - sometimes being too literal leads to absurd results.

Remember: Law-making isn't just about Parliament - judges play a huge role in shaping how laws work in practice through their interpretations and precedent-setting decisions.

The Criminal Justice System: Who Does What

The criminal justice system is like a complex machine with many moving parts. Key organisations include the police (who investigate), the CPS (who prosecute), courts (who decide guilt), and prisons and probation (who deal with punishment and rehabilitation).

These agencies must work together effectively. Police provide evidence to the CPS, who then present cases in court. If someone's convicted, they might go to prison or be supervised by probation services. The Sentencing Council ensures judges give consistent punishments across different courts.

However, things can go wrong. The Liam Allen case showed what happens when police fail to share crucial evidence - his rape trial collapsed when phone records proving his innocence were finally revealed. Similarly, Stephen Kisko spent 16 years in prison for a murder he couldn't have committed.

Key point: These organisations are only as strong as their weakest link - when communication breaks down or evidence is mishandled, innocent people can suffer while guilty ones escape justice.

Crime Control vs Due Process: Balancing Justice

Herbert Packer identified two competing models in criminal justice. The crime control model (conveyor belt approach) prioritises catching and punishing criminals quickly to protect society. It trusts police powers and assumes guilt to prevent further crimes.

In contrast, the due process model (obstacle course approach) presumes innocence and emphasises fair trials with proper safeguards. It limits police powers to protect individual rights, even if this means some guilty people might escape punishment.

Real cases highlight these tensions. The Birmingham Six were wrongly convicted under crime control thinking, while cases like Thompson and Venables (Jamie Bulger's killers) showed due process protecting even child defendants' rights.

Neither model is perfect - Smith argues we need balance between both approaches. Right realists favour crime control with zero tolerance, while left realists prefer due process with community-based solutions addressing root causes of crime.

Think about it: Should we risk convicting innocent people to catch more criminals, or let some guilty people go free to protect everyone's rights? There's no easy answer.

Social Control: How Society Keeps Us in Line

Social control is how society persuades or forces people to follow rules and norms. It works through both internal controls (what we feel inside) and external controls (what others do to us).

Internal social control comes from within - your conscience, religious beliefs, and internalised values from family and culture. Freud's concept of the superego explains how we develop this inner voice of right and wrong by age five. When you feel guilty about jumping a queue, that's internal social control at work!

External social control uses outside pressure - laws, police, courts, and even disapproval from friends. This includes coercion (force or threats) and deterrence (fear of consequences).

Travis Hirschi identified four types of social bonds that prevent crime: attachment to others, commitment to conventional goals, involvement in legitimate activities, and belief in society's values. When these bonds weaken, deviant behaviour becomes more likely.

Real talk: Most of the time, you follow rules not because you're forced to, but because you've been socialised to believe it's the right thing to do.

The Aims of Punishment: Why We Punish People

When someone breaks the law, what should happen to them? There are five main aims of punishment, each with different philosophies behind them.

Rehabilitation tries to reform offenders through education, training, and therapy. The idea is that criminal behaviour results from poor choices that can be changed. Deterrence aims to put people off committing crimes through fear of punishment - both the individual offender and the general public.

Retribution is about paying back society - the offender deserves punishment for their wrongdoing. Incapacitation protects the public by physically preventing offenders from committing more crimes (usually through imprisonment).

Reparation focuses on making amends to victims and society, often through community service or compensation. This connects to restorative justice approaches that bring offenders face-to-face with the harm they've caused.

Consider this: Different theories of crime support different punishment aims - if you believe crime is caused by biology, you might favour incapacitation, while if you think it's about choice, rehabilitation might work better.

Do Our Punishments Actually Work?

Here's where theory meets harsh reality. Imprisonment might achieve retribution and public protection, but it's expensive and has high reoffending rates. Prison rehabilitation programmes only reduce reoffending by 9%, while community-based rehab can achieve 44% reduction.

Community sentences like probation and curfews are cheaper and can be more effective than short prison terms. They allow offenders to maintain family ties and employment while still being punished. However, 30% breach their conditions, and three-quarters of people sent to prison had previously served community sentences.

Financial penalties make offenders pay for their crimes but don't work well for serious offences or wealthy criminals. Discharges might seem like getting away with it, but they're often used when the court process itself is seen as sufficient punishment.

The harsh truth? Reoffending rates remain stubbornly high across all punishment types. Prison numbers have increased 75% in 30 years, yet we don't seem to be getting better at preventing crime or reforming criminals.

Bottom line: No single punishment achieves all aims effectively - each has strengths and weaknesses, suggesting our justice system needs multiple approaches rather than relying on any one solution.

Key Agencies: Roles, Resources and Realities

Understanding who does what in criminal justice helps you see why the system sometimes fails. Police keep the peace, investigate crimes, and bring offenders to justice, funded through £16.9 billion from government and local council tax.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) took over prosecution from police to ensure independence and objectivity. They apply the 'full code test' - cases must have sufficient evidence and be in the public interest to proceed.

HM Prison Service aims to protect the public while helping offenders lead law-abiding lives. With different security categories from high-security Cat A to open Cat D prisons, they're funded £6.09 billion through general taxation.

Probation services supervise offenders in the community, believing in people's potential to change. Charities and pressure groups like the Prison Reform Trust campaign for improvements and provide additional support services.

Key insight: These agencies have noble aims but operate within tight budget constraints and political pressures that can limit their effectiveness in practice.

Environmental Design and Behavioural Control

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) shows how physical spaces can reduce crime. Birmingham's Bullring market redesign included better lighting, wider walkways, and improved surveillance, achieving a 70% crime reduction in two years.

The concept includes physical security (locks, barriers), surveillance (making areas visible), movement control (limiting access routes), and maintenance (preventing the 'broken windows' effect where neglect encourages more crime).

Prison design also affects behaviour. Bentham's Panopticon concept used constant potential surveillance to encourage self-control, while modern supermax facilities use isolation. Norwegian 'human ecological' prisons like Bastoy achieve just 16% reoffending rates through rehabilitation-focused environments.

Behavioural tactics include ASBOs and CBOs for persistent offenders, token economies in prisons where good behaviour earns privileges, and staged sanctions that increase penalties for repeat offences.

Interesting fact: Sometimes the simplest solutions work best - Cardiff's gated lanes in alleyways significantly reduced burglary and anti-social behaviour for just £4,000 per installation.

Why Social Control Fails: The Harsh Realities

Despite billions spent on criminal justice, recidivism remains a major problem. Prison populations have risen 75% in 30 years, with 63% of those serving short sentences reoffending. This suggests our system is failing to rehabilitate effectively.

Funding cuts have devastated every agency. Police lost 20,000 officers, the CPS lost two-thirds of its staff, and probation services faced 40% cuts. These reductions mean fewer investigations, case backlogs, and reduced monitoring of offenders.

Civil liberties can limit agencies' powers - the Human Rights Act protects individual rights, sometimes preventing deportation of foreign criminals or restricting surveillance powers. While these protections are important, they can frustrate crime control efforts.

Environmental factors significantly impact success. Prisoners with family visits have much lower reoffending rates (47% vs 68%), while employment after release dramatically reduces recidivism. However, only 28% find work within a year of release.

Moral imperatives can also undermine social control - juries may sympathise with defendants acting from conscience, like environmental protesters or those assisting loved ones' suicides.

Reality check: The criminal justice system faces an impossible task - reducing crime with limited resources while respecting individual rights and dealing with complex social problems that crime often reflects.