Punishment for Criminal Offenders
The definition of punishment for various types of criminal offense is to take into account many factors and features. Researchers consider how the public punitive attitude is formed and what influences the society’s perception of the severity of the crime (KƤƤriƤinen, 2018). KƤƤriƤinen (2018) reports that “the background attributes had a clear connection to the sentence decisions” (p. 152). The researcher also emphasizes that a unified view of sentencing without taking into account related factors does not reflect the public attitude. Thus, it is not possible to determine the general opinion of the public regarding the appropriate punishment for criminal offenders. Rather, it is necessary to consider each case separately, since different elements of the background influence people’s opinion. Thus, politicians do not have substantial evidence of the punitive orientation of the public as it depends on related factors.
Most crimes are local in nature and can be resolved by local authorities. However, sometimes local policies and laws are not relevant to a particular situation or are slow to respond. In this case, local crime is an organization of larger entities that may be subject to federal authorities. This is explained by the fact that in order to fight larger organizations, state institutions need collaboration, which is possible only at the federal level. Thus, the solution of the crime issues and responsible authorities depend on the scale of criminal activity.
The courtroom work group usually comprises the prosecutor, the judge, and the defense attorney or counsel. This is an informal organization that is in close contact as part of the work on the case in order to reach the most effective consensus. Such groups represent public ideas about justice that are characteristic of society rather than official legislation. These groups can help make criminal justice policies and practices more flexible by taking into account various case factors that may be ignored in general law. They can effectively identify aspects that are not taken into account in current policies and jurisprudence in order to transform and amend them.
Reference
KƤƤriƤinen, J. (2018). Attitudes and public punishment preferences: Finnish results of Scandinavian sense of justice research. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 19(2), 152-169.