A Holistic Approach to Public Safety and Well-Being in the UK

Section A

1. In the UK, Policing is based on the principle of ‘policing by consent’, which is rooted in the belief that a broad public support for police services’ actions for policing is needed for effective policing. Policing is needed when a significant change in the law comes into effect and the law provides for demands and responsibilities on the police (London Assembly Labour, 2020). A classical meaning of police and policing is associated with community safety and well-being and not just fighting or preventing crime. Police personnel are engaged in other forms of help and support for the public. The study of the control room of the Staffordshire police over the period from 2007-2014 showed that 1/5th of the calls concerned crime and the increasing calls concerned traffic problems, abuse, or mental health issues. This means that policing is an instrument of assistance, covering problems of accidents, floods or any danger to the public (Emsley, 2021, p. 9).

2. The three types of crime data that are used to inform crime statistics in England and Wales are the data recorded by the Telephone-operated Crime Survey for England and Wales (TCSEW); police recorded crime; and face-to-face Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

TCSEW provides an estimate for the types of crime and the population that it covers. TCSEW does not cover crimes against businesses; people who are not residents in households; and homicide and victimless crimes such as possession of drugs (ONS, 2021).

CSEW records experiences of crime over the last 12 months by asking members of the public. It records crimes experienced by people including those not reported to the police. The aim is to show an accurate picture of the crimes (ONS, 2015).

Police recorded crime figures cover 43 territorial police forces of England and Wales, and the British Transport Police (ONS, 2021).

3. Macpherson’s report deployed a cultural explanation of institutional racism grounded in the lack of contract between white police officers and black communities. Institutional racism is produced through the normal operational policing practices, particularly the stop and search (Lea, 2000). One Dr Robin Oakley defined institutional racism as racism that is not solely produced by the deliberate actions of a “small number of bigoted individuals, but through a more systematic tendency that could unconsciously influence police performance generally". The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry report, 1999 mentioned the description given by two black activists, Stokely Carmichael and Charles V Hamilton in 1967 to explain that institutional racism stems from the operation of the established and respected forces and relies on active and pervasive anti-black attitudes and practices. There is a sense of superiority practiced against the black community subordinating them to the whites. This is a racist attitude that covertly or overtly permeates the society at the individual and institutional level (MACPHERSON, 1999).

4. The two value systems that Packer (1968) suggested are the crime control model and the due process model. The former stresses on an efficient system. Its most primary function is to suppress and control crime for the society to be safe and to maintain public order. This primary function is given more importance than individual freedom to ensure swifter and severe punishment for offenders. This model favours extra-judicial process to judicial process focused on higher rate of apprehension and conviction (Packer, 1968, p. 158).

Unlike the first model that resembles an assembly line, the due process model resembles an obstacle course. It focuses on a just and fair criminal justice system applicable to all. It relies on fact-finding, which is informal and non-adjudicative stressing on the possibility of errors. This system does not infringe upon constitutional rights. Hence, this system prioritises the protection of individual rights and freedoms. It adopts a liberal perspective (Packer, 1968, p. 163).

5. Community Order is used for a wide range of offenders and offences, including acquisitive crime, white collar crime, youth offender with unstructured lifestyle, first-time offenders of serious offences, vulnerable individuals, and drug and alcohol offences. Suspended Sentence Order will be used for offences where custody is far more likely, and the offender has crossed the custody threshold and prison will not work. Violent offenders are more likely to get this Order. Employment plays a significant factor where offenders have employment, settled family homes, and family responsibilities (Mair, et al., 2008)

For a Community Order, there are 12 requirements. They are unpaid work, curfew, supervision (which are the three main requirements), supervision, drug rehabilitation requirements, prohibited activity, attendance centre, mental health treatment, residence, specified activity, alcohol treatment, and exclusion. For Suspended Sentence Order, they are unpaid work, supervision (which are the two frequently used requirements), curfew, and drug rehabilitation (Mair, et al., 2008).

6. A person can be remanded in custody in case of a risk that they will run away, interfere or threaten witnesses, pervert the course of justice, commit further offences, and become a threat to public order (nidirect, 2021). The defendant can be remanded before trail excluding bail if they are charged with charged with murder. Thus, the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s114 excludes bail in case of a murder and the court must satisfy itself that that there is no significant risk when if the defendant is released they would commit an offence that may cause physical or mental injury to another person. Similarly, there will be remand without bail in case of manslaughter and serious sexual offences listed in Section 25(2) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Similar remand is also applicable with Class A Drug Users in designated areas only (The Crown Prosecution Services, 2021).

7. The Crown Court is a single entity. sits in 77 court centres across England and Wales. It deals with serious criminal cases. It comprises three tiers: the First-tier, Second-tier, and Third-tier centres (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021). The Magistrates’ Court is not a single entity (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021). All the criminal court cases start in the Magistrates’ Court.

The offences tried by the Crown Court are of three classes: Class 1 most serious offences; Class 2 offences including rape; and Class 3 offences, including kidnapping, burglary, robbery, and grievous bodily harm (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021). The Magistrates’ Court deals with three kinds of cases: Summary offences, Either-way offences, and Indictable-only offences. Indictable-only offences must be heard at the Crown Court.

The Crown Court hears appeals from the Magistrates’ Court against conviction and/or sentence (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021). The Magistrates’ court passes on the more serious offences to the Crown Court, for sentencing or for full trial with a judge and jury (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021).

8. The Youth Justice System faces two major challenges. Firstly, in contradiction to the aim of young offenders’ participation in the criminal proceeding, the judiciary is not set up to ensure meeting this aim. The judicial processes and procedures applied to children are the modified versions that apply to adult defendants. Children are alienated from. The participation through the use of legal argument and terminology is difficult for them to understand. The physical structure of the court is not set up to ensure effective communication from the youth offenders. Secondly, the sentencing options of the court do not meet the changing needs of the young offenders. Even though the youth justice system seeks to prevent offending, there is still prolonged youth offending. The system is not adequate to identify and tackle issues that relate to prolong offending. Most of the offenders have significant welfare issues. However, the sentencing options do not consider these issues. They lack flexibility and commitment to address the complex needs of youth offenders (Taylor, 2016).

9. Transnational crimes are committed by occasional criminals and by professionals. Such offences include drug trafficking, terrorism, global-level money-laundering, frauds. They generate enormous profits (Bossard, 1990). The crimes are committed by criminal enterprises operating across national boundaries and they have links with legal governments (Tijhuis, 2006; Sullivan, 2014).

The international criminal justice views crimes as those that pose serious concern to the international community. Acts such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity are considered international crimes (Marchuk, 2013, p. 70). This indicates that international crimes are committed by a state or state actors against its citizen or another state unlike the transnational crime that is committed by non-state actors across various states for the purpose of profits.

International crime has two constitutive elements. The first is the contextual element, determining the context in which the crime was committed, such an international or non-international armed conflict. The second is the mens rea that links the contextual element with the underlying offences (Marchuk, 2013).

10. The six characteristics of an ideal victim are Christie (1986) are as follows: the victim is weak, particularly female and elderly; they carry respectable project, such as caring for their sister; they cannot be blamed for where they were; the offender is big and bad; the offender has no personal relationship with the victim; the victim can establish their identity as an ideal victim, but is weak not to be a threat to others (Christie, 1986, p. 18).

Section B.

Q3. A Youth justice system must be separate from the Criminal Justice System. There are challenges in applying the processes and procedures of the Criminal Justice System to youth offenders. For example, the Youth justice system follows a modified version of the processes and procedures of the Criminal Justice System, which does not sufficiently encourage youth participation due to difficult legal arguments and terminology (Taylor, 2016). As there are trials in the Crown Court involving children, the intimidating atmosphere of the Crown Court and the processes and physical layout cannot be considered easily adapted for children (Taylor, 2016).

An opposing argument is found in the public belief that youth court sentences are too lenient. They believe that young offenders must be processed in the adult justice system, and sentences for specific cases must be harsher. This represents a complex situation given that alternatives to prison in regard to a youth offender may not be effective (Sprott, 1998).

The purpose of a separate youth system is to ensure youth can be saved from oral contamination, reformed and reclaimed. This is unlike the Victorian times that did not consider age while delivering severe criminal justice. Individual children have specific needs. Youth offending is a distinct social problem (Arthur, 2016). Most of the children have significant welfare issues and the youth system cannot adequately identify and tackle such issues (Taylor, 2016). The reason can be that the youth system follows a modified version of the adult criminal justice system, which has not taken account of the specific needs and not identified youth offending as a distinct social problem.

Youth justice is distinct and separate. Youth offenders are associated with a range of protection and welfare concerns. Justice is complex in that regard. It must consider the seriousness of the crime and whether the young offender is at an age where they have assumed criminal responsibility (Carr, 2012). Thus, the type of intervention will be different for them than those for adults. Justice has a welfare orientation. These are some reasons why the youth justice system must be separate from the criminal justice system. If youths are treated in the latter system, they are bound to be subjected to negative effects and poor outcomes (Carr, 2012). Risk governs the kind of intervention of the youth justice system. Youth offenders are governed by the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child. The youth justice system is therefore a right-based approach (Carr, 2012).

Youth offenders are relatively immature. They have lesser ability to control their impulses or understand the consequences of their behaviour. Youth offending is also considered to be a social issue found in the problems related to child’s development (Souhami, 2009). As such, the priority is not punishment, but protecting the welfare of youth offenders, They must therefore be dealt with in a separate system. The emphasis on this view is that youth delinquency becomes the focus of a deep social anxiety. Children, as recognised in the mid 19th century, have a distinct life and they require protection, discipline and education. This arises due to the change in the social structure brought about by the industrial revolution. The children are exposed to risk and are vulnerable. Their delinquent behaviours become a distinct social problem. The Children Act 1908 represents the new outlook to treat children differently through the establishment of the separate court system for children (Souhami, 2009). These views are understandable, but the real question is whether the separate system is serving the desired objectives. The Children Act 1989 divided the Children’s Court jurisdiction into two dealing with family and youth justice separately. However, in 2013 the House of Common’s Justice Committee reported that children in the justice system were disproportionately likely to have high-level welfare needs. Girls and boys were found spending time in statutory care. They were abused or neglected. There was overlap between the two systems (Baidawi & Sheehan, 2019). Continue your journey with our comprehensive guide to Enhancing Investigative Interviewing Through the PEACE Model and PACE Reforms.

To conclude, a separate youth justice system is needed as the problem associated with youth offenders is social in nature distinct from those of adult offenders. However, the key point is that it should serve the objectives of reclaiming the children and preventing moral contamination. For that the rules and processes must also be adapted to their specific needs and demands.

Bibliography

Arthur, R., 2016. The Moral Foundations of the Youth Justice System Understanding the Principles of the Youth Justice System. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Baidawi, S. & Sheehan, R., 2019. 'Crossover' Children in the Youth Justice and Child Protection Systems. s.l.:Taylor & Francis.

Tijhuis, A. J. G., 2006. Transnational crime and the interface between legal and illegal actors: The case of the illicit art and antiquities trade. s.l.:Leiden University.

Carr, N., 2012. Criminal and Juvenile Justice. In: J. Midgley, M. Gray & S. A. Webb, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Social Work . s.l.:SAGE Publications.

Christie, N., 1986. The Ideal Victim. In: F. E. A., ed. From Crime Policy to Victim Policy. London: Macmillan, pp. 17-30.

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021. Crown Court. [Online] Available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/crown-court/ [Accessed 24 08 2021].

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2021. https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/magistrates-court/. [Online] Available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/magistrates-court/ [Accessed 24 08 2021].

ONS, 2021. Crime in England and Wales QMI. [Online] Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/methodologies/crimeinenglandandwalesqmi [Accessed 24 08 2021].

Lea, J., 2000. The Macpherson Report and the question of institutional racism. The howard journal of criminal justice , 39(3), pp. 219-233.

London Assembly Labour, 2020. Policing with Consent. [Online] Available at: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/policing_with_consent.pdf [Accessed 24 08 2021].

Packer, H., 1968. The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. s.l.:Stanford University Press.

Mair, G., Cros, N. & Taylor, S., 2008. The community order and the suspended sentence order. [Online] Available at: http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/3060/1/ccjs_sentencers_views.pdf [Accessed 24 08 2021].

Marchuk, I., 2013. The Fundamental Concept of Crime in International Criminal Law A Comparative Law Analysis. s.l.:Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

nidirect, 2021. Custody and bail. [Online] Available at: https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/custody-and-bail [Accessed 24 08 2021].

ONS, 2015. The Crime Survey for England and Wales. [Online] Available at: https://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/en/HomeReadMore.html [Accessed 24 08 2021].

Souhami, A., 2009. Youth Justice. In: A. Hucklesby & A. Wahidin, eds. Criminal Justice . s.l.:OUP Oxford.

Sprott, J. B., 1998. Understanding public opposition to a separate youth justice system. Crime & Delinquency , 44(3), pp. 399-411.

Taylor, C., 2016. Review of the Youth Justice System in England and Wales, s.l.: Ministry of Justice.

The Crown Prosecution Services, 2021. Bail. [Online] Available at: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bail [Accessed 24 08 2021].