Idea Of Chivalry And Double Jeopardy Criminology Essay

The intent of the Criminal Justice System is to present justness to all, by protecting guiltless members of the society, to penalize and convict felons and to supply aid to them in an effort to halt them piquing ; at least that is what the society expects of the Criminal Justice System. It is supposed to present justness in a just mode regardless of gender. However much is written that suggests otherwise.

Chivalry, believed by Pollak ( 1960 ) is a theory which claims that adult females are treated in a less rough manner by the tribunals and prisons because of their nature as adult females, which so distorts condemnable statistics. However, Gregory & A ; Leonard ( 1982/83 ) disregard the gallantry factor as the cause of a gender spread in offense and Heidensohn ( 1985 cited in Jewkes and Letherby 2002 p.180 ) illustrates the theory of gallantry in a instance reported in the Daily Mirror in January 1978 where a female parent flogged her eight-year old boy with a belt, gave him cold baths and forced him to stand bare for hours at dark. The female parent was jailed but subsequently allowed to travel freely because the tribunals said she needed to look after her other kid. This instance is a great illustration of how adult females are more favoured by the tribunals than work forces. This position can be seen as ideological and unsociological as it is based on female biological science. Carmen ( 1983 cited in Jewkes and Letherby 2002 p.183 ) quotes sherrifs ‘if she is a good female parent we do n’t desire to take her off. If she ‘s non it does n’t truly count ‘ . This shows that the sentencing of a adult female is based on her nurturing nature being of good criterion or otherwise.

A Home office survey research ‘170 ‘ , titled ‘Understanding the sentencing of adult females ‘ was a survey which made an attempt to turn to the deficiency of extended research into the manner adult females are sentenced. The chief purpose of the survey was to set up how the Magistrates go about taking history of the substantial differences in work forces ‘s and adult females ‘s lives and their perceptual experiences of justness. The survey was in two parts, in portion 1 a trial carried out suggested that adult females were less likely than comparable males to have a prison sentence but they were more likely to be discharged or sentenced to a community punishment. However it was suggested that alternatively of the findings being interpreted as a general policy of lenience towards adult females, it should instead be seen that the sentencers may be loath to ticket a adult female perchance because they may be punishing her kids, instead than merely herself. This may hold been all good and good if it were the yearss when bulk of adult females still upheld their stereotyped domestic function as female parents and keepers of the place. “ It is portion of household political orientation that a adult female ‘s topographic point is in the place, while a adult male ‘s undertaking is to out to work to gain the money to back up his married woman and kids ” ( Allan, G 1999, p.191 ) . However, we now live in a society where adult females are now bread victors, house hold responsibilities are besides taken on by work forces, adult females divorce their hubbies for one ground or the other and accordingly go forthing the kids behind for the male parent to take attention of them. The Criminal Justice System might non take into history when condemning work forces, that some of them are really both female parent and male parent to the kids and carry out the function of the female parent. In portion 2 of the survey about 200 Magistrates were interviewed ; the Magistrates said they found it hard to compare their sentencing between work forces and adult females because they dealt with female wrongdoers less often. However, they distinguished between ‘troubled ‘ and ‘troublesome ‘ and tended to turn up most adult females in the troubled class. It was partially because adult females tended to be first wrongdoers, confronting less serious charges than work forces and because they behaved more respectfully in tribunal. The Magistrates went on to state that because they sing adult females wrongdoers as troubled, they responded to their offending with steps ( a discharge or probation ) designed to help them to take jurisprudence staying lives instead than penalizing them.

In an article by Jason Bennetto in ‘The Independent ‘ , it is said that more adult females are perpetrating violent offenses, peculiarly street robbery, burglary and combat, and that portion of the job believed to be doing this is the consequence of disregard, maltreatment and drug or intoxicant dependence. Harmonizing to a study, Crimes of Desperation 2008, a important sum of offense committed by females is rooted in poorness. Equally much as poorness may be the impulsive force for some, others may merely be utilizing the money they have to fund their drug and intoxicant usage and later turning to offense to further fund their inclinations. A Survey of over 1,000 female parents in prison, appears to supply some support for this study, 54 % said they had no money, 38 % needed to back up their kids, 35 % were on drugs or alkies, 33 % had household jobs and 33 % had no occupation. Caddle and Crisp ( 1997 cited in Newburn, T 2007 p.809 )

It was argued foremost by Freda Adler and subsequently Rita Simon that female offense rates had been increasing quickly in the late 80s and early 1970s and that they were altering their offending forms to more masculine manners ; it was due to the growing of the modern adult females ‘s motion. ( Maguire, M. Morgan, R. Reiner, R. 2012 )

In an empirical research looking at whether work forces and adult females offend for similar grounds, it was in relation to belongings offense that adult females featured most to a great extent in, which led to some observers reasoning that many adult females became involved in condemnable activity for largely to supply for kids or household in fortunes where there are limited legitimate chances. ( Newburn, T. 2007 )

“ The point is that female delinquents are non perceived to be simply following behaviors more normally associated with males, they are portrayed as being chromosomally or genetically unnatural. This means that the ‘treatment ‘ of such oi¬ˆenders becomes justii¬?able, the purposes, intentionality and reason of the pervert act are overlooked and the societal and cultural conditions under which the act took topographic point can be relegated to the obscure position of ‘environ- mental ‘ factors whose lone function is to on occasion ‘trigger ‘ the built-in path- ology of the pervert. Crime and delinquency can thereby be treated as an person, non societal, phenomenon ” Smart ( n.d )

An alternate position to that of gallantry is dual hazard. Heidensohn ( 1985 ) proposing that female wrongdoers are subjected to duplicate hazard, intending that when they are on test, they are non merely on test for the offense they committed but besides besides for their muliebrity. Besides, if any, female wrongdoers are penalized for their sexual misconduct, while the male

opposite numbers are non. Therefore the tribunals operate a dual criterion for female wrongdoers. Women ‘s low portion of recorded criminalism has important effects for those adult females who do pique: they are seen to hold transgressed non merely societal norms but gender norms as good. As a consequence they may, particularly when informal countenances are being taken into history, feel that they are double punished. ( Maguire, M. Morgan, R. Reiner, R. 2012 )

In slaying instances, adult females get tougher sentences than work forces do, because in most instances the slaying is premeditated. The instance of R v Ahluwalia ( 1992 ) is about a adult female who was being sexually abused, bullied and violently abused by her hubby. After 10 old ages of maltreatment, she decided she ‘d had plenty and she poured gasoline over her hubby ‘s organic structure and put fire to him, six yearss subsequently he died. She was convicted of slaying because harmonizing S.3 of the Homicide act 1957 there must be a ‘sudden and impermanent loss of self-denial ‘ which she did non possess at the clip she killed her hubby. It was seen as pre meditated because the maltreatment took topographic point over 10 old ages. The suspect was so sentenced to life imprisonment, but was subsequently released. Another instance is the 1 of Zoorah Shah who was given a life sentence for killing her fellow by seting arsenous anhydride in his nutrient. The tribunals did non take into history the fact that she was beaten on a regular basis and exploited by her fellow to be prostitute. These instances are a major contrast to the instance of David Hampson: a adult male smashed the caput of his married woman with a cock and killed her. His ground for the slaying was that his married woman had nagged him for old ages. The justice accepted his ground as a sensible alibi to be provoked to kill person. He was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to six old ages.

Looking at these instances it shows the practicality of adult females being subjected to duplicate hazard. It seems that these adult females are non merely being punished for their offense but besides because of their biological nature. Besides, it seems to demo that the tribunals believe that it is more acceptable for a adult male to lose his pique as opposed to a adult female, because a adult female ‘s nature is meant to be submissive, unagitated and rational. Some would state that adult females should non be aggressive as it is non in their nature.

Women ‘s nature should non be a determinant factor when sentencing, if peculiar sentence is justly appropriate and deserved so it should be served. If the lenience on adult females wrongdoers keeps being applied, it merely means they wo n’t larn their lesson and will non be deterred in the hereafter to perpetrating offense once more. Harmonizing to a study published in 2010 in the BBC intelligence, statistics showed that re-offending rates by adult females went up by four times that for work forces – by 16.4 % , compared with 4.2 % .