Capstone doc outline

If you are looking for affordable, custom-written, high-quality, and non-plagiarized papers, your student life just became easier with us. We are the ideal place for all your writing needs.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

 

Capstone DOC Outline

 Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read Chapters 2, 7, and 9 from the text.  Looking ahead at your Capstone Pa per in Week 5, provide an outline highlighting the major points of your pa per for review and discussion among your classmates and instructor. In your outline, include all major ideas your Capstone Pa per will address, with brief two to three sentence explanations for each.

 

  • Revise your thesis statement that you created in Week 1, which identifies your social and criminal justice issue.
    • Incorporate any feedback that you received regarding your thesis statement from your instructor.
  • Summarize your chosen social and criminal justice issue.
    • Describe what makes this an issue.
    • Provide data to show how this issue has made an impact on society.
    • Explain which social justice principles need to be addressed and why.
    • List the cultural and diversity issues present in your chosen social and criminal justice problem.
    • Evaluate how addressing your chosen issue contributes to the goal of a more just society.
  • Analyze the empirical research on your chosen topic.
    • You may use your Week 1 Annotated Bibliography to complete this section of the pa per.
  • Propose a possible resolution to your chosen social and criminal justice issue.
    • Evaluate which branches of the criminal justice system are impacted/involved and how they either help or hinder the issue.
    • Analyze how the criminal and social justice theories (in relation to the United States Constitution) and landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions impact your chosen issue and support your resolution.
    • Examine how the judiciary, corrections, and law enforcement systems address social equality, solidarity, human rights, and overall fairness for all and how these essential concepts impact your issue and resolution.
    • Evaluate how poverty, racism, religion and other sociocultural variables may apply to contemporary social and criminal justice by drawing information among the fields of, but not limited to, criminology, law, philosophy, psychology, science, and sociology. 

7

Social Justice Overview

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Define the term justice, and evaluate how it relates to the concepts of equality, solidar-
ity, and human rights.

• Explain the concept of individual justice, including examples of restorative, ideological,
and distributive justice.

• Explain the concept of procedural justice, including examples of perfect, imperfect, and
pure procedural justice, as well as procedural justice in the criminal justice system.

• Define the term social justice, using examples of historical events and leading figures in
social justice, and social justice in the community.

Christine Balderas/Photodisc/Getty Images

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.1 And Justice for All

Tim Ellis/Ikon Images/Getty Images

Equality, solidarity, and human rights form the building blocks
of social justice, the notion that all individuals should have
equal access to justice and equal protection of the law.

“Justice . . . is the great interest of man on earth. It is a ligament which holds civilized beings
and civilized nations together” (Webster, 1914, pg. 533). As such, the concept of justice

permeates through all aspects of human life. Yet, it remains an elusive concept to define.

The term justice can be defined as a concept of attempting to understand what is just,
including equality, in all aspects of human life. However, any individual definition of
justice is influenced by cultural and historical contexts and is also based on numerous
contexts in which an individual uses the term—contexts that focus on the definer’s beliefs
and values. “Some people believe that justice is a reality, something that has been achieved
through a set of policies and laws,” while others argue that “perfect justice is illusory and
impossible to achieve” (Owen, Fradella, Burke, & Joplin, 2012, p. 155). Still others believe
“there is much injustice in the world which may or may not be correctable” (Owen, et
al., 2012, p. 156). Although various definitions and individual beliefs about justice exist,
“virtually everyone believes that justice, however it may be defined, is something worth
achieving” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 156).

Social justice is a broad concept that covers every aspect of justice from a societal stand-
point. This includes defining justice on individual, as well as social, levels. Social justice is
also deeply ingrained in numerous social policies, procedures, and institutions that work
with and/or for individuals and their communities. In the criminal justice system, for
example, social justice ideals can be found in various aspects of the system, most notably
in the procedures that guide the workings of the system, from the initial interaction of
law enforcement officers with citizens to the assistance of reintegration into society for
offenders released from prison. For criminal justice students, it is important to understand
the various nuances the concept of justice brings to the criminal justice system. As future
practitioners in the field, it is important to study the concept of justice from individual,
procedural, and social perspectives.

7.1 And Justice for All

Throughout history, societies
have developed ideals of jus-

tice that serve as social bench-
marks for citizens to determine
whether their actions are just,
meaning they are correct or good.
Actions perceived as unjust are
thought to be bad or immoral,
going against what the society
has deemed just or appropriate.
In this light, individuals naturally
have a quest for justice. This quest
helps individuals evaluate their
actions against society’s concept
of justice, fulfilling an individ-
ual need to feel certainty about
whether the behavior is right or
wrong (Owen, et al., 2012).

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Individual Justice

The building blocks of social justice are equality, solidary, and human rights. Each of these
concepts is defined on an individual level, while viewing that individual within a social
context. In other words, individuals are a part of and influence society, while society is a
part of and influences individuals.

The American Revolution, and thus the founding of the United States of America, was
based in part on the perceived lack of justice provided to the colonies by Great Britain. The
term “justice” was used in both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitu-
tion. For the Founding Fathers, with justice came equality, defined as “protections that
promote equal rights for all persons without discrimination regardless of characteristics
such as race, gender, religion, disability status, veteran status, sexual orientation, income,
and more” (Owen, et al., 2012 , p. 192). The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence
reads, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration of Independence, 1776).

While it is important for a society to create equality among its members, these members
must also see themselves as members of that society, thus creating solidarity. For social
justice, solidarity means the degree to which individuals see themselves as members of an
extended family. As such, those individuals will actively strive to create relationships that
are productive and creative, in which individuals who are vulnerable or marginalized are
provided equality and counted as valuable members of society (Sirico, 2012).

Human rights are the third building block of social justice. They are important because
without fundamental human rights being acknowledged, social justice cannot be expected
or achieved. For a society to provide social justice, a respect of basic human rights must
be provided to all members of that society, which include freedoms of speech and move-
ment as well as various other concrete liberties (Miller, 1999). In other words, social justice
requires that societies provide for human rights through basic liberties (Miller, 1999).

A just world is the belief that “individuals get what they deserve” (Hafer & Begue, 2005,
pg. 128). This belief helps shape psychological and sociological perspectives of justice,
helping individuals by providing order in life and helping societies by promoting discus-
sion of and making decisions on important complex issues facing those societies. As such,
an understanding of justice is essential to the appropriate application of law and how it
“informs the workings of the criminal justice system, from a police officer’s discretion to
a judge’s sentencing determinations” (Owen, et al., 2012 , p. 157).

7.2 Individual Justice

Individual justice focuses on outcomes of actions as they relate to individuals, that is,
“whether or not the results are correct” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 158). Several perspectives

have been promoted, which focus on the individual and how the criminal justice system
provides justice to both the victim and offender as individuals, and to the community at
large as a perceived individual.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Individual Justice

Tim Macpherson/The Image Bank/Getty Images

Another aspect of restorative justice, called Victim Impact
Panels, involves the offender meeting with the victim or
victim’s family to listen to the ways in which the crime has
affected their lives.

Restorative Justice
The goals of restorative justice include making the victim and community whole again,
with the ideal of restoring the victim and community to precrime conditions. Both the
victim and offender are viewed as individuals, with individual harms arising from the
crime, while the community is also deemed to have suffered. For example, in the crime
of rape, the victim suffers physical abuse but will also suffer emotional and psychologi-
cal harm, as well as possible financial harm due to medical expenses and lost wages. If
the rape occurred in a prominent location of the community, like a popular park, then the
community is harmed, as individuals may be fearful and avoid the area in which the rape
occurred. The offender may also experience harm, as a conviction will lead to a separation
from the community and family, as well as being labeled a criminal and sex offender.

Restorative justice allows all parties of the crime to come together, with the ultimate goal
of restoration. This is achieved using several techniques. The simplest is for the offender to
apologize. While the providing of a sincere apology may be enough for the victim and state
to forego additional sanctions, this is generally more true for simple or minor offenses. A
second technique involves mediation, whereby the victim and offender come together to
meet with a mediator (an individual trained in resolution or conflict management). After
talking with both individuals, and taking into account their needs, the mediator would
make a recommendation for a solution that both parties will accept (Owen, et al., 2012).

A third technique is the concept of sentencing circle, which is “a community-directed pro-
cess, conducted in partnership with the criminal justice system, to develop consensus on an
appropriate sentencing plan that addresses the concerns of all interested parties” (National
Institute of Justice [NIJ], 2007, p. 1). This involves the victim and family, the offender and
family, and interested community members, whereby each provides the group with his or
her perspective of the crime and how he or she has been personally impacted by the crime.

The victim, victim’s family, and
community members are able to
openly discuss the crime to give
the offender insight into the harm
that was created as a result of the
crime and allow the offender to
take responsibility for the crime
and resulting harm. The group
will then devise a sentencing plan
that is acceptable to all parties.
The goals of sentencing circles
include promoting healing for all
parties, providing an opportunity
for the offender to make amends,
empowering all parties by giv-
ing them a voice and a shared
responsibility in finding construc-
tive resolutions, addressing the
underlying causes of criminal
behavior, building a sense of com-
munity, and promoting and shar-
ing community values (NIJ, 2007).

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Individual Justice

A fourth technique involves the offender attending meetings where the victim and/or
victim’s family has the chance to openly tell the offender how the crime has impacted
his or her life. These are typically called Victim Impact Panels. For example, many courts
require an offender convicted of drunk driving to attend a Mothers Against Drunk Driv-
ing (MADD) meeting to listen to victims of drunk driving crashes. “Attendees get to hear
the poignant stories of those whose lives have been permanently affected by an impaired
or reckless driver or those affected by underage drinking” (MADD, 2012, p. 1). These
exchanges are often powerful and sobering, where closure for the victim and/or victim’s
family is achieved.

Restorative justice may also include compensatory provisions, “making efforts to repair the
physical or financial damage caused by a crime” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 159). For example,
many states have created victim assistance funds, whereby the state and/or local govern-
ments provide monetary assistance to victims of crime. Offenders may be required to pay
into the fund or may be required to pay the victim directly for damages, including medical
bills, lost wages, or other losses deemed appropriate by the court (Owen, et al., 2012).

Ideological Justice
Many individuals believe in a specific ideology, which, for the purpose of defining justice,
is a “collection of beliefs that are assumed to produce justice as a result” (Owen, et al.,
2012, p. 160). Individuals believe that justice can only be achieved if societal policies reflect
their particular ideology. In other words, “the ideology to which one subscribes defines
one’s perception of justice” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 160). The polar opposites in ideology in
American society are libertarianism and socialism.

Libertarians believe strongly in individual rights, and that justice can be achieved with
little government interference, especially with regard to private property (Sargent, 1996).
For example, a libertarian would accept only the minimal amount of taxes, while restrict-
ing the state’s ability to criminalize many behaviors, including drug use. “Therefore,
any intervention of the law into private property or private rights is viewed as unjust”
(Owen, et al., 2012, p. 160).

At the other extreme is socialism, whereby the government uses high taxes and other
means to control the distribution of wealth, as well as services and industries, which is
commonly referred to as democratic socialism (Sargent, 1996). For the socialist, “justice is
best accomplished in a society with a large government that manages public ownership
of industries that are viewed as most necessary for a productive society, and that provides
many services to all members of society” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 160). In other words, “an
active government is required to promote justice” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 160). Socialism
views the role of the government as paramount, thus severely limiting and, in some cases,
eliminating individual rights and responsibilities.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Individual Justice

Distributive Justice
According to Schmidtz (2006, p. 7), “[J]ustice concerns what people are due.” For criminal
justice, this means that individuals who commit crime are to be processed through a spe-
cific system, from arrest through sentencing, to receive their due punishment. “Because
the end result of this process is a distribution of outcomes (i.e., the stops, arrests, verdicts,
and sentences), it is known as distributive justice” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 163). For criminal
justice, there are several perspectives on how to dispense distributive justice.

Commutative Justice
The concept of commutative justice is based on
the philosophies of Aristotle, who wrote that
“what is just is what is proportionate. And what is
unjust is what violates the proportion” (Aristotle,
2000, p. 87). For example, in criminal justice, in
order for a punishment to serve justice, it must be
proportionate to the crime. So, an individual who
commits a crime should expect that he or she is
due some type of punishment and that the pun-
ishment will be in accordance to the severity and
harm caused by the crime.

Utilitarian Justice
The concept of utilitarian justice is found in the
writings of Jeremy Bentham, in his idea of the
greatest happiness for the greatest number. This
is typically calculated using a cost–benefit analy-
sis, whereby the cost of a certain behavior is com-
pared to the benefit of that behavior. Here, the
greatest number represents society, as it is society
who constitutes the greatest number, not the indi-
vidual. If the benefits outweigh the costs, mean-
ing there are more benefits for engaging in the behavior than costs or harms that are con-
sequences of that behavior, then the behavior is deemed to provide more happiness, and
thus it becomes just (Owen, et al., 2012).

SCIENCE SOURCE/Photo Researchers/Getty Images

Aristotle believed in commutative justice,
which dictates that punishment should be
proportionate to the crime committed.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.2 Individual Justice

Vigilante Justice
Vigilante justice, or what is often referred in criminal justice as “retributive justice,” occurs
when individual citizens bypass the criminal justice system and decide to dispense pun-
ishment, and thus justice, themselves. “Individuals generally engage in vigilante justice
(also known as vigilantism) when members of the community agree that it is necessary
to do so to protect persons or property” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 164). Although the reasons
may be honorable, and the vigilante actions taken deemed appropriate, these behaviors
run counter to the criminal justice system, in which the state has the sole discretion to
prosecute and punish offenders. In that sense, individuals engaging in vigilante justice,
regardless of the reason, may open themselves up to criminal liability for their actions
(Owen, et al., 2012).

Vigilante justice is grounded in the notion of retribution. Another aspect of retribution is
just desserts, or “payback but with less emphasis on individual revenge” (Owen, et al.,
2012, p. 266). In other words, society views the offender as harming not only the individ-
ual victim, but also harming society as a whole. Societal acceptance of the punishment is
then based on the notion that it should fit the crime; or rather, the punishment should be
proportional to the harm done without resorting to revenge (Owen, et al., 2012).

Veil of Ignorance
The veil of ignorance, as espoused by John Rawls
(1999), is an idea that if all individuals were to
wear a veil, which would keep them from know-
ing and identifying with their personal back-
grounds (i.e., gender, race, education, wealth,
etc.), then all decisions on social and government
policies would be just and fair because they would
not be based on self-interest. The veil of ignorance
would provide two principles that guide society:
All persons should have equal access to basic
rights (such as the right to counsel), and society
should provide equality of opportunity (such as
access to education). “Rawls argued that justice
is fairness” and that “fairness is achieved when
society provides the same set of rights and liber-
ties to all persons and when society allows per-
sons an equal opportunity to succeed” (Owen, et
al., 2012, p. 168).

Radius/SuperStock

A truly just society would result if
individuals were to don a veil of ignorance,
enabling individuals to dissociate from
their own personal backgrounds and make
decisions for the common good.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.3 Procedural Justice

7.3 Procedural Justice

As each facet of the criminal justice system has individualized procedures that work
within the larger procedures of the system as a whole, it is important for criminal jus-

tice students to understand the relationship of those procedures to the concept of justice.
Procedural justice “concerns the fairness of the processes used when applying the law”
and “is grounded in the idea that fair procedures are the best guarantee for fair outcomes”
(Owen, et al., 2012, p. 206).

In the criminal justice system, procedural justice is grounded in the due process guaran-
tees found in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The words due process “have as their
central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within
the law (“legality”) and provide fair procedures” (Legal Information Institute, 2012d, p. 1).

According to Rawls (1971), there are three basic philosophical models of procedural jus-
tice. These models can be viewed in the context of the criminal justice system to explain
how it attempts to achieve justice.

Perfect Procedural Justice
Within the perfect procedural justice model, Rawls (1971) identifies two characteristic
features: “First, there is an independent criterion for what is a fair division,” and “second,
it is possible to devise a procedure that is sure to give the desired outcome.” In other
words, “there is an independent standard for deciding which outcome is just and a proce-
dure guaranteed to lead to it” (Rawls, 1971, p. 85).

In the criminal justice system, per-
fect procedural justice has its roots
in the accuracy model. “Accuracy
is provided by elaborate trial pro-
cedures, including cross exami-
nation, neutral judges and juries,
rules of evidence, and representa-
tion by counsel” (Solum, 2004, p.
245). However, the current crimi-
nal justice system does not fol-
low the accuracy model. “Rawls
pointed out that legal doctrines
often interfere with the accuracy
in fact finding required of perfect
procedural justice” (Owen, et al.,
2012, p. 207).

For example, the Fifth Amend-
ment provides individuals a pro-
tection against self-incrimination.
To further this protection, the
U.S. Supreme Court, in Miranda

Darrin Klimek/Thinkstock

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that in any custodial
interrogation, the suspect must first be read the Miranda
Rights, which explain an individual’s Fifth Amendment
protection against self-incrimination.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.3 Procedural Justice

v. Arizona (1966) set forth an additional requirement that all individuals in a custodial
interrogation situation be informed of this protection. If an individual suspect is inter-
rogated while in custody without first being informed of his Fifth Amendment protection
against self-incrimination, then all evidence obtained during the interrogation will not
be admissible in court, even if the interrogation yielded a confession. “A higher principle
of public policy—namely, protection of constitutional rights” is addressed; “however, it
interferes with the overall accuracy of the trial process” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 207). For
Rawls, “[P]erfect procedural justice is rare, if not impossible, in cases of much practical
interest” (1971, p. 85). In other words, although there is an independent standard identify-
ing a just outcome, the procedures do not guarantee that outcome.

Imperfect Procedural Justice
Within the imperfect procedural justice model, the first characteristic of the perfect
model is seen, but the second characteristic is missing. In other words, the independent
criterion has been established, but there is no procedure that guarantees the desired, or
just, outcome. For Rawls (1971, p. 85), “[I]mperfect procedural justice is exemplified by a
criminal trial.”

The purpose of the criminal trial
is to prove that an offender actu-
ally committed the crime and that
the offender should be convicted,
or declared guilty, only if the
evidence proves guilt. “The trial
procedure is framed to search for
and to establish the truth in this
regard. But it seems impossible to
design the legal rules so that they
always lead to the correct result”
(Rawls, 1971, p. 85).

For example, even if all of the
evidence points to an individual
as the offender of a crime, a jury
could still declare a not-guilty
verdict, or a truly innocent per-
son may be wrongfully convicted.
“Even though the law is carefully
followed, and the proceedings
fairly and properly conducted, it

may reach the wrong conclusion” (Rawls, 1971, p. 85). Owen, et al. (2012) argue that this
is possible because imperfect procedural justice operates within a balancing model.

The purpose of the balancing model is “to strike a fair balance between the costs and
benefits of adjudication” (Solum, 2004, p. 193). So, for the criminal trial, procedural rights
granted in the U.S. Constitution, and the law of evidence created to protect those rights,
are balanced against the ideal of controlling crime. In other words, there are tradeoffs
within the judicial process.

Stockbyte/Thinkstock

Criminal trials operate under the imperfect procedural justice
model because, though trial proceedings aim to discern the
truth, a jury could still come to an erroneous conclusion and
declare the wrong verdict.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.4 Social Justice

Pure Procedural Justice
Rawls (1971, p. 86) identified pure procedural justice as occurring when “there is a correct
or fair procedure such that the outcome is likewise correct or fair, whatever it is, provided
that the procedure has been properly followed.” In other words, the criminal justice sys-
tem is created with fair procedures that should produce, but does not guarantee, a fair or
just outcome. “The process is then more significant than the accuracy of the outcome . . .
playing by a set of predetermined, mutually agreed-upon, fair rules is what is important”
(Owen, et al., 2012, p. 208).

In order to obtain pure procedural justice, it must be based upon a participation model,
meaning that “those affected by a decision have the option to participate in the process
by which the decision is made” (Solum, 2004, p. 259). For the criminal trial, the parties
involved “are guaranteed a series of rights designed to allow their meaningful participa-
tion in the justice process” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 208). However, not all participation is
equal; thus, the system, and the procedures involved, cannot be just. For example, wealth-
ier defendants are able to hire more experienced lawyers and expert witnesses, thus pro-
viding a possible advantage. Also, even with the ideal of justice being blind, the system
is processed by humans, who possess biases, prejudices, values, and norms that will play
major roles in decisions, and therefore in outcomes.

Procedural Justice in the Criminal Justice System
In our current criminal justice system, all three of the procedural justice models come
into play. Therefore, it is important to understand how concepts and ideas from each of
the models affect the system and the individuals processed in the system in an attempt to
provide just and fair procedures.

Perfect procedural justice tells us that accuracy matters. However, imperfect procedural
justice tells us that accuracy is not the only important goal, but that principles such as
dignity and respect for people and rights must also be considered. And pure procedural
justice tells us that meaningful participation in processes that provide fair rules is also
required. Taken together, these models provide the criminal justice system with a frame-
work within which the system can be deemed fair and just (Owen, et al., 2012).

7.4 Social Justice

Social justice is not a legal process, but “rather, it is an idea or a value to which indi-
viduals may subscribe and which, in turn, can shape decisions about civil justice and

criminal justice policy issues” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 188). Therefore, the quest for justice
is a quest for equality.

David Miller (1999, p. 1) defines social justice as “how the good and bad things in life
should be distributed among members of a human society.” When an individual or group
in a society claims that a policy, procedure, or process is socially unjust, the claim is that the
policy, procedure, or process unfairly gives another individual or group more advantages

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.4 Social Justice

than they ought to enjoy, or provides more burdens for others than they ought to bear
(Miller, 1999). In other words, social justice concerns “equality, empowerment, fairness in
the relationship between people and the government, equal opportunity, and equal access
to resources and goods” (Braveman and Suarez-Balcazar, 2009).

Rawls (1999, p. 8) further elaborates on the concept of social justice, in that

men born into different positions have different expectations of life deter-
mined, in part, by the political system as well as by economic and social
circumstances. In this way the institutions of society favor certain starting
places over others. These are especially deep inequalities. Not only are
they pervasive, but they affect men’s initial changes in life; yet they can-
not possibly be justified by an appeal to the notions of merit and desert.
It is these inequalities, presumably inevitable in the basic structure of any
society, to which the principles of social justice apply.

In essence, “people should not be answerable for things for which they are not responsi-
ble” (Burrus, 2012, p. 231).

Historical Examples of Social Justice
There are numerous examples of
social justice movements in the
history of the United States, with
many of these movements occur-
ring in the 20th century. One such
movement was the Civil Rights
Movement of the 1960s. The
movement was succinctly tied to
social justice by seeking equal-
ity between the races, solidarity
among African Americans, and
human rights for all Americans.
Although a tumultuous time in
our history, the end result was the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, provid-
ing all Americans, regardless of
race, the constitutional right to
vote, equal access to public edu-
cation by desegregating schools,
and injunctive relief against dis-
crimination in federally assisted
programs (Civil Rights Act, 1964). The Act was further amended in 1991 to protect against
intentional employment discrimination, and to strengthen and improve federal civil rights
(Civil Rights Act, 1991).

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Many historical social justice movements have been rooted
in the documents that created our country, namely those
promoting individual rights.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.4 Social Justice

Another historical example is the Labor Movement, which

grew out of the need to protect the common interest of workers. For those
in the industrial sector, organized labor unions fought for better wages,
reasonable hours and safer working conditions. The labor movement led
efforts to stop child labor, give health benefits and provide aid to workers
who were injured or retired. (Brody, 2012, p. 1)

However, it was more than just a movement about wages and conditions; “it harbored a
conception of the just society, deriving from the Ricardian labor theory of value and from
the republican ideals of the American Revolution, which fostered social equality, celebrated
honest labor, and relied on an independent, virtuous citizenship” (Brody, 2012, p. 1).

The Women’s Rights Movement has also been a strong force for social justice since the early
part of the 19th century, advocating that women are and should be considered equal and
valuable members of American society. A major part of the movement involved the issue of
women’s right to vote. White men have always had the freedom to vote in local, state, and
national elections, and black men were given the right to vote in 1870 by the Fifteenth

Amendment to the Constitution. However, for over 100 years, women’s suffrage advocates
pressed legislatures and fought against cultural ideology that placed women in submissive
roles of wife and mother. Their dedication was rewarded with the passage of the Nineteenth
Amendment in 1920, giving all women the right to vote (History.com, 2012a).

Leading Figures in Social Justice
All successful social movements, and even some
unsuccessful ones, have one or two key figures
that bring legitimacy and structure to the move-
ment. One such leading figure in the Civil Rights
Movement was Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
A Baptist minister and social activist, King was an
instrumental figure in the movement from the early
1950s through the 1960s. King was concerned with
all manner of individuals and issues. An advocate
of nonviolence, “King sought equality for Afri-
can Americans, the economically disadvantaged
and victims of injustice through peaceful protest”
(History.com, 2012 b, p. 1). Due to his activism for
social justice, which brought about the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, King
was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. Unfor-
tunately, an assassin’s bullet ended his life in 1968,
but his legacy lives on in the many lives he touched
throughout his life.

Tom Hollyman/ Photo Researchers/Getty Images

Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., is perhaps
the best-known social justice activist of the
20th century.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.4 Social Justice

A leading advocate for workers for most of his
adult life, Cesar Chavez began working the grape
fields of California as a child in 1939. Alongside
other migrant workers, Chavez experienced mea-
ger wages, racism, and corrupt labor contractors.
Introduced to labor organizing in 1952, Chavez
spent the next 30-plus years working to organize
and protect migrant farm workers. After success-
fully creating the United Farm Workers union,
Chavez was instrumental in the passage of Cali-
fornia’s Agricultural Labor Relations Act, the first
of its kind in the country. From his early childhood
through his death in 1993, “Chavez tenaciously
devoted himself to the problems of some of the
poorest workers in America. The movement he
inspired succeeded in raising salaries and improv-
ing working conditions for farm workers in Cali-
fornia, Texas, Arizona, and Florida” (Del Castillo,
2012, p. 1).

In any discussion of the women’s movement,
Susan B. Anthony will invariably be mentioned
as a leader and role model. Born into a politically
active family in 1820, Anthony became part of
the temperance movement, at which time she realized that “no one would take women

in politics seriously unless they had the right
to vote” (History.com, 2012c, p. 1). In 1869, she
cofounded the National Woman Suffrage Asso-
ciation, through which she gave speeches across
the country, calling for recognition of basic and
fundamental human rights for women, includ-
ing the right to vote. Although the Nineteenth
Amendment was not passed until 14 years after
her death, her legacy lives on in various ways,
including her being the first woman to be placed
on U.S. currency (History.com, 2012c).

Photo Inc/Photo Researchers/Getty Images

Susan B. Anthony was a pioneer and social
activist for women’s rights.

Everett Collection/SuperStock

Cesar Chavez at a news conference as the
leader of the United Farm Workers union.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Section 7.4 Social Justice

Social Justice in the Community
Social justice is a broad concept, under which many social policies, programs, and profes-
sions are linked, all with the goal of creating a just society. For example, social work, pub-
lic health, and environmental justice all focus on social justice issues, with practitioners
working with individuals, communities, and the larger society to bring about equality,
solidarity, and human rights.

Figure 7.1: Social justice and connections

Progress in social justice is achieved through a variety of community agencies, each with a specific
focus and direction.

Both social work and public health have at their core the concept of human dignity, a
fundamental aspect of social justice. For social work, the notion that all individuals have
equal worth is the foundation that brings about a social justice perspective to the profes-
sion and the way social workers do their job (Morris, 2002). Similarly, the concept of a
fundamental right to good health can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which
proclaims inalienable human rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,
with the right to life including the right to good health. This notion is also espoused in the
U.S. Constitution’s promotion of the general welfare, which includes the good health of
all citizens (Manderscheid, 2011).

Environmental justice is a relatively new concept under which communities attempt
to reverse environmental harms, deemed to be disproportionately burdening the poor.
Environmental justice is concerned with such issues as air and water pollution, automo-
bile emissions, inadequate transportation, waste disposal, and other issues directly and
indirectly affecting individuals, families, and communities. For example, in areas where
industrial facilities are located, the facilities are held legally responsible for their envi-
ronmental impacts on the local community (Edwards & Darnall, 2010).

Social Work

Public Health

Environmental
Justice

Social Justice

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Web Links

Chapter Summary

Social justice is a broad and overarching concept that is found in numerous social pro-
cesses and institutions. The overall goals of social justice are to provide all individuals

with equal access to social institutions such as education, equitable distribution of basic
resources for the fulfillment of life, and procedures that provide for equality and due
process. Social justice ideals permeate various fields of study including criminal justice,
psychology, and social work. Many social justice advocates work on the local level, but
governments at all levels are working to provide programs and resources based on the
ideals of social justice.

Questions for Critical Thinking
• Why is it so difficult to define the concept of justice? How does the term “justice”

relate to the concepts of equality, solidarity, and human rights?
• What is individual justice? How do the notions of restorative, ideological, and

distributive justice function for individuals?
• What is procedural justice? How do the various procedural justice processes

work, and which are important in social justice?
• What is social justice? What are some examples of historical events and leading

figures in social justice? How do communities engage in social justice?

Web Links
This website provides information on the National Association of Social Workers, the
largest membership organization in the world, created to enhance professional growth
and maintain standards and ethics:
www.naswdc.org/pressroom/features/issue/peace.asp.

This website is the Centre for Social Justice, which conducts research, education, and
advocacy on issues dealing with democracy and equality:
http://socialjustice.org/.

This website is the Center for Economic and Social Justice, which promotes a free-enterprise
approach to global economic justice:
http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/economicjustice-defined.htm.

This website provides an interesting article about the concept of social justice, from The
Heritage Foundation:
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/social-justice-not-what-you-think-it-is.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 7Key Terms

Key Terms

commutative justice The concept that
what is just is what is proportionate.

distributive justice A perspective of what
individuals are due, focusing on how out-
comes are distributed.

equality The promotion of equal rights for
all individuals, without regard to personal
characteristics, such as gender, race, eth-
nicity, religion, etc. This is a fundamental
component of the criminal justice system.

human rights Basic, fundamental rights of
all persons to life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness.

ideology A set of beliefs to which indi-
viduals subscribe and which assist them in
defining justice.

imperfect procedural justice Occurs
when an independent standard for decid-
ing just outcomes is established, but
there is no procedure that guarantees that
outcome.

individual justice A concept of whether
outcomes that affect individuals are just.

justice A concept of attempting to under-
stand what is just, including equality, in all
aspects of human life.

perfect procedural justice Occurs when
there is an independent standard for
deciding just outcomes and a procedure
guaranteed to obtain that outcome.

procedural justice The idea that justice is
achieved when the processes used to apply
the law are fair.

pure procedural justice Occurs when fair
procedures are established that should
produce, but do not guarantee, a fair or
just outcome.

restorative justice The idea of making the
victim and community whole again after a
crime has occurred.

social justice A view of how resources in
society should be distributed in order to
attain equality for all members.

solidarity The degree to which indi-
viduals see themselves as members of an
extended family (e.g., the community).

utilitarian justice The idea of the greatest
happiness for the greatest number.

veil of ignorance The idea that if indi-
viduals were to wear a veil whereby they
would not know their personal back-
grounds, then all decisions on social and
government policies would be just and fair.

vigilante justice When members of a
society or community bypass the criminal
justice system and dispense punishment to
a criminal offender.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

2

Typical Sections of a Research Paper

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Outline the general structure of a social and criminal justice research paper, and dis-
cuss the content included in each section.

• Demonstrate the necessary attention to detail with the supplemental materials pre-
sented throughout the paper (figures and tables) and at the end of an APA-formatted
paper (references and appendix), and be able to create a references section.

Clerkenwell/The Agency Collection/Getty Images

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

The CRJ 422 Capstone project (research paper) can be described as research review
because it presents and evaluates previously published research. In the research paper,

the researcher will present a thesis statement and provide a review of previous literature
and studies on the topic. However, researchers are also engaged in original research, con-
ducting studies focused on a specific topic or issue, or for the purpose of evaluating or
advancing a new theory. This can involve asking individuals to complete questionnaires,
conducting interviews, or making personal observations. Upon completion of the study,
the researcher will produce a written synopsis, typically in the form of a research report,
review article, or theoretical article. These may be presented in the form of articles in pro-
fessional journals, can be included as book chapters or in newsletters, or provided in any
number of other media outlets.

Chapter 1 provides information on how to identify and narrow the thesis statement for a
sound social and criminal justice research paper. However, it is not yet time to begin the
actual writing process. Much more needs to be done in terms of developing an effective
outline and identifying the pertinent sections of the research paper that will be completed
as the resource material is identified and compiled.

The research paper should include the following: title page, abstract, introduction, lit-
erature review, conclusion, and references. This chapter will cover the basic outline that
students should follow to produce a sound social and criminal justice research paper.

2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

A research paper does not pres-
ent original data but will

include a thorough literature
review and perhaps a suggested
methodology and ideas for future
research on the topic. A strong
criminal justice research paper
generally follows a specific struc-
ture and is organized by the order
in which sections of an APA-style
paper appear. The author begins
with a title page and abstract, then
provides an introduction, presents
a concise review of the literature,
and ends with a comprehensive
conclusion and references. Each
of these sections will be covered in
more detail in this chapter.

PhotoAlto/Sigrid Olsson/PhotoAlto Agency RF Collections/Getty Images

Thorough research begins in the library.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Title Page
The title page (also called a cover page), along with the abstract, is typically the last
section to be written. However, the title page and abstract are the first two pages of an
APA-formatted paper.

There are precise formatting rules for the preparation of a manuscript in APA style. For
example, the student should use Times New Roman 12-point font, double-spacing, and
one-inch margins on all four sides of each page. On the title page are the running head
and the page number at the top (all inside the top one-inch margin). The running head
label is in mixed case, but the actual running head found on every page of the paper is all
caps and limited to 50 characters (note that the words “Running Head” appear only on
the title page). For example, a research paper that covers the effects that participation in
a drug court has on recidivism rates might include DRUG COURTS AND RECIDIVISM
across the top of every page. The last elements of the title page are the title of the research
paper (no more than 12–15 words long) and the student’s school affiliation. Author notes,
if included (check with your instructor to find out if these are necessary), should appear
toward the bottom of the cover page. This is all double-spaced and centered toward the
middle of the title page. Titles of research papers often begin with “A Study of . . . ,” “An
Investigation of . . . ,” or “An Experiment on . . .” and are often used for indexing in data-
bases (Sternberg, 2000). The title needs to be clear and concise and must convey specifi-
cally what the paper is about, but it also needs to be creative and enlightening in order
to attract the attention of potential readers. An example title page is shown in Figure 2.1.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Figure 2.1: Sample title page

Running Head: DRUG COURTS AND RECIDIVISM 1

An Investigation of the Effects of Drug Court

Participation on Recidivism Rates

Clint Westwood

CRJ 422 Criminal Justice Capstone

Professor Callahan

August 25, 2012

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Abstract
The next page of a research paper
is the abstract. This might be the
most difficult single paragraph for
students to write, but it is one of
the most important. The abstract
provides a synopsis of the main
points of the paper, identifying
the thesis statement, an analysis
of the literature review, and a brief
summary of the conclusion. APA
style limits an abstract to 120–150
words, so this paragraph must
be succinct (the word count fea-
ture in Microsoft® Word can eas-
ily calculate this value). Because
the student cannot summarize
the purpose, thesis statement,
literature review, and conclusion
until the paper is completed, this
is the last piece of the paper to be
written.

An abstract for a research paper should cover the following areas (preferably in this order):

1. background and purpose: 1–2 sentences;
2. thesis statement: 1 sentence;
3. literature review: 2–3 sentences; and
4. conclusion: 2–3 sentences (Dunn, 2011).

To stay within the 150-word maximum limit, each of the preceding listed items needs to be
no more than three sentences long. The abstract paragraph, appearing on page 2, is never
indented. In addition, numerals (4, 6) should be used rather than spelling out the numbers
(four, six), as the “numerals under 10” rule does not apply in the abstract. For a sample
abstract, see page 2 of the sample papers located in the appendix.

After completing the abstract, students should add keywords (no more than five) that
would help others if they were searching for the paper or topic in a database. Abstracts
are vital because they are indexed and cataloged into databases like EBSCO and ProQuest.
Future researchers looking to identify and retrieve articles in a given subject area will do
so largely based on the abstract.

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

The abstract must be a clear and succinct synopsis of the
main points of the research paper.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Cavan Images/Iconica/Getty Images

Just like meeting someone for the first time, the introduction
provides a chance for your research paper to make a
great first impression. It should introduce the topic, give
background information, and state the paper’s purpose.

Introduction
Although the introduction sec-
tion is the introduction to the
paper, it won’t appear until page
3 of an APA-style research paper
(the title page is page 1, and the
abstract is presented on page 2).
The introduction provides the
organization for the content of the
remaining paper. Students should
consider the introduction as the
first impression. The reader needs
to know what the paper is all
about and why it is important to
read. As such, it is recommended
that students write the introduc-
tion section after the paper has
been written, in order to ensure a
consistent parallel from the intro-
duction through the conclusion.

An introduction has three major
goals: (1) introduce the topic or
issue, (2) develop the background,
and (3) state the purpose and rationale for the research paper, including the thesis state-
ment. This template can be particularly useful for those learning to become proficient in
writing a research paper.

In the opening paragraph of the research paper, the goal is to convince the reader that
the issue is worthy of study. This can be done in a number of ways. For example, statis-
tics about the topic or issue can be given to convince the reader that this issue has merit
and is important to study. Or, a particular behavior can be described in such a way as to
illustrate that it is pervasive in daily life and matters to nearly everyone. Regardless of the
technique, the first paragraph of an introduction should grab the reader’s attention and
demonstrate that the topic is important. Dana Dunn (2011), an expert on writing, offered
advice for possible openers in the introduction, which he called opening gambits—see
Writing in Action: Possible Openers for an Introduction Section to a Social and Criminal Justice
Research Paper for his suggestions.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Writing in Action: Possible Openers for an Introduction Section to a
Social and Criminal Justice Research Paper

• An everyday experience that readers will immediately recognize: “The criminal justice system
is ever changing, as new laws and procedures are being developed on a daily basis.”

• The absence of research in an area important to understand: “High-speed pursuits are an
important part of local law enforcement, but little literature exists that identifies the strengths
and weaknesses of high-speed pursuit policies.”

• A rhetorical question that redirects readers to examine their own feelings about the issue:
“How would you feel if your son or daughter was caught smoking marijuana while in high
school?”

• A compelling fact or statistic that is typically surprising: “When the legal drinking age was
increased from 18 to 21, drunk driving crashes and fatalities decreased by 66% in the first
year.”

• A metaphor or an analogy that joins two seemingly disparate beliefs or ideas: “When investi-
gating juvenile delinquency, all of the major influences on the juvenile’s decisions should be
evaluated to identify the weak link—the juvenile cannot make proper decisions without the
entire chain of influences being positive and working together.”

• An historical reference that helps to indicate change over time: “The perceived increase in
the rate of rape offenses since 1950 may be due to an increase in reporting rates rather than
offense rates—for instance, in 1950, rape was reported at 1 per 250,000 population, but by
2000, rape was reported at 1 per 100,000 population.”

The opening paragraph, following the opening sentence, should also clearly state why
this topic or issue is of importance and why it is important to review the research that fol-
lows in the literature review.

Subsequent paragraphs in the introduction should include the presentation of the thesis
statement and a description of any terms or concepts pertinent to the research. At this
point, students should remember that some terms may be general and well known, while
others may be specific to a certain topic or issue, and thus need more explanation.

Literature Review
Although briefly defined in Chapter 1, literature review (or a review of the literature, or
sometimes a “lit review”) is a fairly generic term that can be used in a number of con-
texts. For the social and criminal justice research paper, the literature review will require
students to develop and write an integrated synopsis or summary of prior research con-
ducted on a contemporary criminal justice topic or issue.

In a research paper, the literature review is more than just the student’s summary of
prior research. It provides support for the thesis statement, including the rationale for
the stance. The literature review may include an historical overview of the topic or issue,

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

any prior theoretical explanations for the topic or
issue, and/or a description of prior research that
shows support for or against the thesis statement.

As the main portion of the research paper, the
literature review should be comprehensive and
include all relevant information to show a depth
of knowledge and insight into the topic. However,
students should understand that not every piece
of information needs to be provided and that it
is not expected that all relevant literature will
be cited in the research paper. Students should
review as many resources as time allows, and then
decide which resources are relevant and pertinent
to the thesis statement and which resources will
provide the most thorough analysis of the topic.
Given the extensiveness of the literature review, it
is important to describe the most appropriate way
to write one.

Galvan (2006) offered a comprehensive set of
writing instructions for literature reviews. Begin
by identifying the broad problem area (e.g., “peer
pressure is related to the use of drugs by juve-
niles”), but avoid global statements (e.g., “juve-

nile drug use is increasing”). Early in the review, indicate why the topic being reviewed
is important. Distinguish between research findings, such as journal articles, and other
sources of information, such as the opinions of politicians or popular media reports. In
addition, researchers provide a great service to readers when they can identify why a par-
ticular study is important and cite a classic or landmark study as such. If commenting on
the timeliness of a topic, be specific in describing the timeframe and give the reader some
context as to why that is an important detail.

Analysis of the Literature
The analysis, synthesis, and evaluation components of the literature review are all impor-
tant components of the research paper. Analysis means that the student has reviewed
relevant literature (e.g., prior research studies) and has analyzed each resource in terms of
the thesis statement. The analysis involves identifying the topic, and reviewing the data
and conclusions posed by the prior researcher. Again, students should remember that just
because a resource covers the topic of the thesis statement, this does not mean the resource
needs to be included in the literature review.

But analysis is much more than identifying sources and choosing a direct quote or para-
phrasing a portion of the material. An analysis consists of examining the written work
to identify key concepts and ideas, to determine the overall benefit of the information.

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock

The literature review synthesizes all
relevant information into a comprehensive
body of support for the thesis statement.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Creating a template with key questions to answer is a beneficial way to ensure that all
resources are analyzed in the same manner, within the same focus. Students should also
remember that the point of the analysis is to evaluate and develop their own assessment
of the information in order to identify that information which is important in addressing
the thesis statement.

As noted in Chapter 1, plagiarism is an important issue in any research paper. It is impera-
tive that students avoid plagiarizing and give credit where credit is due. “Three different
acts are considered plagiarism: (1) failing to cite quotations and borrowed ideas, (2) failing
to enclose borrowed language in quotation marks, and (3) failing to put summaries and
paraphrases in your own words” (Hacker, 2009). Students must remember that unless the
material is common knowledge or their own original idea or concept, citations must be
presented. And when in doubt, cite it!

Synthesis of the Literature
Although the analysis is important, it is not enough. The goal is to synthesize the main
ideas presented in each resource with a critical, evaluative viewpoint. Consider the fol-
lowing literature review examples, adapted from Reaves (2004; reprinted by permission
of Dr. Celia Reaves). In the first example, analysis has been completed, but the product
looks more like a book report than an integrated review of the literature. Note that all of
the citations and authors in the following example are fabricated (thus not presented in
the references section at the end of this book).

Robinson (2005) did a study on the benefits of an antidrug after school program
on young children. The results indicate that these children become better commu-
nicators and more likely to tell parents or teachers of drug use by peers. Robinson
studied 85 children in an after school program in Gainesville, Florida.

Jennings (2004) wrote a book chapter about the educational benefits of an anti-
drug program for young children. She says the long-term effects of these programs
haven’t been studied in children who attended at a young age. She says, “We are
focusing on drug problems that haven’t occurred yet. Kids this young don’t know
what drugs are, so why are we telling them now?” (p. 65).

Girven (2001) stated there are distinct advantages to reaching children early,
before drugs become an issue. She says that children are more likely to learn in an
after school type of environment than in the classroom, particularly if the educa-
tion is part of a fun activity.

According to Mitchell (2004), when very young children are given information
about drugs, they are less likely to give in to peer pressure in older grades. He said
this not only helps them identify the drugs but also gives them resources to call on
when being pressured.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

Lawrence (2003) pointed out that in numerous research studies, drug education
has not been shown to be effective for young children. This is because there is not
enough evidence that starting drug education early makes a difference.

Two researchers (Gregg & Chimel, 2006) conducted a study of a variety of after
school programs. They found similar results, showing kids are more likely to resist
peer pressure and drug use if they have been educated about drugs at an early age.

In another study, Reeves (2002) found that children who had been given antidrug
education in an after school setting were more likely to remain drug-free in later
years. They also had more friends because of the program activities.

Similarly, Reid (2001) found the same basic result. She looked at children who
attended an antidrug after school program. Once again, children who were given
drug education earlier were less likely to give in to peer pressure and more likely
to stay drug-free.

In the format of the above literature review, each article referenced is written as an indi-
vidual paragraph. The literature review indicates a thorough analysis of the topic, but
there is no synthesis to the presentation of the information. Synthesis means searching for
underlying themes and making connections across studies; it is not just the analysis of dif-
ferent studies. Below is an example of the same information, but rewritten with synthesis:

Providing antidrug education in an after school program to young children has
some advantages. It makes them more likely to resist peer pressure (Mitchell, 2004;
Gregg & Chimel, 2006; Reid, 2001) and they are more likely to remain drug-free
(Reeves, 2002; Reid, 2001). In addition, they are better communicators and learn
more in an after school setting (Robinson, 2005; Girven, 2001).

In contrast, some researchers point to the lack of research support for giving anti-
drug education to young children. Several researchers (Jennings, 2004; Lawrence,
2003) state that drug education has not been shown to be effective for young chil-
dren, and the long-term effects of such programs have not been studied. As Jennings
(2004) puts it, “We are focusing on drug problems that haven’t occurred yet. Kids
this young don’t know what drugs are, so why are we telling them now?” (p. 65).

In this second example, the text is shorter and more concise. The references that show a
similarity in a particular argument or thought are grouped together. The intellectual ben-
efit of a well-written literature review is that the author has provided concise analysis and
synthesis of the information for the reader, and the reader is provided with rich context
for understanding the material.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Overview of a Research Paper

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Have you successfully argued your thesis
statement?

Conclusion
The conclusion section is all about interpreta-
tions. Students should carefully analyze the mate-
rial and data in the literature review section and
provide a concise conclusion that links the thesis
statement to the literature review. In other words,
the conclusion should show how the literature
review supports the thesis statement.

Even with a clear link to the thesis statement, writ-
ing the conclusion can be difficult. The conclusion
should help the reader understand why the anal-
ysis and information in the paper should matter
to them, as well as make them satisfied to have
read the paper. In other words, “[T]he conclusion
allows you to have the final say on the issues you
have raised in your paper, to summarize your
thoughts, to demonstrate the importance of your
ideas” and is “your opportunity to make a good
final impression and to end on a positive note”
(The Writing Center, 2012).

There are several strategies for writing an effec-
tive conclusion. Table 2.1 identifies these strate-
gies and explanations.

Table 2.1: Effective strategies for writing a conclusion

Strategy Explanation

Play the “So What” game Whenever a statement is made, ask “So what?” or
“Why should anyone care?” Then answer the ques-
tion in the conclusion. This strategy can be used as the
conclusion is being developed.

Return to the theme in the introduction Brings the reader full circle, using key words or parallel
concepts used in the introduction.

Synthesize, don’t summarize Summarize the main points, but don’t simply repeat
information. Show how the points made and examples
used fit together.

Propose a course of action, solution, or ques-
tions for further study

Redirect the reader’s thought process to help apply
your information and ideas to the reader’s own life or
to see broader implications.

Point to broader implications If the paper is about a criminal theorist, point to his or
her influence on later theorists. If the paper is about
an innovative technology, point to its impact on the
criminal justice system.

Adapted from The Writing Center, 2012

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 References, Tables, Figures, and Appendices

Jupiterimages/Polka Dot/Thinkstock

Remember to include all of your resources in the references
section.

Students should include a discussion of any limitations found in the various studies pre-
sented in the literature review. In addition, the conclusion should also provide a wrap-up
of the information, and comments about future research on the thesis statement.

2.2 References, Tables, Figures, and Appendices

The remaining section of the research paper includes the references and possibly an
appendix. In addition, students may want to gather figures and tables to include

within the text to enhance the presentation of the material. These additions are explained
in more detail in the following sections.

References
The references section is vital to
a research paper because it pro-
vides the “intellectual path” the
author followed to form, shape,
and write the paper. The task of
preparing citations and refer-
ences “is, however, one of the
most important topics regarding
manuscript preparation because
through citations and references
you make or break your reputa-
tion as a careful and thorough
scholar” (Smith, 2000, p. 146). The
references section is not a bibli-
ography and does not list every
resource that was reviewed.
However, the section will contain
a listing of every resource refer-
enced and cited throughout the

paper. The references section starts at the top of its own page, immediately following the
conclusion section.

It is important for students to understand the connection between parenthetical citations
(resource information found within the text of a paper) and reference citations (resource
information found on the references page). In APA format, the in-text citation includes
the author(s)’s last name(s) and the year of publication within parentheses, for both direct
quotes and paraphrased material. This information then connects to the full resource cita-
tion that is placed on the references page. All resources cited within the text must have
a corresponding full citation on the references page, which includes the author(s)’s last
name, first initial, year of publication, title, publication, city and state of publication, and
name of the publisher. An easy way to remember this connection is to put the reference
citation on the reference page at the same time that the parenthetical citation is first placed
within the text.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 References, Tables, Figures, and Appendices

Given the complexity of preparing dif-
ferent reference types in APA format,
there are software programs (e.g., End-
Note Plus™, WPCitation™, Manuscript
Manager™) that aid in the bibliographic
gathering of reference information. (The
online library links its databases with
RefWorks.) Some programs also aid
directly in the preparation of research
papers or manuscripts. These types of
programs are fine for helping track and

organize bibliographic citations; however, do not use them in manuscript preparation.
Why? First, letting the computer program do the APA formatting means writers won’t
learn the details themselves (using a familiar analogy, children learn to do math by hand
prior to being given a calculator). Second, if an instructor deviates from APA style (such
as two spaces after a period rather than one), odds are that the software cannot be altered
to follow some APA rules and not others. Try to conquer APA format first, and then, if
appropriate, use a computer program to ease the workload.

Tables and Figures
Tables and figures can be included in a research paper if the student deems that they will
aid in the comprehension of the material. Tables are typically used to present quantitative
information, whereas figures are typically used to present graphical or pictorial results.

In general, students should use these features sparingly, as they are complicated to pre-
pare (more APA rules), and when used indiscriminately, tables and figures can be confus-
ing to the reader. In general, it’s easier to write text in a paragraph than to prepare a table
or figure in APA format. But if there is a great deal of quantitative data, a well-prepared
table can be efficient and can help advance the discussion. A well-placed bar graph can be
effective in showing a significant comparison in the literature.

After gathering and analyzing the data, selecting a graphic approach can be efficient
at times. Tufte (1983) suggested that clear, precise, and efficient graphs should do the
following:

• show the data;
• encourage the viewer to think about the content of the graph rather than focus on

the graphic design;
• avoid distortions;
• present much data in a small space, making large data sets more coherent;
• reveal the complexity of the data on both a broad level and a fine level;
• serve a clear purpose—description, exploration, tabulation, or decoration; and
• have close integration with the text that accompanies the graph.

Tips & Tools: Formatting
References

A word processing tip: In Micro-
soft® Word, type in the reference in perfect APA
format, highlight it with your mouse, and hit
control-T. This automatically creates the hanging
indent—no need to use tabs or manually space
the lines over.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Web Links

There are specific sections of the APA manual that will help in the preparation of tables
and figures. In fact, creating tables and figures in APA format can be so complicated that
there are specific reference guides designed to help with them (Nicol & Pexman, 2010a;
2010b). Students should check with their instructor about tables, figures, or an appendix
before going to the trouble of preparing them in APA style.

Appendices
An appendix is not often used, but when it is, it acts as a depository for information that
was important for the preparation of the research, but not so important that it had to be
included in the text or flow of the research paper. For example, if a resource was deemed
significantly important because of the survey questionnaire that was assessed in a study,
the questionnaire may be included, in its entirety, as an appendix. All appendices are
placed after the references section, with each appendix labeled with a letter—Appendix
A, Appendix B, etc.

Chapter Summary

This chapter provides a step-by-step guide for creating the subsections of a research
paper in APA format. These subsections include (in order) the title page, abstract,

introduction, literature review, conclusion, and references. If an appendix is included, it
will be placed after the references. Following the advice about writing in APA style in this
chapter will help students create a research paper that is solid in content and design.

Questions for Critical Thinking
• Which sections of a research paper are likely to take the most time to complete?

Which will take the least? Which is likely to be the most challenging section of a
paper, and why?

• Why does the standard APA order of topics follow the format that it does? Is it
logical? Are there parts of it that could be improved? What would you change
about the APA formatting rules if you could? What is the most difficult aspect of
generating a research paper using APA format?

Web Links
The Writing Center at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill provides instructions
and strategies on how to write a literature review:
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/literature-reviews/.

Professor Linda Weiser Friedman’s guide to writing a literature survey paper can be
found here:
http://cisnet.baruch.cuny.edu/friedman/rm/litreview.htm.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 2Key Terms

For more examples of APA-formatted papers, visit Vanguard’s Department of Psychol-
ogy website:
http://psychology.vanguard.edu/faculty/douglas-degelman/apa-style/.

Get some frequently asked questions about research papers answered at this website (or
even ask a few of your own):
http://www.uwstout.edu/grad/student/faq_paper.cfm.

Bates College’s Department of Biology offers instructions on “How to Write a Paper in
Scientific Journal Style and Format”:
http://abacus.bates.edu/~ganderso/biology/resources/writing/HTWsections.html.

Key Terms

abstract A synopsis of the main points
found in the research paper. The length of
an APA-style abstract is 120–150 words.

appendix The portion of a research paper
that notes information that was important
for the preparation of the research, but
was not included in the text or flow of the
research report.

conclusion The portion of the research
paper that interprets and concludes the
results of the literature review in context of
the thesis statement.

figure Used to present graphical or picto-
rial results.

introduction The portion of the research
paper that provides the reader with the
thesis statement and the purpose of the
review of the literature.

references The section of the research
paper that contains a list of every citation
used in the paper.

running head A heading in the research
paper that appears at the top of the page
and is limited to 50 characters. The run-
ning head should be flush left and the
page number flush right, in uppercase. The
words “Running Head” appear in mixed
case and only on the first page of the paper.

table Used to present quantitative
information.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

9

Using the Criminal Justice System to
Create a More Just Society

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Analyze the concept of equality, including examples of how the criminal justice system
both provides for and hinders equality for all citizens.

• Evaluate the concept of solidarity, including examples of how the criminal justice sys-
tem both provides for and hinders solidarity among citizens.

• Assess the concept of human rights, including examples of how the criminal justice
system both provides for and hinders individual human rights of citizens.

Lonely Planet/Getty Images

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Introduction

In thinking about the correlation between criminal justice and social justice, students
should focus their thoughts on how they, as criminal justice practitioners, can impact the

citizens and communities they serve. Criminal justice personnel are in a unique position
to have both positive and negative impacts on individual lives, whether intentional or
unintentional. Therefore, all criminal justice practitioners need to understand the dimen-
sions of social justice and how they, as practitioners and as community citizens, can work
toward applying positive aspects of social justice to their profession and everyday lives.

At the basic core of the criminal justice system is the U.S. Constitution and, more spe-
cifically, the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights “was set up to protect civil liberties and to
provide for equality, at least ideally. Further, criminal justice agencies are ideally dedi-
cated to outcomes consistent with social justice (e.g., due process and equal protection)”
(Robinson, 2010, p. 86). In addition, criminal laws are written and developed to identify
appropriate and inappropriate behaviors in order to maintain order and to protect the
liberties of all individuals. “Defining crimes to protect citizens and society” is consistent
with social justice ideals as “the right of people to live freely and safely” is essential to
those ideals (Robinson, 2010, p. 88).

As such, all parts of the criminal justice system play important roles in providing social
justice in order to create a more just society. The three major facets of the system—law
enforcement, courts, and corrections—are correlated and intricately aligned with equality,
solidarity, and human rights. In addition, each facet has its own specific ways of providing
these important aspects of social justice to those involved with the criminal justice system.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Introduction

Figure 9.1: Criminal and social justice

Equality
Bill of Rights

Code of Ethics

Solidarity
Crime Prevention

Community Policing

Human Rights
Title 18, Section 242

Equality
Appellate Decisions

Sentencing Guidelines

Solidarity
Procedural Laws

Human Rights
Alternative Courts

Equality
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Classification System

Solidarity
Prison Nurseries

Reentry Programs

Human Rights
Restorative Justice

C
ri

m
in

al
J

u
st

ic
e

S
ys

te
m

an
d

S
o

ci
al

J
u

st
ic

e

Law Enforcement

Court System

Corrections

Examples of the criminal justice system providing social justice.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

9.1 Social Justice and Equality

A major focus within social justice is the concept of equality, defined in Chapter 7. As Miller
(2003) notes, equality is based on the social ideal that all members of society are treated

as equals, that certain rights should be distributed equally, and that all citizens deserve equal
rights. Individuals “are related not just through their communities and their instrumental
associations but also as fellow citizens. Anyone who is a full member of such a society is
understood to be the bearer of a set of rights and obligations that together define the status of
citizen” (Miller, 2003, p. 30). Equality under the law is found in the Bill of Rights, as the rights
established focus on due process and equal protections for all citizens (Orth, 2007).

Law Enforcement and Equality
The U.S. Constitution, through the Bill of Rights, provides individual citizens with due
process and equal protection of law. The Fourth Amendment requires that “no Warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” (U.S. Constitu-
tion, 1791). This means that law enforcement officers are required to obtain a warrant by
first establishing that probable cause exists to believe that the individual to be arrested
committed a crime, or that the place to be searched holds evidence of a crime. Because
of this provision of the Fourth Amendment, all warrants are processed equally, with the
same standard required to obtain the warrant and authorization from a judge.

Another provision in the Bill of Rights that provides equality from law enforcement con-
cerns the Fifth Amendment, which states that no person “shall be compelled in any crim-
inal case to be a witness against himself” (U.S. Constitution, 1791). This is commonly
referred to as protection against self-incrimination. Although historically applicable to
testimony in criminal trials, the U.S. Supreme Court broadened this protection to the duty
of law enforcement officers with its decision in Miranda v. Arizona in 1966. In Miranda, the
Supreme Court ruled that the police are required to inform accused individuals that they
have the right to not testify against themselves (Reid, 2011).

In the decision, the Court specifically delineated what law enforcement officers are to state
to each suspect—what has become known as the Miranda Warnings—which includes
the right to remain silent. In addition, the Court explained that Miranda Warnings are
required whenever individuals are subjected to a custodial interrogation, whereby there is
a possibility that they could incriminate themselves. This requirement is provided equally,
to all suspects, without regard to a specific crime or action.

Law enforcement officers are also bound by codes of conduct and agency policies and pro-
cedures that reflect the understanding that all citizens, regardless of their status within the
community, are to be provided with equal protection of the law, and given equal opportuni-
ties within the criminal justice system. For example, the foremost purpose of the Lowndes
County, Georgia, Sheriff’s Office is to maintain social order. As part of this agency’s poli-
cies and procedures, “Our fundamental duties are to serve humanity . . . and to respect
the constitutional right of all persons to liberty, equality, and justice” (Lowndes County
Sheriff’s Office, 2012, para. 1). For many agencies and their officers, these policies and
procedures are just as binding as legal statutes. In other words, violating an agency policy
can give rise to legal and/or civil liability for the law enforcement officer and the agency.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

In addition, many agencies have sought outside organizations to provide professional
standards and accreditation to ensure that all officers and other law enforcement personnel
understand the necessity of equality and how to provide equal protection to all citizens.
For example, the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA)
is a national credentialing authority, whose purpose “is to improve the delivery of public
safety services” by “maintaining a body of standards, developed by public safety practi-
tioners” (CALEA, 2012, para. 2). In addition, CALEA goals include establishing “fair and
nondiscriminatory personnel practices” (CALEA, 2012, para. 3). The purpose of accredita-
tion, as well as the reaffirmation of that accreditation, is to ensure that all law enforcement
personnel provide equitable services to all citizens in a professional and ethical manner,
free from discrimination and bias.

The Court System and Equality
As with law enforcement, the court system is also concerned with equality. The nature of
the court system is adversarial, which provides that all defendants are innocent until
proven guilty. This means that the state (government) has the burden of proof in proving
guilt, using a standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, within the court
system, when an individual is charged with a crime and subjected to a criminal trial, that
individual is presumed innocent, regardless of the nature of the crime, and must be proven
guilty of the crime, using fair and just procedures.

Equality in the court system is also
provided to all citizens through
the Bill of Rights (see Table 9.1).
When originally adopted in 1791,
the Bill of Rights applied only to
the federal criminal justice sys-
tem, leaving state defendants
without adequate and fair protec-
tions of the law. This changed with
the adoption of the Fourteenth
Amendment in 1868, which pro-
vides that “No State shall make
or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immu-
nities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive
any person of life, liberty, or prop-
erty, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection
of the laws” (U.S. Constitution,
1868). The Due Process Clause makes most of the criminal procedural rights contained
in the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, in an effort to ensure fairness under the law.
The Equal Protection Clause requires the states to guarantee equality by providing equal
protection under the law for all citizens.

Jeff Cadge/The Image Bank/Getty Images

It is the prosecution’s responsibility to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime he
or she is accused of.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

Table 9.1: Protections and Supreme Court cases for the Fifth, Sixth, and
Fourteenth Amendments

Amendment Protections Supreme Court cases

Fifth Double Jeopardy
Self-Incrimination

U.S. v. Felix, 1992
Miranda v. Arizona, 1966

Sixth Speedy and Public Trial
Impartial Jury
Notice of Charges
Obtain and Confront
Witnesses and Counsel

Baker v. Wingo, 1972
Turn v. Louisiana, 1965
Moore v. U.S., 1964
Kentucky v. Stincer, 1987
Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963

Fourteenth Due Process Clause
Equal Protection Clause

Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 1971
Brown v. Board of Education, 1954

The Fifth Amendment provides the protections that “nor shall any person be subject for
the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or prop-
erty, without due process of law” (U.S. Constitution, 1791). The first protection is com-
monly known as double jeopardy, and essentially means that the state (government) gets
one chance to convict a defendant for a particular crime and, if the defendant is acquitted,
cannot keep retrying the defendant until the state gets a conviction. For example, a defen-
dant on trial for murder is acquitted of all charges due to a lack of evidence showing the
defendant was at the murder scene. A few months after the trial, new evidence surfaces,
including DNA evidence, to show the defendant was indeed at the murder scene. The
state cannot, taking the new evidence into account, charge and try the defendant a second
time for the murder.

The second protection, commonly known as self-incrimination, means that a defendant is
not required to take the stand and testify in a criminal trial. For example, a defendant is
accused of burglary and rape. The defense can present a case without the defendant tes-
tifying, and this in no way indicates the defendant’s guilt or innocence. In other words,
the jury should not draw any conclusions about the guilt or innocence of the defendant
simply because he or she decides to remain silent.

The third protection is that of due process, which means that reasonable and lawful proce-
dures must be made available to all defendants in any criminal actions. All of these Fifth
Amendment protections are granted equally to all individuals who are processed in the
criminal justice system, regardless of the nature of the crime.

ASSOCIATED PRESS/AP Images

Clarence Gideon’s case helped champion
the Supreme Court ruling that mandated
the right to legal counsel for all defendants,
regardless of an individual’s ability to pay
for it.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

The Sixth Amendment provides that “[i]n all
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the
right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial
jury of the State and district wherein the crime
shall have been committed, which district shall
have been previously ascertained by law, and to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusa-
tion; to be confronted with the witnesses against
him; to have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance
of Counsel for his defence” (U.S. Constitution,
1791). All of these provisions apply to all defen-
dants in any criminal trial, on any level (local,
state, or federal), and are intended to assist the
defendant in a criminal trial, in order to ensure
that a fair and just prosecution is obtained. The
provisions are provided without regard to the
individual defendant or the nature of the crime.

Several U.S. Supreme Court cases have clarified
the meaning and interpretation of these provi-
sions. For example, the provision of confronting
witnesses was addressed in Kentucky v. Stincer
(1987) in which the Court, explaining what is
known as the confrontation clause, stated that “the
opportunity for cross-examination is critical for
ensuring the integrity of the fact-finding process.

Cross-examination is the principal means by which the believability of a witness and the
truth of his testimony are tested.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has also addressed the assistance of counsel provision, most
importantly with the landmark case of Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). In Gideon, the Court
mandated equality for all defendants, regardless of ability to pay for counsel, which
means that all defendants in felony (later expanded to include misdemeanor) cases are
to be assisted in their cases with legal counsel, even if the state has to pay for that legal
counsel. However, merely being assisted by legal counsel is not enough; competency is
also important. In Strickland v. Washington (1984), the Court further interpreted this provi-
sion as guaranteeing the effective assistance of counsel. “Accordingly, when a lawyer’s
performance falls so far below the standard of reasonable competence that the outcome of
the case is likely to be unfair or unreliable, the Sixth Amendment provides a remedy for a
new trial to occur” (Owen, Fradella, Burke, & Joplin, 2012, p. 224).

Table 9.1: Protections and Supreme Court cases for the Fifth, Sixth, and
Fourteenth Amendments

Amendment Protections Supreme Court cases

Fifth Double Jeopardy
Self-Incrimination

U.S. v. Felix, 1992
Miranda v. Arizona, 1966

Sixth Speedy and Public Trial
Impartial Jury
Notice of Charges
Obtain and Confront
Witnesses and Counsel

Baker v. Wingo, 1972
Turn v. Louisiana, 1965
Moore v. U.S., 1964
Kentucky v. Stincer, 1987
Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963

Fourteenth Due Process Clause
Equal Protection Clause

Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 1971
Brown v. Board of Education, 1954

The Fifth Amendment provides the protections that “nor shall any person be subject for
the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or prop-
erty, without due process of law” (U.S. Constitution, 1791). The first protection is com-
monly known as double jeopardy, and essentially means that the state (government) gets
one chance to convict a defendant for a particular crime and, if the defendant is acquitted,
cannot keep retrying the defendant until the state gets a conviction. For example, a defen-
dant on trial for murder is acquitted of all charges due to a lack of evidence showing the
defendant was at the murder scene. A few months after the trial, new evidence surfaces,
including DNA evidence, to show the defendant was indeed at the murder scene. The
state cannot, taking the new evidence into account, charge and try the defendant a second
time for the murder.

The second protection, commonly known as self-incrimination, means that a defendant is
not required to take the stand and testify in a criminal trial. For example, a defendant is
accused of burglary and rape. The defense can present a case without the defendant tes-
tifying, and this in no way indicates the defendant’s guilt or innocence. In other words,
the jury should not draw any conclusions about the guilt or innocence of the defendant
simply because he or she decides to remain silent.

The third protection is that of due process, which means that reasonable and lawful proce-
dures must be made available to all defendants in any criminal actions. All of these Fifth
Amendment protections are granted equally to all individuals who are processed in the
criminal justice system, regardless of the nature of the crime.

ASSOCIATED PRESS/AP Images

Clarence Gideon’s case helped champion
the Supreme Court ruling that mandated
the right to legal counsel for all defendants,
regardless of an individual’s ability to pay
for it.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

The appellate courts, which consist of a panel of judges, have been established to consider
errors of procedural law in trial court cases. “The work of appellate courts concerns ques-
tions about the interpretation or application of laws, not questions of fact” (Owen, et al.,
2012, p. 321). For example, a convicted defendant may appeal, whereby “the appellate court
would review issues such as whether he had a fair trial, whether the evidence was obtained
legally, and whether the law has been applied correctly” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 321).

Although the appellate courts are not seeking to determine whether the defendant actu-
ally committed the crime, the process of appeal is equitable to all defendants, as these
courts will determine whether any error of law occurred that had a negative or detrimen-
tal effect on the outcome of the trial. In other words, as noted in Chapter 8, the appellate
courts do not retry the case but rather look for errors whereby the defendant was not pro-
vided with a fair and just trial. If the appellate court deems that no errors of law occurred,
the trial court decision is upheld; conversely, the finding of an error of law will require the
conviction to be set aside and the defendant retried in a trial court. Therefore, appellate
courts provide equality, as decisions are made without regard to individual defendants or
the nature of the crime.

An additional aspect of the legal system that provides fairness and justice occurs with
the use of sentencing guidelines “to produce fair sentences based on legal variables such
as offense seriousness and prior record” (Robinson, 2010, p. 92). Sentencing guidelines
provide judges with a basis from which to determine appropriate sentences for similar
cases and circumstances. This provides for a more standard and just legal system, while
also providing future offenders with an idea of consequences to expect from engaging in
criminal behavior.

Corrections and Equality
Correctional systems, on all levels, provide equality through various provisions of the Bill
of Rights. Probably the most important provision of the Bill of Rights encountered in cor-
rections is the protection against cruel and unusual punishment, delineated in the Eighth
Amendment (U.S. Constitution, 1791). Correctional systems, which include probation and
parole, are required to assess and impose punishment in such a manner as to be fair and
just. With this, all inmates have the right to challenge the constitutionality of their confine-
ment through a writ of habeas corpus. This writ allows for the court to determine the appro-
priateness and legal grounds for confinement, thus safeguarding the rights of all inmates.

Another provision of equality within corrections is the classification system, which is a “spe-
cific set of objective criteria, such as offense history, previous experience in the justice system,
and substance abuse patterns, applied to all inmates to determine an appropriate classifica-
tion” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013, p. 150). The importance of the classification system is for
the correctional facility to identify for each incoming inmate the appropriate and needed
services, as well as identify under what conditions, if any, the inmate will be housed.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

There are numerous types of criminal offenders, all with individual and unique reasons
for offending. For example, the mentally ill offender would need a different type of treat-
ment program than a drug abuser or a sex offender, with the latter two needing still other
types of treatment. In addition, the elderly inmate brings additional medical care issues
that may not be found in younger inmates. By using a standard set of criteria, classifica-
tion allows the correctional facility to equitably provide each inmate the unique services
he or she requires.

In addition, classification is also
used to identify the appropri-
ate correctional facility for the
inmate, based on security level.
Although classification has tradi-
tionally been an important aspect
of identifying program and treat-
ment needs, “prison management
still relies on continuing classifi-
cation, which now focuses on the
offender’s potential for escape,
violence, or victimization by other
inmates” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig,
2013, p. 376). In addition, to main-
tain a fair and just classification,
inmates may be reclassified at any
time during their incarceration,
which can occur, for example,
at the completion of a treatment
program or for any other unique
circumstance that may arise.

According to the decision in Ramos v. Lamm (1979), classification systems must be “clearly
understandable, consistently applied and conceptually complete.” As a result, objective
classification systems have been developed to ensure that the classification and level of
custody are appropriate. Equity-based models have been created that “use only a few
explicitly defined legal variables reflecting current and previous criminal characteristics.
Such variables as race, employment, and education are not used because they are seen as
unfair” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013, p. 353). In other words, today’s classification systems
strive for equity and fairness in order to ensure that all inmates are housed with an appro-
priate custody level and are able to access appropriate services and programs.

David R. Frazier/Stone/Getty Images

Elderly offenders may require different care than is required
for other types of inmates.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

Inequality in the Criminal Justice System
The preceding sections provide examples of how the various facets of the criminal justice
system provide equality for all citizens. Although equality has been a focus since the
founding of our country, the system has not always been effective at providing equality
for all citizens.

Inequality in Law Enforcement
Several issues arise in law enforcement in regard to inequality. One of the most notable,
with a history as old as law enforcement itself, is corruption. Law enforcement officers are
required, by law and agency policy, to uphold the law, while being upstanding members
of society. We look to law enforcement officers to help in times of crime and crises and
expect them to be above reproach. We respect them when they catch criminals but hate
them when they write us tickets. For many officers, this is a difficult paradox that per-
vades every aspect of their daily lives.

Oftentimes, we forget officers are humans, with the same wants and needs as ordinary cit-
izens. It is no wonder many officers find themselves tempted by corruption. While some
officers successfully handle the temptations, many fall victim to temptation without a
clear intention to do so. For example, the “slippery slope” mentioned in Chapter 8 sym-
bolizes the notion that an officer can accept a seemingly innocent token of appreciation
without fully recognizing or understanding the intention behind the token. The officer
may believe that the convenience store owner who provides free coffee to all officers sim-
ply likes the extra attention and surveillance that officers provide to his store and area.
However, when that same storeowner is pulled over for speeding by one of the officers
who frequents his store for free coffee, does the store owner expect a “favor” or special
privilege in return? In other words, what is the intention, hidden or not, behind the pro-
moting and providing of free coffee? Is it truly a show of appreciation and respect, or does
it anticipate something bigger, such as the store owner’s expectation that the officer will
return the favor down the road?

And where does the slippery slope end? If an officer is willing to take free coffee, food,
or any other free gift, when is the line drawn? If an officer succumbs to the temptation of
corruption, then those who provide the thing of value to the officer will begin to receive
special treatment, placing all others at a disadvantage when law enforcement services are
needed. For example, if an officer is “on the take,” and getting paid on the side for extra
security for a certain area of a neighborhood, the officer is likely to respond more quickly
to the individuals in that area than to others, creating inequality of services.

In order to reduce the temptation to corruption, all law enforcement officers need train-
ing, education, and monitoring to ensure compliance with all laws and ethical behaviors.
Steps to this end could include more ethical training in police academies and requiring
officers to complete ethical training as part of their yearly in-service hours. In addition,
more training for supervisors could be provided on warning signs of corruption and what
to do to intervene before it becomes an issue. Officers are also bound by a Code of Ethics,
which should be constantly and consistently reinforced throughout the officers’ careers.
Law enforcement officers are human, with worries about family, bills, and other life stress-
ors. Due diligence is required, not only to keep officers in line but also to help avoid any
and all corrupt behaviors.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.1 Social Justice and Equality

Inequality in the Court System
As with law enforcement, several issues concerning inequality exist within the court
system, with the biggest being inadequate counsel. Through the Sixth Amendment, all
individuals being processed through a criminal trial are guaranteed the right to counsel.
However, this does not mean the right to the most experienced, most expensive, or most
successful counsel; it simply permits that the defendant may have an attorney working
on his or her behalf.

The majority of defendants processed through the court system do so with a court-
appointed attorney. Due to the sheer volume of cases that each court-appointed attorney
must process, oftentimes this means that each individual case receives less focused atten-
tion than could be provided by a privately hired attorney, who is working on one specific
case. This is not to say court-appointed attorneys are not well trained or competent, but
the reality of processing excessive amounts of criminal cases can lead to inequity when
preparing for and presenting a defense in a criminal trial.

Inequality may also occur because cases are different (i.e., different crimes, different types
and amounts of evidence, different witnesses, etc.). As a result, all cases are not processed
in the same way. For example, a high-profile serial murder case would most likely require
additional time and resources to defend. The more difficult the case, the longer it may
take to prepare an adequate defense. This must be weighed against the defendant’s Sixth
Amendment right to a “speedy and public trial.” In other words, while the defendant has
a right to counsel, that counsel may request additional time to prepare the defense—while
at the same time, the defendant has a right to not spend an excessive amount of time wait-
ing for his or her day in court.

The most logical way to resolve this issue is both practical and impractical—hire more
court-appointed attorneys. It is practical in the sense that more attorneys would allow for
a smaller caseload per attorney, allowing for a more focused approach to each case. It is
impractical in the sense that most jurisdictions do not have the additional funds needed
to hire an extensive number of new attorneys. Another way to resolve this issue would
be to hire more paralegals. Although not able to try the case, they can certainly provide
much-needed research and writing skills to assist the case attorneys. Barring the ability to
hire new attorneys, jurisdictions can perhaps provide additional training on time manage-
ment, and structure court time to allow the most expeditious processing of criminal cases.

Inequality in Corrections
The field of corrections also has its share of equality issues, with a major issue concerning
access to treatment programs while in a correctional facility. As noted previously, inmates
in correctional facilities have myriad mental, psychological, and physical health issues
that need to be addressed if rehabilitation is to be achieved. One of the overarching goals
of corrections is rehabilitation, gained through various treatment options. However, not
all inmates have equal access to treatment programs. Depending on the level of security
and classification of any particular correctional institution, some inmates may need a spe-
cialized treatment option that is simply not available at their facility.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

For example, for the sex offender, research shows that treatment is most effective when
provided in a one-on-one, individual counseling setting. However, group counseling is
most often found in correctional institutions (Holmes & Holmes, 2008). The issue is one of
funding—individual counseling costs more than group counseling. Correctional institu-
tions, which get their funding from state appropriations, are seeing less and less funding
available. In addition, this decrease in funding is found at a time when the general public
is calling for more severe punishment for sex offenders, which results in more offenders
being sent to prison. As a result, more sex offenders are in correctional institutions at a
time when less money is being used for counseling. Sex offenders are therefore being
placed in counseling and treatment programs that do not have a high success rate because
they are not tailored, nor can they be tailored, to meet the specific needs of these offenders.

As with the inequality in the court system, the solution to this issue is both practical and
impractical—provide funds for more treatment programs when funds are simply not
available. Another option would be for the states and/or individual correctional facility
personnel to solicit volunteer service from local psychologists and social workers. Perhaps
even setting up some form of clinical internship would be beneficial to those inmates
needing the most counseling treatment. Although a correctional setting may not be the
ideal choice of career for an intern, it would provide a unique opportunity for students to
gain valuable experience not available in the classroom or other settings.

9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

As discussed in Chapter 7,
the concept of solidarity for

social justice means the degree
to which individuals see them-
selves as members of an extended
family, where citizens in commu-
nities are “in this together” (Rob-
inson, 2010). Solidarity with the
community, and thus the human
family, is in the context of free-
dom and justice. “Solidarity with
all of the human family implies a
special commitment to the most
vulnerable and marginalized in
our midst”; therefore, “solidarity
encourages striving for relation-
ships that tend toward equality
on the local, national, and inter-
national levels. All members of
the human community must be

brought as fully as possible into the circle of productive and creative relationships”
(Sirico, 2012, para. 3).

Jose Luis Pelaez Inc/Blend Images/Getty Images

Social justice can be maintained if community members feel a
sense of solidarity with one another.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

Law Enforcement and Solidarity
With a common goal of eliminating and preventing crime, law enforcement agencies and
officers, particularly on the local level, are in a unique position to unite their respective
communities. While crime and local criminal behavior can tear apart and alienate seg-
ments of a community, the workings and programs of local law enforcement agencies can
bring together individual citizens to work toward revitalizing those neighborhoods and
communities touched by crime. There are numerous examples of law enforcement agen-
cies and individual officers working with community citizens and leaders to integrate all
segments of the community, with the goal of providing social justice through solidarity.

One such example is the Community Oriented Policing (COP) model, which has been
adopted by numerous local law enforcement agencies across the country. The COP model
“is a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic
use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques, to proactively address the imme-
diate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and
fear of crime” (U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services, 2012,
para. 1). Community policing is a proactive approach to solving crime, putting local law
enforcement officers on the streets and in neighborhoods, specifically with the goal of
improving police–community relations. Officers walk the beat, are encouraged to get to
know business owners and residents, and are actively engaged in the happenings of the
neighborhoods in which they patrol.

When law enforcement officers are routinely seen by neighborhood residents, are
actively participating in neighborhood activities, such as crime watch programs, and
actively pursue open lines of communication with residents, a valuable and trusting
bond develops that fosters improved cooperation between residents and officers. This
allows residents to become active participants in protecting their own neighborhoods. In
other words, police–community
partnerships allow residents to
become an active part of the solu-
tion to crime, which increases the
solidarity of the neighborhood.

Similar to the COP model is the
Problem Oriented Policing (POP)
model used by numerous local law
enforcement agencies across the
country. The main focus of the POP
model is to identify specific crime
problems within local neighbor-
hoods and communities, so that
law enforcement can work with
local citizens to solve those prob-
lems. Community leaders iden-
tify recurring events or areas of
concern, then a four-step process
known as SARA is implemented
(Scanning—a problem is identified,

Sean Murphy/Stone/Getty Images

Officers practicing Community Oriented Policing are aware
of the events in their patrol areas, and frequently walk the
streets, getting to know business owners and community
residents.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

Analysis—questions are asked to learn about the problem, Response—a custom-made
response is tried, Assessment—the response is evaluated to determine effectiveness). For
example, in San Diego, California, “The police, community and City Council worked to
attack drug and gang problems in the Skyline and Meadowbrook community. Those efforts
led to an organized community association, and a reduction in criminal activity” (San
Diego [CA] Police Department, 2012, para. 3). As with the COP model, Problem Oriented
Policing increases integration of citizens, providing for solidarity within the neighborhood.

Another program on the local level that brings together all segments of the community to
build solidarity is the National Night Out program, “America’s Night Out Against Crime”
(National Night Out, 2012). According to National Night Out (2012), more than 37 million
people partook in the event in 2012, including “law enforcement agencies, civic groups,
businesses, neighborhood organizations and local officials from over 15,000 communities
from all 50 states, U.S. territories, Canadian cities and military bases worldwide.”

The purpose of National Night Out is to “heighten crime and drug prevention awareness;
generate support for, and participation in, local anticrime programs; strengthen neighbor-
hood spirit and police–community partnerships; and send a message to criminals letting
them know that neighborhoods are organized and fighting back” (National Night Out,
2012). Law enforcement agencies and individual officers work with neighborhood lead-
ers, through National Night Out, to promote neighborhood spirit and police–community
partnerships, under the common goal of crime prevention.

A prominent feature of National Night Out is that there are no financial obligations
required of communities and neighborhoods to participate, due to partnerships between
the sponsoring organization, National Association of Town Watch (NATW), and Tar-
get Corporation and law enforcement agencies (National Night Out, 2012). As a result,
neighborhood and community leaders have the opportunity to work with their local law
enforcement agencies to bring about neighborhood solidarity.

The Court System and Solidarity
The court system provides for solidarity through legal and criminal procedures that are
provided to all defendants throughout the various stages of the trial process, to ensure
that legal structures serve all citizens, regardless of the nature of the crime or individ-
ual circumstances. As noted previously, the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Bill of
Rights provide all citizens with certain procedural rights when being processed in the
legal system, including the protection against self-incrimination, with a right to have a
notification of charges, to have a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, to obtain
and cross-examine witnesses, and to have access to legal counsel. Of most importance is
the requirement that states have a constitutional obligation to ensure all citizens processed
through the legal system have access to counsel at all critical stages of a criminal prosecu-
tion, including arraignments, preliminary hearings, postindictment lineups, trials, and
sentencing hearings (Owen, et al., 2012).

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

The entire court system is guided
by a set of procedural laws that
protect all citizens, regardless of
the nature of the crime. Once an
individual is arrested and the
prosecutor deems the charges
worthy of further prosecution, the
defendant must be taken before a
judge within a specified time (for
example, within 72 hours for an
arrest with a warrant and 48 hours
for an arrest without a warrant)
for an initial appearance (Robin-
son, 2012). At this point, the state
will provide counsel, if required,
and the opportunity for bail. The
defendant is then brought back
to court for a preliminary hear-
ing, whereby probable cause to
hold the defendant for trial will be

determined. The preliminary hearing is the first of several stages in the criminal process,
and it is at this time that probable cause to believe the defendant committed the crime will
be determined by a magistrate or judge. If probable cause exists, all defendants must be pro-
vided with either an indictment or an accusation, both formal charging documents used to
bring the accused to trial (Robinson, 2012). In other words, citizens are protected from arbi-
trarily being arrested and taken to trial without the prior establishment of probable cause.

The defendant is then brought to court for arraignment, whereby he or she will enter a
formal plea to the charges. A guilty plea has the same effect as being convicted at trial;
however, the judge will take precautions to ensure that the guilty plea is entered volun-
tarily and without coercion or promises. A not-guilty plea will move the defendant to the
formal trial. Once the trial is imminent, the defendant has the right and opportunity to file
pretrial motions, with the most important of those being discovery, whereby the defen-
dant is allowed to obtain and review the evidence to be presented by the prosecution. This
is another layer of protection for the defendant, regardless of the nature of the crime or
possible punishment.

Again, the criminal justice system, and particularly the trial, is based on the adversarial
process; the burden of proof to prove guilt is on the prosecution, with guilt based on a
finding beyond a reasonable doubt. This inherent nature of the adversarial process pro-
tects the defendant from shouldering the burden of proof. The concept of double jeopardy
mentioned earlier in the chapter provides another layer of defense.

moodboard/the Agency Collection/Getty Images

Among a defendant’s most important rights is the right to
legal counsel throughout all phases of a criminal prosecution.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

Corrections and Solidarity
Many convicted offenders serve
their prison time in their local com-
munities, or at least within their
state of residence. This provides
an opportunity for the inmate
and his or her family to maintain
an active relationship, if they so
choose, thus maintaining the soli-
darity of the family.

Another aspect of family soli-
darity provided by correctional
systems is the creation of nurser-
ies within certain prison facili-
ties for women who are pregnant
at the time of incarceration and
will deliver the baby while incar-
cerated. Prison nurseries are a
“reemerging trend within correc-
tional facilities” (Women’s Prison
Association, 2009, p. 9). Many pro-
grams started in the last 15 to 20 years, as the female prison population increased sharply
(Women’s Prison Association, 2009). There are currently nine states that allow women in
prison to keep their newborn infants with them while incarcerated (with Rikers Island in
New York being the only jail in the country with a nursery). However, the women must be
incarcerated for a nonviolent offense and have no history of child abuse or neglect (Wom-
en’s Prison Association, 2009).

The purpose of these nurseries is to allow for a bonding period between mother and child,
thus encouraging the solidarity of the family. The duration of time an infant may stay within
the confines of a correctional facility varies among states, from 30 days to 3 years, with the
average between 12 to 18 months. The capacity of the nurseries also varies from 5 to 29
mother/child rooms, which are most often located in a separate wing or unit, apart from the
general population. In addition to required parenting skills and child development classes,
several facilities also require mothers without a high school diploma to complete educa-
tional classes to obtain a GED. “Through these programs, incarcerated mothers are able to
participate in support groups, gain support and information about breastfeeding and learn
about infant growth and development” (Women’s Prison Association, 2009, p. 10).

To restore the solidarity of the inmate with his or her community, many state departments
of corrections are actively engaged in providing various forms of reentry services for
inmates with impending parole. This includes equipping inmates with the skills necessary
to be productive members of their families and communities, and connecting inmates with
services and resources that will both meet their needs and support their transition back to
their respective communities (Robinson, 2012). The overriding premise is enhancing safety
within the community by reducing the opportunity and desire to commit future offenses.

Most reentry programs provide specific vocational and education training programs,
in an effort to help inmates get jobs and thus decrease recidivism (Robinson, 2012). For

MICHAEL ROUGIER/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images

Local jails and state prisons allow offenders to serve their
time closer to home in order to maintain relationships with
their friends and family.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

example, reentry programs in Georgia include training in auto body repair, carpentry,
computer technology, construction, cosmetology, culinary arts, graphic arts, masonry, the
service industry, and welding (Georgia Department of Corrections, 2012). By providing
job skills that allow for gainful employment once released from prison, the inmate is better
equipped to become a productive member of the community, thus reconnecting with the
community and bringing closure to the hole formed when the inmate was incarcerated.

In many states, reentry programs are conducted at transitional centers, whereby the
inmates are gradually reintegrated into the community. However, many transitional cen-
ters are small, and thus the limited bed space does not allow for a large influx of parolees.
To counter this problem, many state prisons have created “in-house” transitional dormi-
tories on the prison grounds that allow inmates within 12 months of their release to be
isolated from general population so they can participate in intensive training, education,
and substance abuse treatment (Robinson, 2012).

In addition to state reentry programs, inmates in federal prison who are nearing their
release on parole (approximately 17–19 months) may be eligible for placement in a residen-
tial reentry center, or halfway house. The residential reentry centers “provide a safe, struc-
tured, supervised environment, as well as employment counseling, job placement, financial
management assistance, and other programs and services” and help inmates “gradu-
ally rebuild their ties to the community and facilitate supervising ex-offender’s activities
during this readjustment phase” (Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2012b, para. 3). Inmates are
monitored 24 hours per day, and are required to gain employment within 15 days and to
complete substance abuse and mental health treatment if needed. The reentry programs
provide “an opportunity for inmates to assume increasing levels of responsibility, while at
the same time providing sufficient restrictions to promote community safety and convey
the sanctioning value of the sentence” (Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2012b, para. 9).

Nonsolidarity and the Criminal Justice System
The criminal justice system func-
tions mostly at the local level, in
communities across the United
States. There are many programs
within the various components
of the criminal justice system
that focus on creating solidarity
with local and community citi-
zens. Although these programs
are effective, and many commu-
nities have a positive relationship
with their local criminal justice
agencies and personnel, there are
many issues that result in a lack
of solidarity between the crimi-
nal justice system and commu-
nity citizens.

Thomas Northcut/Lifesize/Thinkstock

Nonsolidarity means inconsistency in making decisions and
handling situations, which may result in not going in the
right direction.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

Nonsolidarity and Law Enforcement
Law enforcement officers are charged with maintaining order, protecting citizens, and
apprehending criminals. A major aspect of the duties of law enforcement officers is the
use of discretion, discussed in Chapter 8. For example, when an officer stops a motorist to
conduct a traffic stop for speeding, the officer has the discretion to issue a traffic citation
or to issue a warning.

Discretion also means that many factors go into decisions made by law enforcement offi-
cers. In the previous example, the officer will make the decision to issue a speeding citation
or warning based on numerous factors—i.e., the actual speed, the road and weather condi-
tions, traffic conditions such as construction zones, the motorist’s reason for the excessive
speed, the motorist’s demeanor toward the officer, etc. In addition, local and state statutes
also guide officer discretion. Although discretion is a major part of law enforcement, it
may result in inconsistent treatment of offenders (Reid, 2001). This can hinder community
solidarity and can actually create a negative atmosphere and relationship between law
enforcement agencies/officers and those whom they serve.

For example, prior to 2010 in the state of Georgia, in order to be charged with driving with
a suspended license, the law required that the driver must have been notified that his or
her license had been placed in suspension. After that notification, if the individual was
stopped while driving, with the knowledge that his or her license was suspended, the
officer would arrest the driver on the spot. In 2010, Georgia Code § 40-5-121 was changed
to allow an increase in officer discretion to make or not make an arrest, with or without
the prior notification of the suspension of the driver license. In other words, the statute
removed the requirement that the driver must first be notified of a suspension of the
driver license before an arrest can be made.

Although the new provision provides an increase in officer discretion, it also provides an
increase is the inconsistency of handling offenders, thereby decreasing solidary within
the community. If an officer works within a particular zone or beat, particularly under the
Community Oriented Policing (COP) model, then he or she gets to know the citizens of
the community. This new increase in discretion can become a hindrance to the solidarity
of the community if the officer is then seen as using discretion in some cases and not oth-
ers, and more specifically, if the law enforcement agency supports such practices.

To counter the negative impact of this type of discretion, officers can be educated on how
their decisions impact those they serve. Officers need to be aware that although discretion
is part of their everyday duties, these decisions do have an impact on how they are viewed
by the community. Although it is not feasible to provide a citation or make an arrest of every
individual with whom they come into contact, being consistent and fair in their discretion
will result in a more positive relationship with the community—thus creating solidarity.

Nonsolidarity and the Court System
The trial process in the court system is of major interest for both the offender and the
victim. It is the time when the offender has the opportunity to see and hear evidence pre-
sented against him or her and to present a defense to the charges. It is also the time when
the victim, through the prosecution, has the opportunity to make the case that the offender

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.2 Social Justice and Solidarity

committed a crime and inflicted harm, and thus is in need of punishment. However, many
victims do not get the opportunity to have their day in court. If a victim is deemed to be
an ineffective witness, the prosecutor may be reluctant to put the victim on the stand to
testify. On the other hand, if the victim is deemed to be an effective and powerful witness,
the defense will likely opt for a plea bargain agreement.

Plea bargaining is “the process of negotiation between the defense and the prosecution
. . . [that] may involve reducing or dropping some charges or a recommendation for leni-
ency in exchange for a plea of guilty on another charge or charges” (Reid, 2001, p. 181). In
addition, all plea agreements must be agreed to by the prosecutor, defense counsel, and
defendant (Owen, et al., 2012). “Plea bargaining dominates the modern American criminal
process. Upwards of 95% of all state and federal felony convictions are obtained by guilty
plea” (Covey, 2008, p. 1238). Consequently, very few criminal cases actually go to trial.

For the victim, this can create feelings of abandonment and seclusion, as the victim is
typically not involved in plea bargain negotiations. The criminal trial is an important part
of the criminal justice system for the victim, yet only a select few are granted the oppor-
tunity. Although several jurisdictions allow a victim limited participation in the actual
plea negotiations, victims do not have a right to veto the agreement. In addition, unlike
the offender who has a Sixth Amendment right to a speedy and public trial, the victim
has no constitutional rights to any participation in the trial. And because the plea bargain
generally yields a lesser sentence than could possibly be obtained from a conviction at
trial, victims may believe justice is not served. As a result, victims may experience a lack
of solidarity with the court system, as well as with other criminal justice personnel and
perhaps with the community as a whole. This is especially true when family and the com-
munity do not completely support the victim.

To create a sense of solidarity within the court system for the victim, changes would need
to occur. For example, allowing the victim to have a voice in plea bargain negotiations
may be a start. Victims have interests in the case that go beyond revenge, and participa-
tion in plea bargain negotiations can protect those interests (Starkweather, 1992). In other
words, the victim could be brought into plea negotiations without negatively impacting
the process, providing a positive experience for the victim, and thus creating solidarity.
Another change that would more significantly impact the process is to allow victims the
opportunity to veto a plea, requiring the prosecutor to take the case to trial. Although this
could affect the overall court system, it could be used in limited cases; for example, those
involving serious felonies or DUI cases, in which the victim would greatly benefit from
being able to be heard in court.

Nonsolidarity and Corrections
Overcrowding is a major issue in all levels of corrections, from local jails to federal cor-
rection institutions. Because more correctional institutions and facilities are experiencing
overcrowding every day, the result is that many offenders are now being confined to
facilities not in the regional jurisdiction in which they live. This negatively impacts the
solidarity of the family and community.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

For example, an offender commits and is convicted of a felony in his hometown. Due to
overcrowding in area state prisons, the inmate is sent to a correctional institution located
on the other side of the state. In certain states, this could involve a day’s drive from the
inmate’s hometown. As a result, the inmate’s family may not have the resources to maintain
a consistent relationship with the inmate while he is incarcerated, meaning fewer visits and
personal contacts. This can further diminish the already strained solidarity of the family.

In addition, this can negatively impact the inmate’s return to the community. Because the
overcrowding issue requires the inmate to serve time in another community, the ability to
participate in a reentry program, if available, could be diminished because those opportu-
nities will be given to those inmates returning to that particular community. Reentry pro-
grams are typically geared toward assistance in reconnecting with family and providing
an opportunity to secure gainful employment upon release. This is difficult and perhaps
not feasible for those inmates who seek to reconnect with family and community in far
away jurisdictions.

It is important to take family and community solidarity into consideration when deter-
mining the placement of inmates within correctional facilities. Although it may not always
be feasible to keep an inmate within a reasonable distance of his or her family and com-
munity, all efforts should be made to ensure that at least a reentry program is available for
that inmate. Any and all efforts should be made to provide a smooth transition back into
the family and community in order to facilitate solidarity.

9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

According to Rawls (2003, p. 13), “a just world order is perhaps best seen as a society
of peoples, each people maintaining a well-ordered and decent political (domestic)

regime, not necessarily democratic but fully respecting basic human rights.” There are
many human rights that are relevant to the criminal justice system, including equality
before the law; the presumption of innocence until proven guilty by independent and
impartial tribunals; freedom from torture or cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment;
freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention or exile; freedom from arbitrary interference with
privacy; and freedom from discrimination (Robinson, 2010).

Miller (2003) argues that human rights play a significant role in social justice theory. “A
central element in any theory of justice will be an account of the basic rights of citizens,
which will include rights to various concrete liberties, such as freedom of movement and
freedom of speech,” meaning “an extensive sphere of basic liberty is built into the require-
ments of social justice” (Miller, 2003, p. 13).

Law Enforcement and Human Rights
According to the Office of the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights’s Code
of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (2012, para. 6), “In the performance of their duty, law
enforcement officials shall respect and protect human dignity and maintain and uphold
the human rights of all persons.” In essence, this means that law enforcement officers,

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

whether local, state, or federal, have the duty to protect the human rights of all individu-
als, including those who have committed a crime. As such, law enforcement agencies have
placed similar statements in their codes of conduct and codes of ethics to ensure that offi-
cers protect the human rights of all individuals with whom they come into contact.

As with equality and solidarity, the U.S. Constitution includes provisions for law enforce-
ment officers to ensure the protection of human rights, through due process and equal
protection clauses. In addition, the federal government created several federal statutes
that protect individuals from violations of human rights by law enforcement officers, and
provides remedies for violations.

Title 18, Section 242 addresses deprivation of rights while acting under the color of law,
meaning a person who has a legal authority granted by a government body is acting
within the scope of that legal authority (i.e., a law enforcement officer acts under the color
of law when making a valid arrest). Under Section 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom,
willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Pos-
session, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immuni-
ties secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States,
or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person
being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the
punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than one year, or both.

While Section 242 provides for criminal sanctions against the offending law enforcement
officer, Title 42, Section 1983 provides civil actions for deprivation of rights:

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, cus-
tom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects,
or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person
within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges,
or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the
party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding
for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for
an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief
shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declara-
tory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of
Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be con-
sidered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

Through these federal statutes, law enforcement officers are bound by law to protect the
human rights of all individuals, without discrimination. As noted above, law enforcement
agencies, on all levels, have implemented these provisions into their codes of conduct that
provide an additional layer of protection.

Law enforcement officers and agencies also promote human rights through assistance to
victims of crime, with the idea of promoting the victims as humans, and of ensuring that
their dignity is respected. For example, states have created versions of a Victim’s Bill of

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

Rights. One provision of the Georgia Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights is “the right to be treated
fairly and with dignity by all criminal justice agencies involved in the case” (Official Code
of Georgia Annotated [OCGA], 1995). In Georgia, law enforcement officers on the local
and state level are required by law to provide all victims of crime, regardless of situation,
with a copy of the Georgia Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights. Providing the victim with a bill of
rights gives her or him a meaningful opportunity to exercise these rights (Robinson, 2012).
As law enforcement officers are the initial criminal justice system contact for victims, it is
essential that these officers provide all victims of crime with assistance and compassion
and ensure that all victims are shown respect.

The Court System and Human Rights
The court system is in the unique position of providing human rights during the most
important phase of the criminal justice system—the determination of guilt or innocence.
The recognition of fairness and justice is essential to ensuring that all individuals pro-
cessed in the legal system are treated with dignity and respect.

A harsh reality of the criminal justice system is that numerous criminal defendants have
larger social and psychological issues than can be addressed in the traditional criminal
court. Judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys have recognized that many individuals
require a less strict and indifferent trial process, one that can address certain mitigating
factors related to criminal behavior. As such, specialty courts have been created to handle
specific cases and individuals where those mitigating factors have contributed to the
criminal behavior. “Specialty courts handle cases where the defendant suffers from an
underlying problem and will benefit from services directed toward solving that problem”
(Pretrial Justice Institute, 2012, para. 1). Most of these specialized courts are part of a trend
of community-based programs that target the root causes of criminal behavior, rather than
simply determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant.

One such development is that of
drug courts, discussed in Chapter
8, which provide a more caring
and compassionate approach to a
criminal defendant who has a drug
dependency or addiction. “The
concept of the drug court is unique
in that it creates a courtroom
partnership centered on provid-
ing rehabilitation that is individu-
alized to meet each offender’s
needs,” something that is not pos-
sible in the traditional criminal
court (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 366).

Another specialty court that goes
beyond what is available in a
traditional criminal court is the

Don Seabrook/ASSOCIATED PRESS/AP Images

Drug courts provide an option for rehabilitation, specially
catering to each offender’s specific needs.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

mental health court, which is designed to address the needs of offenders identified as hav-
ing some type of mental illness. “The mentally ill are overrepresented in the criminal jus-
tice system and often do not have access to the services they need, which can exacerbate
offending” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 287). Similar to drug courts, offenders in mental health
courts are monitored through regular appearances before a judge, and the result is a more
compassionate approach to those offenders with special needs.

Domestic violence is an issue that involves numerous factors, many unique to the indi-
vidual circumstances of the domestic relationship. “Domestic violence cases involving
spouses and other intimate partners often entail complex processes that require careful
consideration by the criminal justice system” (National Institute of Justice, 2012, para. 1).
As such, domestic violence courts have been developed

for judges to ensure follow-through on cases, aid domestic violence vic-
tims, and hold offenders accountable, with the assistance of justice and
social service agencies. By specializing in domestic violence offenses, these
courts aim to process cases more efficiently and deliver more consistent
rulings about domestic violence statutes. (National Institute of Justice,
2012, para. 1–2)

All of these courts and special processes used in the legal system recognize that many
criminal defendants need specialized attention to address the underlying causes of their
criminal behavior. At the core of all of these specialized courts is the judge, who provides
a strong focus on rehabilitation and deterrence.

Corrections and Human Rights
A major aspect of corrections is the enforcement of punishment to an individual who has
been convicted of a crime. Although retribution is one of the basic premises on which pun-
ishment is inflicted, an individual does not become less of a human being because of the
commission of a crime. It can be a basic human instinct to inflict comparable pain on those
who have inflicted pain on us; however, human rights require that individual dignity and
humane treatment be at the forefront of any punishment given by the state.

To provide fair and just punishment, especially for first-time offenders and those who
have committed relatively minor offenses, numerous alternate sanctions, under the name
of restorative justice, have been developed. Many of these alternative sanctions require
the offender to take responsibility for his or her actions and to make amends and rep-
arations to the victim and community. These sanctions are viewed as more restrictive
than traditional probation, but less punitive than traditional incarceration. In keeping the
offender out of prison, alternative sanctions are deemed to instill more humane and just
punishment for these specific offenders. In other words, restorative justice is seen “as an
alternative to destructive forms of imprisonment and a means in which offenders can be
healed or rehabilitated,” as well as “an alternative to costly forms of imprisonment and as
a means to ensure that offenders are made to account to victims and communities often
through tangible forms of reparation” (Roach, 2000, p. 253).

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

Day reporting centers, which began operating in the early 1970s, are a form of alternative
sanction “used primarily for those offenders with substance abuse problems and who
need social skills training” (Jones & Connelly, 2001, pp. 4–5). Because not all jails and pris-
ons provide adequate substance abuse and treatment programs, these centers are viewed
as providing a more just punishment for offenders with substance abuse issues because
the available programs can directly target the abuse. “Programs at these centers include
adult basic education, cognitive restructuring, community service, employment enhance-
ment, intensive supervision, and substance abuse counseling” (Robinson, 2012, p. 164). In
addition, being sentenced to a day reporting center “empowers the individual offender”
by providing literacy courses, GED preparation, and anger management classes (Jones &
Connelly, 2001, p. 5).

Similar to the day reporting center is the halfway house, a community-based facility which
“provides various educational and counseling programs in a setting that is more homelike
and has greater freedoms than a prison or jail” (Owen, et al., 2012, p. 365). Although the
programs offered are similar, inmates live at the halfway house, whereas the day report-
ing center requires only a daily visit.

Correctional systems also provide for basic human needs through medical and dental
programs, as well as mental health and psychological counseling. Inmates, as humans,
are entitled to have, at minimum, basic healthcare and provisions for advanced care of
chronic or acute medical conditions, such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes. An
additional provision to this level of care is to provide healthy diets—as well as nutrition
education—for all inmates, regardless of medical condition. However, due to the close
and constant interaction between inmates and correctional staff, provisions are also made
for a healthy living environment, which include an emphasis on clean air and safety in
living and work areas (Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2012a).

In addition, female inmates are
provided with additional ser-
vices related to pregnancy and
childbirth. As discussed earlier in
the chapter, several states allow
chosen mothers convicted of
nonviolent offenses to live with
their infants within the confines
of the correctional facility for an
average time of 12–18 months.
Mother–child bonding is deemed
an essential element to establish-
ing a healthy relationship, one
that can hopefully continue upon
the mother’s release from prison.
Other medical and psychologi-
cal issues related specifically to
female inmates are also provided
to ensure that dignity, respect, and
human rights are upheld, even in
the harshest of conditions.

Bettmann/Bettmann/Getty Images

Some prisons allow nonviolent female offenders to care
for their babies for a period of time postpartum so that the
mother is able to bond with the child, thus increasing the
likelihood of family solidarity in the future.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

Human Rights Violations by the Criminal Justice System
In America, all citizens “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration of Indepen-
dence, 1776). The Founding Fathers asserted that human rights were a given, something
embodied in all citizens. However, it must also be asserted that individual biases, preju-
dices, and emotions have an effect on one’s ability to uphold or violate those rights.

Human Rights Violations by Law Enforcement
Law enforcement officers are the first contact in the criminal justice system. This initial
contact sets the tone for the rest of the system, providing either a positive or a nega-
tive perception and experience. Since law enforcement officers have great latitude in dis-
cretion, how they handle and process suspects, victims, and witnesses can have a huge
impact on these individuals, and subsequently, on the community.

Police brutality has existed for as long as law enforcement itself, but over the years, more
and more statutes have limited the amount and type of force that may be used by officers.
Even though limitations are present, there are still examples of violations of human rights
by law enforcement officers across the country, with several instances emerging as major
cases, spotlighting the tremendous power and control officers can yield.

For example, several highly publicized cases of police brutality and misconduct occurred
in the 1990s. In Los Angeles, California, in 1991, Rodney King became the personifica-
tion of police brutality. King, an African American, was 25 at the time and was severely
beaten by four white City of Los Angeles police officers. The beating included being tased,
kicked, and hit in the head with nightsticks, causing multiple skull fractures, injuries to
his neck, legs, and kidneys, and some brain damage. The four officers were charged and
tried in state court for assault with a deadly weapon and excessive force. All were acquit-
ted of the charges. The reactions by Los Angeles citizens to the verdicts included looting
and rioting, during which time 45 people were killed as a direct result of the rioting. In a
separate trial in federal court, all four officers were tried for violating King’s civil rights.
Two officers were again acquitted, while the other two officers were found guilty and sen-
tenced to 2.5 years in prison (Reid, 2001).

The State of New York also witnessed two high profile cases of police misconduct and
excessive use of force. In 1999, four white New York City police officers were acquitted
in the shooting death of Amadou Diallo, an immigrant from Guinea. The four officers,
dressed in plain clothes, suspected Diallo could be a wanted serial rapist and approached
him as he stood in the doorway of his apartment building. As they identified themselves,
Diallo pulled a wallet from his coat pocket. Upon doing so, the officers believed it to be a
gun and opened fire, shooting a total of 41 times, 19 of which hit Diallo. Although it was
revealed that Diallo was in fact unarmed at the time of his death, all four officers were
acquitted of second-degree murder and reckless endangerment charges (Reid, 2001).

Just two weeks after the verdict in the Diallo trial, New York City police officer Justin
Volpe pled guilty to sodomizing Abner Louima, a Haitian immigrant, with a stick at a
police stationhouse in 1997 and threatening to kill him if he reported the incident. Volpe
received a 30-year sentence without parole, with other participating officers receiving var-
ious sentences for additional charges.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

All three of these incidents show the most severe actions that can be taken by one person
against another. And even though these types of cases receive national and international
attention, and are not the norm in law enforcement, any human rights violations of this
magnitude should never occur. “Although only a minority of police officers may be guilty of
misconduct, any misconduct is serious and should be subject to discipline. Policies and pro-
grams should be developed to avoid as much misconduct as possible” (Reid, 2001, p. 109).

Ways in which the potential for human rights violations can be decreased include educa-
tion and training in interpersonal communications, use of force alternatives, increased
supervision of patrol officers, and sensitivity training. Training should occur on at least a
yearly basis to ensure that all officers, as well as administrators, are aware of new statutes
and policies, as well as new techniques in dealing with citizens, to guarantee that all those
who come in contact with law enforcement are treated with dignity and respect.

Human Rights Violations by the Court System
The court system is charged with determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant, and
with doing so in a fair and judicious manner. Research indicates that the court system
is adept at processing defendants, as less than 8% of criminal convictions are reversed
on appeal (Neubauer & Fradella, 2011). However, even with the effective processing of
defendants through trial, one punishment in the court system stands in stark contrast to
the protection of human rights—the death penalty.

Currently, 33 states allow executions for those convicted of murder. The proponents of the
death penalty argue that it deters crime, achieves justice, prevents criminals from commit-
ting additional crimes while on parole, and is less expensive than maintaining offenders
in prison for life. Opponents of the death penalty argue that there is no conclusive evi-
dence that it deters crime and that it is wrong for the state to take the life of its citizens.
They also argue that the death penalty is applied in a discriminatory manner, and that
innocent people have been put to death through its use (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013).

The basic issue with the death penalty centers on the Eighth Amendment’s protection
against cruel and unusual punishment. Is it a violation of this basic fundamental right if
the government takes a life? To go even further, should a distinctly fatalistic punishment be
allowed if there is a possibility that an innocent person could be subjected to that punish-
ment? Probably the most widely identified case involving the possible execution of an inno-
cent person is that of Cameron Todd Willingham, executed in Texas in 2004 for the murder
of his children by arson. After his execution, forensic experts concluded that the evidence
did not support the conclusion that Willingham started the fire (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013).

“In recent years, courts, governors, and legislatures in many of the death penalty states
have acted to abolish or limit executions” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013, p. 515). The decline
in support has come about mostly because of the 138 exonerations of death row inmates
since 1973. The U.S. Supreme Court has also shifted its focus on the death penalty since
it reinstated the punishment in Gregg v. Georgia in 1976. In the first decade of the 21st
century, the Court made three landmark decisions. In Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the Court
ruled that the execution of a mentally retarded defendant was unconstitutional. In Ring v.
Arizona (2002), the Court ruled that juries, rather than judges, must make the decision to

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Section 9.3 Social Justice and Human Rights

impose the death penalty. In Roper v. Simmons (2005), the Court ruled that it is unconstitu-
tional to impose the death penalty on a defendant who was under the age of 18 (a juvenile)
when the crime was committed (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013).

In order to remove any violations of human rights in the state execution of inmates, the
death penalty must be abolished completely. The criminal justice system, and by virtue
the court system, is not exact. Mistakes, however unintentional, are made, simply because
the system is processed by humans. Until the death penalty is completely abolished, there
will remain the possibility for human rights violations. Even if only one innocent person
is executed, that one person was made to suffer the most egregious violation of all human
rights—the undeserved loss of life.

Human Rights Violations
by Corrections
Inmates in correctional institu-
tions and facilities are held behind
fences and closed doors, unseen
by the public and community for
most of their confinement. Conse-
quently, most of the public does
not know what goes on behind the
facility’s closed doors. “A fact of
life in many institutions is unau-
thorized physical violence by offi-
cers against inmates” (Clear, Cole,
& Reisig, 2013, p. 286). Many cor-
rectional officers believe that to
maintain control in this confined
setting and among some of the
worst criminal offenders, they
must show a willingness to exert
physical force whenever neces-
sary. As a result, “in some institutions, authorized ‘goon squads’ comprising physically
powerful officers use their muscle to maintain order” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013, p. 286).

In some instances, the show and use of brute force by correctional officers leads to human
rights violations. Because inmates are confined and not free to leave, officers are in a unique
position to use force without the fear of retaliation or punishment. California State Prison
at Corcoran has become synonymous with prison-guard brutality. From 1989 to 1995, dur-
ing what has been called the “gladiator days,” seven inmates were killed and 43 inmates
wounded by correctional officers using assault weapons to stop fighting between gang
members. This constituted the most inmates killed in any American prison. What made
the killings worse was the fact that guards actually initiated fights between rival gang
members. In the end, however, the shootings were justified by state-appointed investiga-
tors (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013).

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Because the public is not able to see what goes on behind
the closed doors of correctional institutions, violations of
prisoners’ human rights are likely.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Questions for Critical Thinking

Another example of allegations of human rights violations of inmates occurred in 2004
when U.S. military personnel at Abu Ghraib were accused of mistreating Iraqi prison-
ers. Pictures were released showing detainees being humiliated by being paraded naked
and placed in sexually humiliating poses, while other allegations included beatings and
threats of rape. Although these cases seem extreme, some have argued that conditions in
U.S. prisons are not much different, with unknown numbers of inmates being “ill-treated,
whether by officer brutality, neglect of medical needs, or administrative failure to prevent
violent victimization” (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2013, p. 286).

Inmates do not lose their rights to humane treatment when they pass through jail or
prison doors. Although correctional institutions may be cold and harsh environments,
correctional officers need to understand that inmates are human beings, and should be
treated with respect. Of course, officers are expected to enforce rules to maintain order,
but that enforcement must be aligned with department and institution policies and proce-
dures, and must include a respect for human dignity. Education and training must occur
on a continual basis in order to ensure that all officers are current on the most appropriate
ways to effectively manage inmates while maintaining order and control.

Chapter Summary

The criminal justice system as a whole, and criminal justice practitioners individually,
are in a unique position to have both positive and negative influences on individual

lives. It is imperative that criminal justice practitioners, throughout law enforcement,
courts, and corrections, understand their impact on the citizens they serve, while striv-
ing to ensure that all citizens are treated with respect and dignity, and that all citizens are
valued as human beings.

Questions for Critical Thinking
• Explain the concept of equality. What are some examples of how the criminal

justice system provides equality for citizens? What are some examples of how the
criminal justice system hinders equality for citizens?

• Explain the concept of solidarity. What are some examples of how the criminal
justice system provides solidarity for citizens? What are some examples of how
the criminal justice system hinders solidarity for citizens?

• Explain the concept of human rights. What are some examples of how the
criminal justice system provides individual human rights for citizens? What are
some examples of how the criminal justice system hinders individual human
rights for citizens?

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

CHAPTER 9Key Terms

Web Links
Women’s Prison Association:

Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies:
http://www.calea.org/content/commission

National Night Out:
http://www.nationaltownwatch.org/nno/about.html

Center for Economic and Social Justice:
http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/economicjustice-defined.htm

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WelcomePage.aspx

Key Terms
color of law When a person who has a
legal authority granted by a government
body acts within the scope of that legal
authority (i.e., a law enforcement officer
affecting a legal arrest).

Due Process Clause A provision in the
Fourteenth Amendment that makes most of
the criminal procedural rights contained in
the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, in
an effort to ensure fairness under the law.

Equal Protection Clause A provision in
the Fourteenth Amendment that requires
states to provide equal protection under
the law, without discrimination.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

© 2013 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Running Head: Annotated bibliography

1

Annotated bibliography

4

Annotated Bibliography

Robert Ponton

Professor Ramsey

CRJ422: Criminal Justice Capstone

10/28/2022

Rofiq, A., Disemadi, H. S., & Jaya, N. S. P. (2019, December). Criminal Objectives Integrality in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System. In 
Al-Risalah: Forum Kajian Hukum dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan (Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 179-190).

According to this article, each component of the criminal justice system, from its substance to its structure to its legal culture, must work together to accomplish the system’s full potential. Because of this, it is crucial that the three components of Indonesia’s criminal justice system work together harmoniously so that legitimate law enforcement can proceed with confidence in the legitimacy of the rulings made. Laws will always be biased against the poor and favor the wealthy unless this policy is implemented. This research examines the impact of the integrality of criminal intentions on Indonesia’s criminal justice system. This study uses a normative juridical approach to show how the many parts of the criminal justice system—the police, the prosecutors, the courts, and the prisons—all work together to achieve the goals set forth by the numerous statutes that establish them.

The full extent of the pandemic’s influence on the American criminal justice system will become apparent as time goes on. These systems will keep on producing both routine and pandemic data for the time being. Research based on these statistics will help define disaster preparedness for years to come, making it of critical importance to the future of the criminal justice system. Researchers who want to use data from the criminal justice system at this time should be aware of several potential data constraints, however. This essay concludes with a consideration of four guidelines that academics should take into account when using data collected during the epidemic, regardless of the area of criminal justice they intend to examine.

Jamal, T., & Higham, J. (2021). Justice and ethics: towards a new platform for tourism and sustainability. 
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
29(2-3), 143-157.

Justice has emerged as a crucial principle to govern the growth and direction of the tourism industry in these times of turmoil and uncertainty. People everywhere are searching for ways to right the wrongs they’ve suffered at the hands of the powerful, whether those wrongs date back centuries or are more recent inventions. This special issue provides a variety of theoretical and empirical insights regarding the intersection of justice and tourism as a response. Considering the nascent nature of theory development in the tourist industry, academics would do well to investigate the various disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches being taken to the study of theories of justice. Social justice, equity, and rights; inclusivity and recognition; sustainability and conservation; well-being, belonging, and capacities; post humanistic justice; and governance and participation are all discussed in this paper as evolving principles and approaches to justice and tourism. We achieve this by outlining the many topics and ideas related to “just” tourism that need immediate and thorough academic consideration. Fortunately, there is a new methodological foundation forming in the field of justice and ethics that might serve as a beacon for the tourist and sustainability industries. Insights and direction towards this topical and vital research agenda are provided in this special issue.

Almqvist, J. (2006). The impact of cultural diversity on international criminal proceedings.

This article examines how cultural diversity affects international criminal processes and what can be done to alleviate the negative outcomes that arise as a result, such as a lack of mutual understanding, estrangement, and conflict. If any one of these prerequisites isn’t met, international criminal tribunals lose not just their ability to provide justice to those who need it (the accused, witnesses, and victims) but also their value in the eyes of those who are intended to benefit from them (the affected populations). To date, international criminal tribunals have mainly viewed the issue of cultural variety through the lens of language diversity. Focusing just on language, however, obscures disparities in socio-cultural norms and views about justice, both of which are crucial to their work. These variants are very challenging to address. This article considers whether national courts, which are generally thought to operate in more culturally homogeneous environments, provide more appropriate fora of adjudication of grave crimes under international law.

Arbour, L. (2007). Economic and social justice for societies in transition. 
NYUJ Int’l L. & Pol.
40, 1.

Considering Beck’s ‘risk society’ concept, risk has been generally seen negatively in social theory and critical criminology. However, the author of this research contends that such concerns are unwarranted. The political climate shapes many of the objects of criticism, and risk is an incredibly malleable governmental technology. All other methods of security have been negatively framed by the same context. Strategies for reducing the potential for harm caused by drugs hold great promise for bridging the gap between risk and security, and more generally, issues of social justice. However, the same issues that plague oversimplifying risk-based security also plague abstract requests for harm minimization security. This study argues that a government analyst may help us build a strategic understanding of risk by analyzing current practices (such damage minimization and restorative justice) and then utilizing that analysis to design new experiments in these areas of policy.

References

Arbour, L. (2007). Economic and social justice for societies in transition. 
NYUJ Int’l L. & Pol.
40, 1.

Almqvist, J. (2006). The impact of cultural diversity on international criminal proceedings.

Jamal, T., & Higham, J. (2021). Justice and ethics: towards a new platform for tourism and sustainability. 
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
29(2-3), 143-157.

Rofiq, A., Disemadi, H. S., & Jaya, N. S. P. (2019, December). Criminal Objectives Integrality in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System. In 
Al-Risalah: Forum Kajian Hukum dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan (Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 179-190).

Are you stuck with another assignment? Use our paper writing service to score better grades and meet your deadlines. We are here to help!


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper
Writerbay.net