Goal and challenges of the justice model
The justice model of sentencing in criminal justice was proposed by one David Fogel as a method of sentencing convicts that would eliminate the disparity created by the unbridled judicial discretion in sentencing. The main goal of the model is to punish crime. It is intended to do away with the rehabilitative aspect of correctional services in that it looks at an adult who has committed the crime as someone who deserves the punishment rather than someone who is ‘sick.’ It reduces the judicial discretion that judges are given by ensuring that the range of years within which a court is to exercise discretion is not more than two years. In this way, the biggest disparity in sentencing similar crimes is reduced to no more than four years.
The justice model however faces a few challenges. One is that by reducing judicial discretion, it goes against the time honored principles of proportionality and restraint in sentencing. The judge, having been the one who tried the case has a better idea of the circumstances and demeanor of the accused person and therefore can give a suitable sentence based on the circumstances of the case. the removal of parole and imposition of the ‘day for day’ rule is liable to abuse by the convicts who may chose to be good only for the prison time and then once he is out in half his term, he can go back to crime. While it is true that some convicts are not sick, there are those who are and these need rehabilitation rather than punishment. The Justice Model would effectively deny this for most of them.
The justice model also emphasizes on custodial sentences and the elimination of parole. Instead of parole, the model suggests a ‘day for day’ policy where a convict’s sentence is reduced by one day for every day that he stays in prison and obeys all the rules and regulations.
For instance studies have shown that the application of judicial discretion in many cases has resulted in a racially disproportionate result especially in serious crimes such as drug related and violence related crimes. A study conducted in Illinois looking at death sentencing trends from 1988 to 1997 has shown that race is a major factor that affected whether a convict was sentenced to death or not. With a justice model, judicial discretion that allowed for racial preferences of judges would not feature in sentencing as the sentence will be mandatory.
Effectiveness of justice model
One of the major features of legal systems all over the world is that justice must not just be done, but it must be seen to be done. The criminal justice system is a public service aimed at making the public safer by eliminating crime. Studies have shown that crime is a major issue that dictates elections especially in the U.S.A. This shows that the public feels strongly about efforts to combat crime. The justice model caters to this because the sentence that is given is shown to be punishment.
One of the most attractive features of the justice model is the certainty of punishment which has been said to not only deter crime but to give a sense of fairness. Existing sentencing models have resulted in huge disparities in sentencing for identical crimes which gives an impression of unfairness and exposes the judiciary to allegations of discrimination. A system where it is well known before hand the amount of punishment that will be suffered does away with all this. Further, the justice model gives some form of a guarantee that all criminals will serve prison terms if convicted. This will work to motivate police officers to apprehend more criminals. The system where there is no guarantee that a successful conviction will lead to a jail term is demoralizing, especially where the convict is given a very light sentence.
Management of costs
The justice system is extremely expensive, and the cost is continuing to increase. The justice system if well implemented can drastically reduce the cost of correctional systems. This is because the system is simple and its goal is simple. There is no effort to change the convict and therefore the money spent on correction officers and rehabilitation efforts will be saved. Further, since the goal is to punish the offender, some of the amenities offered in prison can be done away with. A clear and concise sentencing system will also ensure that appeals on the grounds of sentencing are eliminated thus freeing up courts to hear other matters and saving the taxpayers money. The justice model also greatly reduces the need for parole boards and probation services which mean that the money spent on these services can be used instead to build prisons.
On the other hand, the justice model will require custodial sentences for nearly every crime. Parole and other forms of punishment such as community service, house arrest probation and so on are key in reducing the population of inmates thus reducing the costs of correctional services. Introduction of the justice system might result in a rise in taxes to cater for prison services.
Philosophical and social issues
In assessing whether a sentencing model is cost effective, it is important that the cost be measured both in hard currency and in the return or the result achieved from the implementation of the model. In other words, it entails looking at the investment and the return on investment that is likely to be achieved from the investment. In the case of the justice model, looking at the management of costs should therefore look also at whether it is effective in reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders.
Using this approach, it is clear that the justice system not only costs less because of the emphasis on punishment rather than rehabilitation, but by placing responsibility on the defendant for his action and ensuring certainty of punishment, it acts as a deterrent and satisfies the public need for stern action.
Works Cited
Diamond, L. J. (1990). Formation and Change in Lay Evaluation of Criminal Sentencing. Law and Human Behavior , 14 (3), 199-214.
Fogel, D. F. (1978-1979). Justice, Not Therapy: A New Mission for Corrections. Judicature , 62, 373.
Pierce, G. L., & Radelet, M. L. (2002). Race, Region and Death Sentencing in Illinois: 1988-1997. State of Illinois.
Rustowski, C. P. (1976, March 18). Fogel's Justice Model: Will Illinois accept it? Illinois Issues .
Rutkowski, C. P. (1976, February 14). Fogel's 'Justice Model': Stop trying to reform. Punish, but treat all alike. Illinois Issues .
