Reasons for Using Diversion in the Criminal Justice System
Diversion is an attempt by the criminal justice system to divert or channel out offenders from the justice system. The program is normally executed by the police departments, the court systems, and the attorneys who want to have the offenders evade the charges in which they are responsible for. Some of the problem solving courts usually uses the diversion technique to try and have the criminals solve the case out of the court (Quay, 1977). The Diversion program is usually used for a number of reasons. In most cases, there are two types of diversions: the formal and the informal. The informal diversion occurs when an official of the court system decides that the case shall be kept out of the justice system, either by using appropriate discretion or not. In most cases, the reason for using diversion is when the crime is minor and does not warrant a court hearing. Such cases include traffic violation and entering restricted areas without prior knowledge among others. Diversion will be applied if the culprit is calm and deferential. Evidently, diversion in most states may be used when the crime is minor and the victim confesses of the crime and vows not to repeat. At the same point of the case being minor, some of the victims may have committed domestic violence. In this instance, the court may divert the case and instead send the culprit to a hanger-management program. This occurs when the offender requires some treatment or voluntary sanction. Once the culprit undergoes the program, the case may then be closed in an unofficial capacity (Quay, 1977). Notably, not every person may use the diversion program; it is only supposed to be used by magistrates and court officials with the capacity of the office they hold.
The diversion program is also used to redirect the teenage offenders from the court system through support, programming, and supervision. For most youths who indulge in minor offenses, it is appropriate not to let them face the justice system; instead, the cases are diverted towards community-based programs and support systems. This has been tested and proved that it is helpful to the youth than confinement. Although most countries have juvenile courts for underage people, some minor offenses do not warrant their imprisonment. Diversion in this instance is therefore a productive way of handling and curbing future felony. In most cases, subjecting youth through the juvenile system does more harm to them than good. This is because it perpetuates delinquency by means of labeling. This is where the youth are exposed to circumstance within the prison that may corrode their morals more. The diversion program in this case is beneficial to the justice system because it will not incur the extra cost incurred when accommodating the youth out of home (Hoff, 1999). The third reason why the diversion program is used is the reduced overcrowding in jails and a mutual dissatisfaction among the stakeholders who believe that arrest and prosecution is not always the option when addressing some crimes. The program is thus used to offer a viable alternative to the arrest and prosecution of minor offenses. The stakeholders who invented the program argued that some of the perpetrators may be prosecuted despite the fact that some may be facing mental issues. The only alternative in such cases is to divert the case and try to help the person become mentally well through rehabilitation programs. The diversion program is beneficial to the criminal justice because it will the amount of cases being brought to court and the expenses incurred in the process (Quay, 1977). It will also reduce congestion and overcrowding in the prisons.
The Effect of Diversion on the Law Enforcement Agency
The Diversion program has had notable effects on law enforcement. First, the pre-arrest diversion was implemented for the law enforcement. This is a case where law enforcement officers have the ability to redirect low-level offenders into community based programs instead of taking them to courts for prosecution. Some offenders are “frequent fliers,” which refers to those criminals that have been repeatedly arrested on low-level drug charges or prostitution. So instead of them being taken to court, they are referred to the rehabilitation programs. The Diversion program has been effective in the law enforcement because the front-line officers are the ones who decide who is offered the chance before the offender is booked. In the law enforcement department, diversion has been a significant success in trying to curb recidivism. Research has showed that offenders who go through the rehabilitation programs are 58% less likely to commit a crime, unlike those who have not gone through it (Quay, 1977). However, good the program is to the law enforcement agency, the power to divert criminals may bring about corruption in the force. Most criminals are involved in drug dealing and prostitution which is a lucrative business in some parts of the country. When a police officer arrests an offender there is a likelihood that the officer will be bribed so that they do not take the culprit to the court. Law enforcement simply means ensuring that the law of the land is respected and obeyed. The purpose of the law enforcement officers is to ensure that the law breakers are brought to book. The diversion program is to book as having reduced the rate of crimes in most parts of the country (Cocozza, 2005). This implies that the program has eased pressure on law enforcement officers by reducing the rate of crimes especially by the youth.
Is Diversion Cost-Effective?
I believe that the diversion programs are not entirely cost-effective. They may be cost-effective to the justice system alone but not to the government. The court may evade the prosecution of an individual which means that the justice system will not incur the cost of prosecution and that of hosting the individual in prison. The main goal of diversion is to have an individual evade the justice system but have access to the rehabilitation program. The rehabilitation programs provide criminals with services and help which addresses the underlying cause committing a crime. Such causes may include mental issues, drug and alcohol. When a person is referred to the rehabilitation center, they are going to spend a considerable amount of time there. This means that hosting them shall be a cost to the government or whoever finances the rehabilitation center. During their stay at the rehabilitation center, they will go through counseling and guidance which will be a cost to the councilor. However the process that shall be used on the perpetrators, a cost will be expected. To the offender, the process of diversion may also be cost-effective. This is because an offender who remains with the community will have an opportunity to retain his/her job which is important when money is required to pay for the counseling, fines, or restitution (Cocozza, 2005). Diversion may also be cost-effective when compared to other criminal processes. Research has established that diversion is cheaper than prosecution and confinement. However, good and cost-effective diversion may appear, it still has some controversies. For one, the program seems to consider the well-being of the offender and not that of the victim (Hoff, 1999). It is deemed appropriate that the problems be solved by involving the victims in the diversion processes.
References
Quay, H. C., & Love, C. T. (1977). The effect of a juvenile diversion program on rearrests. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 4(4), 377-396.
Hoff, R. A., Baranosky, M. V., Buchanan, J., Zonana, H., & Rosenheck, R. A. (1999). The effects of a jail diversion program on incarceration: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 27(3), 377-386.
Cocozza, J. J., Veysey, B. M., Chapin, D. A., Dembo, R., Walters, W., & Farina, S. (2005). Diversion from the Juvenile Justice System: The Miami-Dade Juvenile Assessment Center Post-Arrest Diversion Program*. Substance Use & Misuse, 40(7), 935-951.
