CJ Administration

C.JUSTICEGIRL

M01_PEAK1530_09_PP_C01.pptx

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >CJ Administration

The Study and Scope of Justice Administration

Chapter #1

Justice Administration Ninth Edition

Learning Objectives

1. Explain and distinguish between the concepts of administration, manager, and supervisor.

2. Understand and distinguish among criminal justice process, network, and nonsystem.

3. Understand system fragmentation and how it affects the amount and type of crime.

4. Understand consensus and conflict theorists and their theories.

5. Understand the two goals of the U.S. criminal justice system (CJS).

6. Distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic rewards and how they relate to the CJS.

7. Explain the differences between planned change and unplanned change in an organization.

Why Study Justice Administration?

Administration is a science that can be taught, not a talent one must be born with.

Often through on-the-job training.

Key Terms

Administrator

The chief executive who focuses on the overall organization, its mission, acquisition and use of resources, and agency relationships with external organizations and groups.

Manager

Persons (captains, lieutenants) in the intermediate level of management, responsible for carrying out the policies and directives of upper level administrators and supervising subordinate managers and employees.

Supervisor

Persons (sergeants) typically in the field who plan, organize, and direct staff members in their duties.

A True System of Justice?

Each system component—police, courts, and corrections—has varying degrees of responsibility and discretion for dealing with crime.

Relations among and between these components are often characterized by friction, conflict, and deficient communication.

This criticism of the justice system or process—that it is fragmented and rife with role conflicts and other problems—is a common refrain.

A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)

Our CJS may not be a system at all.

Better described as a criminal justice process.

It involves the decisions and actions taken by an institution, offender, victim, or society that influence the offender's movement into, through, or out of the justice system.

A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)

At one end of this process are the police

Primary role as getting lawbreakers off the street

At the other end are the corrections officials

Role as being primarily custodial in nature

Somewhere in between are the courts that try to ensure a fair application of the law to each case.

A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)

In criminal justice planning jargon, "You can't rock one end of the boat.“

Every action has a reaction, especially in the justice process.

Actions and reactions of each component will send ripples throughout the process.

Fragmentation exists among the components and within the individual components.

A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 2)

The criminal justice network is said to be based on several key, yet erroneous, assumptions.

The components of the network cooperate and share similar goals.

The network operates according to a set of formal procedural rules to ensure uniform treatment of all persons, the outcome of which constitutes justice.

Each person accused of a crime receives due process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Each person receives a speedy public trial before an impartial jury of his or her peers and is represented by competent legal counsel.

A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 2)

Reasons the assumptions are erroneous:

The three components have incompatible goals and continually compete with one another for dollars.

Evidence indicates that blacks and whites, males and females, and middle- and lower-class citizens receive differential treatment in the criminal justice network.

Some persons are prosecuted, some are not; some are involved in plea bargaining, others are not; some are convicted and sent to prison, whereas other convicted persons are not.

Finally, it is argued that the current backlog of cases does not ensure a speedy trial; a vast majority (at least 90%) of all arrestees plead guilty prior to trial.

A Criminal Justice Non-system? (1 of 2)

It is argued that:

The system is neither efficient enough to create a credible fear of punishment nor fair enough to command respect for its values.

Cohn and Udolf stated that criminal justice "is not a system, and it has little to do with justice as that term is ordinarily understood.“

Wright and Fox asserted that "the criminal justice system... is frequently criticized because it is not a coordinated structure—not really a system. In many ways this is true."

A Criminal Justice Non-system? (2 of 2)

System fragmentation:

Police officers have great discretion over whom they arrest and are effectively able to dictate policy as they go about performing their duties.

Judicial officers also possess great discretionary latitude.

Fragmentation also occurs in corrections.

With this fragmentation comes polarity in identifying and establishing the primary goals of the system.

However, the justice system may still constitute a true system.

From Nonsystem to System Redefining Performance Measures

Despite the CJS being decentralized and fragmented there is a set of common goals.

Doing justice, securing communities, restoring crime victims, reducing crime rates and recidivism.

The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (1 of 5)

U.S. society has innumerable lawbreakers.

Most are easily handled by the police, do not challenge the legitimacy of the law when arrested and incarcerated, nor challenge the system of government that enacts the laws or agencies that carry them out.

According to John Locke, people were created by God to be free, equal, independent, and with inherent inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property.

Each person had the right of self-protection against those who would infringe on these liberties.

Although most people are good, some will likely prey on their fellows, who in turn would constantly have to be on guard against such evildoers.

The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (2 of 5)

In Locke's view:

To avoid their brutish existence, people join together, forming governments to which they surrender their right of self-protection.

In return, they receive governmental protection of their lives, property, and liberty.

As with any contract, each side has benefits and considerations:

People give up their right to protect themselves and receive protection in return.

Governments, in turn, give protection and receive loyalty and obedience in return.

The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (3 of 5)

Locke's famous theory of tacit consent:

"Every Man . . . doth hereby give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to Obedience to the Laws of the government."

Locke's theory essentially describes an association of landowners.

Thomas Hobbes argued that all people were essentially irrational and selfish.

Hobbes’ “social contract theory.“

People are essentially irrational and selfish, but have enough rationality to come together to form governments for self protection.

The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (4 of 5)

Rousseau, a conflict theorist, differed from both Hobbes and Locke, arguing that "Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.“

Conflict between the ruling group and the other groups in society

Whereas Locke described consensus within the ruling group.

The primary difference between the consensus and conflict theorists concerns their evaluation of the legitimacy of the actions of ruling groups in contemporary societies.

Important because it involves the competing views of humankind toward its ruling group.

The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (5 of 5)

Consensus model:

The view of the criminal justice system in which it is assumed that all parts of the system work toward a common goal

Conflict model:

Holds that actors within the criminal justice system are self-serving, with pressures for success, promotion, and general accountability and resulting in fragmented efforts

Crime Control through Due Process

Two competing models of the criminal justice process:

Due process model:

The idea that the accused should be presumed innocent and have their rights protected, while police must act only in accordance with the Constitution.

Crime control model:

A philosophy that states crime must be repressed, the accused presumed guilty, legal loopholes eliminated, offenders swiftly punished, and police and prosecutors given a high degree of discretion.

Neither of these models completely dominate a particular community or control U.S. crime policy.

Public versus Private Sector

Private businesses and corporations can use a panoply of extrinsic (external) rewards to motivate and reward their employees.

Examples: financial bonuses, private office, key to the executive washroom, paid trips, company car, awards, expense account, membership in country clubs and organizations, and a prestigious job title.

People working in the public sector must acquire their job satisfaction primarily through intrinsic (internal) rewards:

Examples: doing work that is gratifying and intrinsically making them feel good about themselves and what they accomplish.

Planned Change and Policymaking (1 of 3)

In the past, change in criminal justice agencies typically occurred slowly and incrementally.

Change is now a constant rather than an exception.

If unplanned, programs will often fail and even result in negative consequences in the workplace.

Three-strikes law

Change in criminal justice should not and typically does not occur accidentally or haphazardly.

Justice administrators must know how to plan, implement, and evaluate interventions that address problems in their organizations and systems while taking into account all the other important components.

Planned Change and Policymaking (2 of 3)

Planned change involves problem analysis, setting goals and objectives, program and policy design, developing an action plan, and monitoring and evaluation.

Examples include:

Programs and policies that address domestic violence

Prostitution

Drug abuse

Gang activities

Repeat offenders

The availability of handguns

Planned Change and Policymaking (3 of 3)

The policymaker approach is far less complex manner.

The formal development of ideas or plans that are then used by an organization to guide decision making.

Simple goals; like “keeping crime down”

Variables may not be considered.

Analyses may not be completed.

Has merit and is commonly used for problem-solving.

Force-Field Analysis

There will always be barriers and resistance to change in criminal justice organizations.

Such barriers may be physical, social, financial, legal, political, and/or technological in nature.

One useful technique for identifying sources of resistance (and support) is called force-field analysis, which involves:

Identifying driving forces (those supporting change) and restraining forces (those resisting change)

Analyzing forces identified in Step 1

Identifying alternative strategies for changing each force identified in step 1 and focusing on reducing forces of resistance

Consequences of Not Planning for Change

Can be negative consequences to not planning for change.

Proactive planning for change can be advantageous over forced change based on events that already have occurred (reactionary change).

Example: Team policing