Community Justice: An Essay By Todd Clear And David Karp

The reflection paper review for this week’s reading assignment topic “ Community Justice: An Essay” by Todd Clear and David Karp article points out how Jackson Heights community has developed a sanctioning body that has a direct voice in the criminal justice system to determine the outcome of the local offenders that has committed crimes against the people in their community. This proactive approach by the community is due to the community lack of trust between law enforcement, criminal justice system, and the politicians that are suppose to represent the people. In addition, the sanctioning body was able to devise programs within the community to recuperate a percentage of the funds that is spent on the criminals for incarceration and have the money reinvested back in the community through community based rehabilitation programs for the offender and develop the community.

This article by Clear and Karp utilize a triangulation core of responsibility with the community-based system that directly correlates between each entity within the community, victim and the offender. All three shares a common bond for partial responsibility to ensure reparation and justice is fulfilled to the utmost

highest degree by the community leaders that are directly involved with the criminal justice system that supposes to filter back in the community with better relations between them.
I feel this community base system is just another added feature to the criminal justice system to determine the sentencing for possible misdemeanor offenders within the community and to salvage community relations to shift the blame from the courts to the people.

However, it might cut down on the court system over loads for these type of offenses and minimize the incarceration rate due to the over population for misdemeanor offenses. This attempt to fix social relations with the community, this is not the fix all to stop criminal behavior throughout our communities in America. The checks and balances in the triangle of community justice will not be able to satisfy all the grievances between the victim and the offender due to human nature indifferences in beliefs and

values.
Also, I do not recall on any stipulations how victims are monetary compensated for their losses in accordance to this community base program. If so, who decides on the monetary value for compensation? Will this provide another cog or additional process in the court system for determining the availability of funds that can be allocated with the community base programs?
I can see this community program causing another cog in the legal system when you have disagreeing parties what is acceptable and not acceptable for community restitution with the degree of labor and time served. Will this become an issue of being double jeopardy for restitution being paid to the victim and then providing serves to the community.
Overall, I feel this could be a good community base program. However, I can foresee the flaws and drawbacks that will affect how the victim is rightfully compensated and how the offender fulfills his restitution to the victim and the community without conflict between the parties or the community.
Questions:
1. The service provided by the offender to the victims. How does the community base panel determine sentencing? Will the panel have court appointed advisors to provide current statues and guideline within the legal means of the law.
2. The basis of the risk assessment model for three main factors that are essential to crime is having a motivated predatory offender that seeks out a suitable target. In which, the target does not have that capable guardian to provide them the protection to prevent offenses against another citizen. Does the community panel have the capability to recognize these factors without the assistance of the criminal justice oversight for the community best interest and safety with offenders back in the community?