Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Justice legal system
Justice legal system
The legal system justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Prisoners serving life sentences for first degree murder should not receive parole hearings after fifteen years since they have not served an appropriate amount of time for the crime, the victims’ family deserves justice and closure, and criminals who are released on parole pose a huge threat on the community. Criminals serving life sentences for first degree murder have been convicted of unlawfully killing that is willful and premeditated. In other words, the murder was immoral and planned out. Most of the time the murderer knows the victim personally, which means they know the victims’ family and workplace. So after the murder has occurred, it really surprises the family knowing who intentionally killed their loved one, which really takes a toll on them.
Prisoners should not be eligible for parole after only serving fifteen years due to the fact that they will repeat crime, and be re-entered into the prison system. In other words I mean that there is a higher chance a prisoner will go back into the jail
…show more content…
system, than he or she would to get a job and stay out of the systems. According to Alex Kingsburg in The Ex-Con Next Door, “more than two-thirds (68 percent) ended up back behind bars within three years of being released”. Prisoners do not deserve to be released because, prisoners being released would not be of benefit to anyone. The number of prisoners being re-entered into the prison systems is too high and there is no logical reason for it to go any higher, and that is what would happen if they get released. First degree murder victims, as well as their families and loved ones deserve justice and closure.
Therefore, criminals should not be eligible for parole at all. The amount of pain the victims’ family and loved one feel is extreme, and nobody should have to go through that amount of pain. The family and loved ones do not get to say goodbye and do not get to have peace with the victim. New York Amsterdam News’ Saeed Shabazz mentions that the Smith family said “we do not want anyone else to suffer the pain of losing a loved one to violence” (p. 3) Families of the victims deal with a lot of pain and trauma, especially when they do not get to say goodbye. Criminals do not have to deal with even half of the amount of torture that the victims’ family feels. They need to serve the life sentence because they took an innocent life away and they need to pay for it. There is no reason for the criminal to be released since the victim are not able to get their lives
back. Criminals should not be eligible for parole since they pose a massive threat for the rest in the community. In USA Today, it stated that “not only are states releasing prisoners in a rush, their watching released prisoners less closely once their out” (p. 1). In other words, prisoners can basically do what they want since they are not being observed as well as they should be. Prisoners who are released earlier than they are supposed to do not serve a suitable amount of time in prison. Which means that they are not able to fully learn from their mistake. Fifteen years is not enough time to realize that the crime committed was immoral and caused a countless amount of suffering for others. Releasing prisoners who have been convicted of first-degree murder will only produce one thing, a revolving door. By this I mean that the prisoner has not learned his or her lesson and will either one: commit the same crime, or two: commit one even worse. The criminals do not deserve any type opportunity to commit another crime, and that is exactly what they will do as soon as they get released on parole. Prisoners serving life sentences should not be eligible for parole. They have committed a very cruel crime that has cause other a great deal of pain and suffering. They are criminals, and that will not change. This means that once a criminal is release, there is a high chance that the crime they have committed will most likely reoccur. More than two-thirds of criminals are entered back into the systems within three years of being released. Plenty of people have suffered for the criminals’ actions, particularly the victims’ family. They have to deal with funeral and burial arrangement. Topping it off, the families and loved ones have to transition into living a life without their loved one, which is probably the hardest thing to do. The families and loved ones deserve to have that little peace of mind, knowing that the person who wrongfully murdered their loved one is behind bars, thinking about what he or she did, for the rest of his or her life. States do not realize that the more they release criminals, the more crimes are committed. It’s set into the criminals mind, they can do what they want and just get a slap on the hand, like serving only fifteen years. There is a tremendously high chance that criminals who have been unconfined early will be re-incarcerated. The state should not give the criminals that chance.
One of the problems with the law is its principle of removing judicial discretion. This severely hinders a judge's ability to make a punishment fit the crime. While some felons deserve life in prison, it is unfair to create a standard that would force judges to sentence offenders to life imprisonment for relatively minor crimes.
All the laws, which concern with the administration of justice in cases where an individual has been accused of a crime, always begin with the initial investigation of the crime and end either with imposition of punishment or with the unconditional release of the person. Most of the time it is the duty of the members of constituted authorities to inflict the punishment. Thus it can be said that almost all of the punishments are an act of self-defense and an act of defending the community against different types of offences. According to Professor Hart “the ultimate justification of any punishment is not that it is deterrent but that it is the emphatic denunciation by the community of a crime” (Hart P.65). Whenever the punishments are inflicted having rationale and humane factor in mind and not motivated by our punitive passions and pleasures then it can be justified otherwise it is nothing but a brutal act of terrorism. Prison System: It has often been argued that the criminals and convicted prisoners are being set free while the law-abiding citizens are starving. Some people are strongly opposed the present prison and parole system and said that prisoners are not given any chance for parole. Prisons must provide the following results: Keep dangerous criminals off the street Create a deterrent for creating a crime The deterrent for creating a crime can be justified in the following four types Retribution: according to this type, the goal of prison is to give people, who commit a crime, what they deserved Deterrence: in this type of justification, the goal of punishment is to prevent certain type of conduct Reform: reform type describes that crime is a disease and so the goal of punishment is to heal people Incapacitation: the...
Without proper motivation, many inmates may lose sight of their overall goal to improve their behavior. However, for the safety of the public, the requirements for parole should be strict enough to allow only the rehabilitated individuals out so there are less chances of violent re-offenders within the public. These constraints should serve only to filter out dangerous individuals, and should be flexible enough to provide the hope necessary to benefit offenders who are ethically ready to enter the general public. Furthermore, having the parole available to those who deserve it increased the overall compliance of inmates within prisons. Everyone deserves a second chance and probation should not serve to deprive offenders of that.
For a juvenile to be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole is almost to give that child the death penalty, a punishment that was outlawed in the 2005 case Roper v. Simmons. In Roper Christopher simmons challenged his death penalty sentence for murder at age 17 because of his claim that the was an “immature and irresponsible juvenile”. The Supreme Court overturned his sentence, saying that their was a national consensus against the death penalty for juveniles because so many states had rejected that as a viable form of punishment. A life without parole sentence is equal to the death penalty for a juvenile because the child is having any hope of living a semi-normal life terminated at a young age, in this case 14 years old. If this were your child would you want them to sit in jail for the rest of their life, with no hope and no reason to live? Or would you want them to, even if it was an impossibly long sentence, have a least some sliver of hope that maybe one day they will escape the icy hell of the prison walls and feel the sunshine upon their face once again? When the sentence of life with parole is given it is not a guarantee that the person will be let out, it is simply giving them some glimmer of hope and reason to
In America millions of offenders including men and women leave imprisonment in hope to return to their family and friends. On an article Prisoners and Reentry: Facts and Figures by The Annie E. Casey Foundation, in the year 2001 1.5 million children were reunited with their parents as they were released from prison. Also in 2005 the number of that passed prison gates were 698,499 and the number of prisoners that were released was approximated at about 9 million. Parole and Prison reentry has been a topic that really interests not only a lot of the communities around the world but is a topic that interest me. Recidivism is not only the topic that interests people but the offenders that get off on parole and how they cope with society after they
Criminals who are sentenced to life in prison still have a chance to kill again. According to Terri Langford’s article “Rookie Prison Guard Killed Escorting Violent Inmate” a man with life in prison murdered a rookie prison guard. “A rookie Texas Department of Criminal Justice guard was beaten to death Wednesday at a northeast Texas prison as he was transporting an inmate with an extensive history of attempted escapes and previous beatings of prison personnel from a day room to a cell.” (The Texas Tribune). This is clear that life in prison is a more deadly route. When the death penalty is enforced on a murderer, that murderer can't end the life of other innocent
Instead, these individuals are subjected to the structural violence of the system, and are largely given “life without possibility of parole” sentences. No matter how remorseful they are, how much they have learned, or how young and naive they were when the crime was committed, these individuals will never get the chance to live a different type of life.
Prisons and correctional facilities in the United States have changed from rehabilitating people to housing inmates and creating breeding grounds for more violence. Many local, state, and federal prisons and correctional facilities are becoming more and more overcrowded each year. If the Department of Corrections (DOC) wants to stop having repeat offenders and decrease the volume of inmates entering the criminal justice system, current regulations and programs need to undergo alteration. Actions pushed by attorneys and judges, in conjunction current prison life (including solitary confinement), have intertwined to result in mass incarceration. However, prisoner reentry programs haven’t fully impacted positively to help the inmate assimilate back into society. These alterations can help save the Department of Corrections (DOC) money, decrease the inmate population, and most of all, help rehabilitate them. After inmates are charged with a crime, they go through the judicial system (Due Process) and meet with the prosecutor to discuss sentencing.
First off sentencing juveniles without parole should not be allowed to happen because the juveniles brain has not yet matured enough and they don’t think before they act. In the article “Juveniles don’t deserve life sentences” by Gail Garinger he asserts “young people are biologically different from adults. Brain imagining studies reveal that regions of
Is it fair to give juveniles life sentences? On June 25 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that “Mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and its hallmark features- among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate the risks and consequences. It prevents taking into account the family and home environment that surrounds him and from which he cannot usually extricate himself no matter how brutal or dysfunctional.” Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison or adult jail until legal age. Due to the facts that many are still young and aren’t over eighteen.
The idea that you could purposely take someone's life then continue to live your own seems completely absurd. According to Mitchell Keiter, deputy attorney general, "in 1994 courts sentenced 2.5% of the 911 defendants convicted of murder to death, 20.7% to life without parole, and 76.7% to life imprisonment with the chance of parole." As i previously stated the sentence "life with the chance of parole" gives these murderers the opportunity to get out of prison after only 12 years and 9 months, then they are back out on the streets free to commit more murders. Why are these dangerous criminals being released back out into society to harm other innocent citizens rather than just being sentenced to
Offenders given mandatory life in prison on charges of murder, on average only serve 16 years before being released back into society. One in three of these killers carries out a second murder even under the supervision of the probation officer.1 If we allow murderers to spend life in prison we run the chance of them getting out and killing again. Capital punishment can also deter future perpetrators from committing such a heinous crime, and it will end the prisoner’s suffering by giving them a humane death and give closure to the victim’s family. Without a concrete meaning of “life in prison” we need the death penalty to put an end to the most evil of people.
It has been a topic of discussion for forever. Do we give convicted murderers the death penalty or let them live in a prison cell for a life without parole? If we get rid of the death penalty sentence there could be millions of dollars saved that could be put toward violence-prevention efforts to keep offenders on the right path. But on the other hand prisoners that are sentenced to life without parole are forced to live in a maximum-security prison with very few rights. The death penalty and life without parole both have positives and negatives therefore it would be very hard to pick a side.
Prosecutors found that she murdered him in a jealous rage because he wanted to break up the relationship. Arias was found guilty for the murder and she now has to be in prison for life. She shot alexander and stabbed him thirty times; they found alexander in the shower dead with hid throat cut open. Arias told the judge she wanted the death penalty but the judge refused to listen to her. She said alexander tried to attack her in self-defense but she quickly stabbed him. My personal view on this population is that the inmate serving life in prison shouldn’t have too many special services, especially to those who murder. The offender murdered someone and they should pay for that. Most of the inmates serving life without parole didn’t murder, some robbed, and some sexually assaulted other people. Inmates serving life for robbing should be treated better than the ones who murdered or the one who raped someone. Some facilities treat the prisoners that murdered or raped someone just life the other prisoners, the inmate that committed murder or sexually assaulted should not be treated as if what they did is
... system is overflowing with many cases involving violent crime, but it doesn't seem rational to have a system in place where there are cases where first degree murder has occurred and the sentence doesn't match the violation. I believe that if you take a life, you deserve a life sentence in prison. Allowing criminals to get away with murder is something that will hurt all of us. If we live in a world where this continues to happen, the system will fail to do its job to protect our city's from the worst kind of criminal.