Law and order; crime and punishment. How can the scales of justice be balanced

morally?

David Carpenter

21st October 2015

Portsmouth Cathedral

16 September 2015 Who is my neighbour 1? The so-called migrant problem.

23 September 2015 Who is my neighbour 2?World hunger, disease and other challenges faced by developing countries.

30 September 2015 The perfect person1. The moral landscape of new reproductive technologies

7 October 2015 The perfect person 2. Worthwhileness of life in the face of progressive disease and disability. Euthanasia- including assisted suicide.

14 October 2015 Law and order; crime and punishment. How can the scales of justice be balanced morally?

21 October 2015 Open session. It is likely that participants will identify further topics – this session will be devoted to some of these.

Next Week

• War• Ethics and the Environment• Medical Ethics• Case study work

Key Text

Rachels, J. Punishment and Desert In: La Follette, H. (1997) Ethics in Practice. Oxford: Blackwell

Punishment

• Always requires justification– A matter of justice – it would be wrong not to

punish a rapist or murderer– A matter of equality (equal treatment)

• But:

• It just adds to misery and suffering – utilitarian response – we should seek a greater net benefit

Punishment Should:

• Only be inflicted on the guilty

• Be equally meted out

• Be proportional

Punishment as:

• Retribution

• Deterrence

• Rehabilitation

A few preliminary key questions

• Can the misconduct be excused or explained?– Appeal to Rawlsian justice – people can’t

always ‘help their situation’– Provocation– Extenuation, palliation and mitigation– Appeal to excuses

Excuses

A: P did X but it was not bad

B: P did not mean to do X –accidents, some examples of ignorance, coercion

A: Responsibility accepted

B: Responsibility denied

Retribution (Mainly Deontological)

• Simple vengeance• The idea of paying back• Treating others as one would wish to be

treated oneself• Treating people as they deserve• Rebalancing the scales of justice

Appeal of Retribution

• Only the guilty are punished

• Equal treatment for equal crimes

• Proportionality

Appeal of Deterrence (Mainly Consequentialist)

• Prevention of individual re-offending• Deter other from offending

Does it work?

Against Deterrence

Whilst equal treatment remains necessary,

• The punished don’t have to be guilty

• The punishment does not have to ‘fit the crime’ (proportionality) – a new goal has been imposed

• Best not to allow excuses

Rehabilitation

• Guilt is not really an issue – if rehab. Works then it would be a good idea to act preventatively

• Equal treatment – not a consideration – good grounds for unequal treatment

• Proportionality – the ‘punishment’ no longer relates to the crime

Deterrence Rehabilitation Retribution

Guilt No No Yes

Equal Treatment

Yes No Yes

Proportionality No No Yes

Karl Andree case: David Cameron to write to Saudi government

Prime Minister David Cameron will write to the Saudi Arabian government about a UK pensioner imprisoned for possessing alcohol, Downing Street has said.

Historical Crime

Policeman killed in Liverpool