论文代写:刑事警察自由裁量权

论文代写:刑事警察自由裁量权

根据Black(1970)只有百分之十五的青少年罪犯与警方联系了拘留。这意味着,越来越多的警察的自由裁量权实行。有许多重要的方面影响警察的选择而决定它是否是更好的问题,羁押或拘留的年轻罪犯这些方面包括以下特点的犯罪:犯罪的严重性,各种武器的参与水平和犯罪造成的危害,有大小(李森&斯奈德,1981;卡林顿& schelenberg特里,1967,2005)。其他特点包括犯罪的青年,性格上相互作用,青年的家庭的贡献,学校和家长;团伙和他们联系青年的参与和年龄的影响(卡林顿& schelenberg,2005)。这些因素被认为是由警方决定,以实践自由裁量权。
有两个方向警方决策可能需要同时处理那些犯了罪的年轻人:他们要么是通过正式的司法系统充电,或是避开法院的法外措施,在警察的自由裁量权。刑事法典不成立警察自由裁量权的具体立法。然而,青少年刑事司法行为(ycja)规定,警察应该考虑交替执政(这是与年轻的罪犯的自由裁量权)在应对犯罪青年(Bell,2012)。已经有人被判以及尺寸制度人口在ycja 2003以来的年轻罪犯显著减少(莫耶,2006)。ycja迫使警察考虑以下行动包括:
发出警告,对年轻的罪犯,他们的行动,然后释放他们;
通知家长/监护人,然后将罪犯拘留;
在释放他们之前把这个年轻的罪犯带到警察局;
在释放他们之前,制定一个关于年轻罪犯的报告;
对青少年犯罪的收费;
释放一定的先决条件的青少年;
在青春期的一个程序,分散了他们的犯罪行为或青少年司法委员会;或
留住年轻罪犯(最多二十四小时)进一步的司法处理这一开始就听到“保释”。

论文代写:刑事警察自由裁量权

According to Black (1970) only fifteen percent of the young offenders’ contacts with police culminated in detention. This implies that increasing amount of discretion by the police is practiced. There are numerous important aspects that affect the choice of police whilst deciding whether it is better to question, take into custody or detain the young offender These aspects include the following features of the offence: the severity of the crime, the involvement of a weapon, the level and magnitude of the harm that the offence has caused (Leeson & Snyder, 1981; Terry, 1967; Carrington & Schelenberg, 2005). Other characteristics of crime include the character of the youth, previous interaction, the contribution of youth’s home, school and parents; the involvement of gang and affiliation of youth with them and the effect of age (Carrington & Schelenberg, 2005). These factors are considered by the police before deciding to practice discretion.

There are two directions the police making decision might take whilst dealing with the youth who are guilty of a crime: either they are charged by the formal system of justice, or they are averted from the court by extrajudicial measures that are at the discretion of the police. The Criminal Code does not hold specific legislation for police discretion. However, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) ordains that a police officer should consider the alternate ruling (that is discretion with the young offender) whilst dealing with the criminal youth (Bell, 2012). There has been a significant reduction of the young offenders who have been sentenced as well as the size of institutional population under the YCJA since 2003 (Moyer, 2006). YCJA obliges police officers take into account the following course of action including:

  1. Issuance of warning to the young offender regarding their actions and then release them;
  2. Notify parents/guardian and then take the offender into custody;
  3. Take the young offender to the police station before releasing them;
  4. Formulate a report on the young offender before freeing them;
  5. Charging the adolescent with an offence;
  6. Releasing the adolescent with certain prerequisites;
  7. Referring the adolescent to a program that distracts them from criminal behaviour or youth justice committee; or
  8. Detaining the young offender (for twenty-four hours at the most) for further judicial processing – this begins with a hearing for “bail”.