Capacity as Philosophy: A Review of Richard Lippke’s, The Ethics of Plea Bargaining

Armstrong, Sarah

doi:10.1007/s11572-013-9272-3

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the end, a negotiated setlement neither serves the objectives of retribution nor those of deterrence or even rehabilitation. But proponents of plea bargaining incessantly reject these accusations, claiming that plea bargaining helps in ensuring efficiency and finality in criminal justice administration (Stitt and Chaires, 1992;Armstrong, 2014). Yet, it is important to point out the flaws of plea bargaining as a system that lends itself to procedural informalities and also compromises the transparency and accountability needed for the fair adjudication of criminal disputes.…”

Section: The Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Criminal Justice’s Ailing Role

Kagu

2017

ASSRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The general philosophy of social contrcat is premised on the notion that the state assumes the role of maintaining social relation through diverse political ideas and strategies. Within the context of this historical arrangement, the institution of criminal justice has been foremost in shaping the relationship between members of the community by defining rights and sanctions. These socio-legal trajectories that developed through theories and policies have continued to define the various strategies of crime control as well as the jurisprudence of punishment. It has also been the key measure for the legitimacy of crime control and other dispute resolution technics (Davies et al. 2009). Being a significant component in the formation of political systems, the institution of criminal justice has also developed to encapsulate the values of democracy, constitionalism and human rights. It is from these ideas that criminal justice institutions mainly the police, the prosecutors, the courts and prisons derived their legitimacy, that are today seen by many as the ideal mechanism for maintaining social order. These agencies have, over time, gained prominence within the framework of a larger political order, engaging themselves as some "product of incremental enlightenment, benevolence, and a consensual society" (Burke 2012: 194). Despite these lofty assumptions about the role of criminal justice in the society, this paper argues that the policies and practices in criminal justice are far from benign. By bringing to discourse the contemporary realities of penal justice, this paper argues that many of the traditional values of criminal justice have been tremendously altered; conventional narratives are replaced by a new kind of penology. This includes the way in which the role and rights of various parties and participants in the system have been reconfigured as well as the economic way of thinking that is steadily disrupting the balance and objectives of the entire institution of criminal justice.

show abstract

Section: The Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Criminal Justice’s Ailing Role

Kagu

2017

ASSRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Response 1: Re-thinking the time of punishment: A response to Valverde

Armstrong

2014

Criminology & Criminal Justice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This response picks up on Valverde's call for scholars to excavate contestable assumptions about space and time that are embedded in contemporary security arrangements. It does so by re-visiting the problem of time in punishment, focusing on how time works in sentencing and punishment theory compared to how it is experienced by prisoners. Time is both a central concern and banal quality of contemporary punishment, the most basic and so taken for granted dimension of modernity's exemplary penal form-imprisonment. Sentencing theory operationalizes time through the principle of proportionality. The proportionality principle employs a uniform measure of time in which all prison sentences (or fine amounts or probation hours) of the same length equate to an identical amount of pain, no matter to whom, how often or in what order they are applied. By contrast, recent research by Armstrong and Weaver on the lived experience of penal time contradicts in almost every way the temporality assumed in proportionality theory. Such findings expose not only asocial assumptions about time but show how empirical work can be relevant to and inform philosophical and normative thinking on punishment.

show abstract

Capacity as Philosophy: A Review of Richard Lippke’s, The Ethics of Plea Bargaining

Cited by 2 publications

References 21 publications

Criminal Justice’s Ailing Role

Criminal Justice’s Ailing Role

Response 1: Re-thinking the time of punishment: A response to Valverde

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About