Orientador: Ana Gabriela Mendes Braga / Resumo: Esta pesquisa busca compreender em que situações conflituosas envolvendo travestis o sistema de justiça criminal interveio, de que forma essas intervenções ocorreram e como tudo isso foi representado na “ponta final” do processo penal. Para isso, analiso 100 acórdãos criminais do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo, coletados a partir da palavra-chave “travesti”. Por meio da análise de discurso - atento, portanto, ao poder da linguagem -, busquei compreender em que momentos a travestilidade é evidenciada ou silenciada, e de que formas estereótipos e expectativas sociais influenciam as decisões jurídicas e o funcionamento do sistema de justiça criminal paulista. Considerando a vulnerabilidade em que vive grande parte das travestis, a distribuição desigual de violência, as estratégias estatais de controle dos crimes e a seletividade de classe, raça e gênero inerente ao poder punitivo em nossa sociedade, concluo que o Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo reproduz a imagem de travestis como pessoas necessariamente desviantes e criminosas, culminando em um processo de criminalização que deslegitima suas narrativas sobre os conflitos e legitima práticas bastante questionáveis do sistema de justiça. Sua humanidade somente é reconhecida depois da morte – para punir com prisão seus agressores. A ambivalência dos discursos sobre travestis e as profundas desigualdades que marcam o processo penal concretizam as expectativas sociais e servem como fundamentação jurídica para a criminalização das ... (Resumo completo, clicar acesso eletrônico abaixo) / Abstract: This research seeks to understand in which conflicts involving transvestites the criminal justice system intervened, how these interventions occurred and how all this was represented in the “final point” of the criminal process. For that, I analyzed 100 criminal decisions of São Paulo’s Supreme Court, collected through the key-word “transvestite”. Using discourse analysis – therefore watchful of the power of language –, I tried to understand which moments travestility is evidenced or silenced, how stereotypes and social expectations influence juridical decisions and the criminal justice system’s functioning. Considering the vulnerability under which most transvestites live, the unequal distribution of violence, the State’s strategies to control crimes and the class, race and gender selectivity inherent to the punitive power in our society, I concluded that São Paulo’s Supreme Court reproduce the image of transvestites as necessarily deviant and criminal people, culminating in a criminalization process that delegitimizes their narratives about the conflicts and legitimize profoundly questionable practices of the criminal justice system. Their humanity is only recognized after death. The ambivalence of discourses surrounding transvestites and the deeply rooted inequities that constitutes the criminal process materialize the social expectations and serve as legal validation for the criminalization of transvestites, consolidating a process known in critical criminology as self-fu... (Complete abstract click electronic access below) / Mestre

This study explored the perceptions and lived experiences of 10 transgender and gender nonconforming individuals who had interacted with the various sectors of the criminal justice system (i.e., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system). The focus of this phenomenological qualitative study was providing insight into how sexual orientation and gender identity influenced transgender and gender nonconforming individuals' experiences and perceptions of the criminal justice system. Procedural justice theory guided this study by providing an understanding of how the behavior of the actors in the criminal justice system shaped the cooperation or resistance of transgender and gender nonconforming individuals. During semistructured telephonic interviews, participants were asked open-ended questions about their feelings, experiences, and perceptions regarding the various sectors of the criminal justice system (i.e., law enforcement, the prison system, and the court system). Using Moustakas's modified Stevick-Colaizzi-Keen approach, 3 themes were identified: (a) interactions with the criminal justice system, (b) thoughts about the criminal justice system, and (c) experiences with the criminal justice system. Findings indicated that the criminal justice system is not adequately prepared to accommodate or appropriately deal with transgender and gender nonconforming individuals and their unique needs. Implications for social change include the development of transgender-affirmative training programs and education for the criminal justice system and its personnel.

This research utilised a range of deterministic and stochastic analyses to establish whether Queensland's juvenile justice system processes Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young male offenders differently. The impetus for this research stemmed from the continued high rates of Aboriginal over-representation within Australia's criminal justice system, despite diversionary measures to reduce such over-representation, and a commitment by the Queensland Government to reduce by 50% the number of Aboriginal peoples in custody by the year 2011. There are two competing hypotheses concerning the cause of this over-representation, (i) external factors such as socioeconomic disadvantage, unemployment or substance abuse, or (ii) systemic disparity within the criminal justice system. For this research, disparity is defined as the unacceptable use of discrimination; discrimination can be appropriate if it is used to define or enhance a situation, such as discriminating between offenders who are recidivists and those who are first time offenders. The inappropriate use of discrimination occurs for example, when harsher sentences are issued to offenders based on non-legal factors such as race or gender. Systemic disparity is therefore used here to represent the inappropriate use of discrimination against an offender by the criminal justice system. The second hypothesis, one of systemic disparity, provided the framework for this research, which posed the following primary question: Is there quantifiable evidence to support the existence of disparity acting against young male Aboriginal offenders within Queensland's juvenile justice system? Two separate but complementary studies were designed to address this issue: the pathways study and the trajectory study. The pathways study utilised 20,648 finalised appearances for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young male offenders in Queensland's juvenile courts, during 1999 to 2003. Three custodial decision-making stages (police custody, remand, and sentencing) were examined and two questions initially posed: Does the custodial decision made at one stage of the juvenile justice system impact on a subsequent custodial decision-making stage? Does criminal history, Aboriginal status, offence type or an interaction of these factors significantly influence the probability of (i) detention in police custody (ii) court remand (iii) a custodial order at sentencing? It was recognised that other legally relevant factors such as family structure and stability, school attendance and community ties might also influence these custodial decisions; however, for the purposes of this research it was not possible to include these variables in the analyses. Controlling for criminal history, findings from logistic regression analyses indicated that being detained in police custody increased the odds of being remanded into custody, and being remanded into custody increased the odds of a custodial order. Whilst Aboriginal status was not a consistent factor at any of these three custodial stages, there was clear evidence of disparity acting against the young male Aboriginal offender, particularly early in their criminal career. To examine these disparities further, these three custodial stages were modeled as eight processing pathways: four of which resulted in a custodial order and four in a noncustodial order. Using this processing model, a third question was posed: Do young Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal male offenders have different custodial pathways? Findings indicated that Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young male offenders were in general, processed along similar custodial pathways that did not include police custody, remand or a custodial order. However, young male Aboriginal offenders were less likely than equivalent non-Aboriginal offenders to have been processed along this pathway and more likely to be processed along the pathways that included remand. It was found that young offenders with a chronic criminal history were more likely to be processed along these remand pathways, and Aboriginal offenders were more likely to have a chronic criminal history than non-Aboriginal offenders; there was clear evidence of disparity at specific custodial stages of the system. In addition, as young male Aboriginal offenders progressed deeper into the system there was evidence of cumulative disparity, particularly along the remand pathways, meaning that the probability of being in custody increases as the offender progresses from one custodial stage to the next custodial stage. Given the existence of disparity, acting within the juvenile justice system and against the young male Aboriginal offender, it was important to formulate viable solutions to such disparity, particularly in light of the Queensland government's commitment to reduce Aboriginal offenders in custody by 50%. Deterministic analyses and computer simulations were used to test the viability of various reduction scenarios suggested by the data. Despite in some instances, different results from the deterministic analyses and the computer simulations, overall findings indicated that to reduce custodial disparity whether at the remand stage, the custodial order stage, or in custody overall (the summation of police custody, remand and custodial orders) that reducing remand, regardless of whether the young offender had been in police custody or not, was the best overall solution. The trajectory study built on the findings of the pathways study, which had identified criminal history as an important factor in the processing pathways of young male Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal offenders. Using the semi-parametric group based method, the criminal trajectories of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young male offenders in Queensland were modeled. These trajectories were based on the finalised appearances of two cohorts of young offenders aged 10 to 17 years of age: those born in 1983 and 1984 and who had turned 18 years of age in 2001 and 2002 respectively. All of these young male offenders had entered the adult system when they turned 17 years of age, and this data provided their complete juvenile history in Queensland. Prior analyses using this method had not considered Aboriginal status or race as a determining factor in these trajectory models, nor had these models been validated either internally or externally in published works. For this research, internal validity was considered as the correct classification of offenders into trajectory groups, and external validity as the ability to reproduce these results in a second or subsequent sample of juvenile offenders. Two questions were therefore posed in the trajectory study: Do young Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal male offenders have different criminal trajectories? Can the predicted model(s) be validated, both internally and externally? Initial findings indicated that the optimal trajectory models selected on prior knowledge and the Bayesian Information Criterion did not validate internally. This finding brought into question the trajectory results of other published works that had not internally validated their models. The models finally selected as optimal indicated that Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young male offenders did not have a common criminal trajectory and could not be modeled as one population. Both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal young offenders were modeled by a low-frequency group, a late-onset group, and a chronic trajectory group. However, the young male Aboriginal offender was more likely than the non-Aboriginal to have been in the chronic or the late onset group and less likely to have been in the lowfrequency group. External validation utilised an innovative but simple method that utilised all of the data in the modeling process along with a sample of this same data for validation purposes: 10% of the criminal profiles, which were characteristic of the trajectory groups, and a further 5% of randomly selected profiles were chosen for validation. All of the characteristic profiles, but only 50% of the randomly selected profiles were validated, and of the latter, the majority not validated was in the late-onset group. In total, 79.2% of the Aboriginal trajectories and 85.6% of the non-Aboriginal criminal trajectories were correctly externally validated. Overall, there are two important implications from this research for government. First, even though young male Aboriginal offenders are more likely to have a chronic criminal history than non-Aboriginal offenders, this factor does not account for all of the observed disparity acting against the young Aboriginal offender within Queensland's juvenile justice system: there is evidence of disparity within the system that is unaccounted for by either offence type or criminal history. Second, given this chronic criminal history, systemic solutions to systemic disparity whilst viable, will not ultimately resolve this problem: they are only short-term measures at the end of a very long justice system. Longer-term solutions are needed to address external factors such as socio-economic disadvantage, unemployment and substance abuse in Aboriginal communities, before these young people are exposed to the system. Continuing to concentrate on systemic solutions, to such an entrenched problem as Aboriginal overrepresentation and disparity, is a misdirection of system resources and is inconsistent with social justice.

Increasingly individuals are coming into contact with the criminal justice system. For millions of Americans this contact is mediated by the victimization or offense of a loved one. This study focused on exploring what the family members of victims and offenders identify as their needs and concerns in relation to the criminal justice system, assessing if the system is effective in addressing these needs and concerns, and understanding how these families' lives are shaped by interaction with the system. Grounded theory method was used to analyze the narratives posted on two on-line message boards, one for victims' families and one for offenders' families. The results from this study suggest that both groups express the same frustrations and concerns about the criminal justice system, and that both groups develop similar coping strategies to assist them in negotiating the system after initial incarceration or victimization.

Available research demonstrates that public perceptions and beliefs about the Criminal Justice System (CJS) differ from its actual processes and procedures, but there is little research on the effects of such a difference, specifically with regard to wrongful accusation and/or conviction of factually innocent persons, and their families. Perceptions and beliefs, held as reliable and accurate knowledge, may impact on wrongful accusation/conviction of the factually innocent, both on the lived experiences of wrongly accused/convicted persons themselves, and on perceptions held about them (and responses to calls for case reviews) within the wider public. Although a great deal of research has been carried out on the subject of wrongful conviction generally, this has focussed, in the main, on legal, procedural and structural causes of wrongful conviction, and, in particular, on a small number of ‘high profile’ cases. This research examines perceptions and beliefs held as knowledge by individuals claiming to be factually innocent, wrongly accused/convicted persons, and the results of attempts to employ such perceptions and beliefs to maintain claims of innocence. Further, the experiences of family and friends of the wrongly convicted, whose lives continue in the community following the conviction of their family member, are examined, with particular attention to the interface of beliefs and perceptions between such families and the wider community. To a lesser extent, the role of the media, in shaping public opinion, the effects of media coverage on trial procedures and outcomes, and non-reporting or selective reporting is also addressed. A series of semi-structured interviews was carried out throughout the UK, with wrongly accused/convicted persons, family members of those individuals, and members of groups and organisations working to highlight the problems of wrongful accusation and conviction. A survey aimed at examining key perceptions and beliefs, held as factual knowledge about the CJS within the wider public, was also conducted. The analysis of the data indicated that not only do individuals and families attempt to employ erroneous perceptions and beliefs as factual knowledge in cases of wrongful accusation and conviction, but that such attempts feed into and support the case against the wrongly accused (in direct opposition to the aims and objectives of those employing them). Furthermore, knowledge of the actual workings of the CJS (held by CJS actors) can be, and is, used to exploit the ignorance of those so accused, and their family members. This is made possible because legal meanings of key words and phrases are vastly different from their commonly understood meanings, a factor known only to CJS actors, and not, generally, to the wider public. Political rhetoric and media representations support and reinforce those commonly held understandings, simultaneously maintaining the inaccessible code of actual CJS processes, thereby influencing public perceptions of those who are accused and convicted.

The cognitive and/or behavioural problems associated with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) place this population at increased risk of involvement in the justice system. Although FASD poses challenges at each stage of the justice system, legal discussion and commentary have pinpointed the sentencing stage as the phase in which the issue of FASD is most commonly raised and considered. The purpose of this study is to examine if (and how) FASD is being taking into consideration at sentencing. To this end, a comparative analysis of 87 sentencing judgments (42 FASD offenders and 45 non-FASD offenders) reported in Quicklaw was conducted. Cases were matched on most serious offence (assault, robbery and sexual assault) and jurisdiction (Yukon, British Columbia and Ontario). Descriptions of FASD and non-FASD offenders as reported by judges were found to differ in a number of significant ways. Similarly, sentencing purposes applied to each offender group emerged as distinct. Despite these distinctions, no differences were found in the type and length of sentence handed down (even after controlling for criminal record and breaches). These findings indicate a need for further research and possible policy changes.

Foucault's 'governmentality approach' developed the notion of 'dividing practices' (1991; see Seddon 2007) which recognises that how individuals and groups are categorised determines how they are governed. This thesis draws on critical disability studies and criminological literature on 'doing justice to difference' to develop a disability perspective in criminology, in order to analyse the governance of offenders with autism. It argues that there is descriptive and normative value in proactively categorising these groups as 'disabled' under the 'social model' of disability. The social model of disability is helpful in enabling us to distinguish between impairment and disablement. It allows us to comprehend the 'psy' literature, which explores the link between the 'symptomatology' of autism and criminality (the 'impairment branch' of the distinction) in combination with the 'interconnecting variables' (Browning and Caulfield, 2011) which lead offenders with autism into the criminal justice system and their inequitable experiences (the 'disablement branch' of the distinction). This is timely given the entrenchment of this model in the Equality Act 2010 and the inception of the Autism Act 2009, Statutory Guidance (DOH, 2010; 2015) and related policy. Using cross-method triangulation of qualitative data collected through interviews with elites and practitioners, textual analysis and court observation of eight adult defendants with autism through their court process, this thesis investigates why the status of this group as disabled under the Equality Act 2010 has been overlooked in criminal justice policy and criminal court decision-making. It examines the extent to which policy-makers and criminal justice decision-makers consider the defendant's autism in their decision-making about the defendant's case in the courts. Finally, it examines the impact of 'collateral' effects of the criminal justice process on family members who supported these defendants.

Japan has been seen as a safe country in the world. Previous studies that show societal and cultural characteristics have contributed to the comparative low crime rates. Also, the roles of criminal justice system are critical. Today, Japanese society favors a more punitive approach towards offenders. The present study examined which variables of economic factors, socio-structural factors, and deterrence factors affected Japanese crime rates (i.e., homicide, robbery, and larceny), testing for Institutional anomie theory (IAT) and deterrence theory. I conducted visual examination of co-variation with Z-scores and an ARIMA (autoregressive integrated moving average), with Japanese governmental data from 1955 to 2012. The results indicated homicide rates were explained by neither IAT nor deterrence variables. Robbery rates were significantly related with unemployment rates and divorce rates, supporting IAT. Larceny rates were strongly associated with clearance rates, giving support to deterrence theory. Based on the results, practical implications and limitations were discussed.

In this paper, we try to understand the high prevalence rates of domestic violence in the United States. Using the history behind domestic violence, the psychology behind male batterers and batterer intervention programs we discover solutions to help reduce battery recidivism rates. An analysis of the criminal justice system regarding police intervention and Family Court result in future policy implications. In addition, the proposed solutions are creating lasting impact in either batterer intervention programs or policies. Lastly, policy and future implications are discussed without reducing batterer responsibility.

The aim of this diploma thesis is to introduce and compare the rules and regulations of criminal responsibility and ways of punishing of youth offenders in the Czech Republic and in England and Wales. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part deals with rules and regulations in the Czech Republic, the second part deals with rules and regulations in England and Wales, and the third part compares the rules and regulations in both jurisdictions mentioned. The third part also includes de lege ferenda considerations about the possible usage of findings from the English jurisdiction in the Czech legal system. The first part of this thesis systematically describes relevant provisions of Act No. 218/2003 Sb., the Juvenile Justice Act (ZSVM). This act is partly based on a welfare model, when it accents protection of a youth against outer risk factors, and it is partly based on a justice model, when it imposes an obligation on a youth to take responsibility for his/her unlawful actions. Besides, it acknowledges the principles of restorative justice - it stresses the obligation of a youth to redress the harm he/she has caused, to satisfy the needs of his/her victim and to reintegrate back into society. ZSVM differentiates between three types of sanctions - educational, protective and criminal. The minimal...