194620 Secondary victimisation Essay Example

194620 Secondary victimisation Essay Example 194620 Secondary victimisation Essay 194620 Secondary victimisation Essay ( 1 ) Critically discuss whether the commissariats for the support, protection, and aid of vulnerable and intimidated informants are an effectual manner of covering with secondary exploitation. ( 2 ) Should victims of serious offenses, such as colza and the household members of homicide victims have the right to legal representation during the test? If so, should they be entitled to such representation at all phases of the test, or merely at the condemning phase? Introductory Note Part ( 1 ) requires a reappraisal of the relevant primary UK statute law. The statutory commissariats that are discussed below are non intended as an thorough but instead a representative list in this respect. The relevant European Union statute law is besides considered in this context, given the possible linkage to UK procedural patterns by operation of theHuman Rights Act, and others. Unless otherwise specified, the footingsvictimandinformantare given separate consideration ; each term is sometimes used interchangeably in the academic literature where secondary victimization is critically analysed. Part ( 2 ) is examined by manner of a two phase analysis: one, the UK attack to victim legal representation at the declared facets of the condemnable test procedure is considered ; two, a comparative attack is adopted to contrast the cardinal characteristics of similar victim representation governments in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The United States was non selected because the condemnable processs in single American provinces has spawned a assortment of somewhat inconsistent attacks that render a comparing with UK pattern hard. As secondary exploitation is the common component for treatment in Parts ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) , the undermentioned definition of the term will be applied throughout the analysis. Secondary exploitationis defined as a circumstance or set of fortunes where a victim of offense ( or in limited fortunes, a household member of a offense victim ) sustains an enhanced degree of enduring due to the insensitiveness of either single individuals or a lawfully mandated procedure within the condemnable justness system, by virtuousness of the victim’s mandated engagement in the system. [ 1 ] The assorted elements of the definition are explored in item below ; secondary exploitation can happen at any occasion within the condemnable justness system continuum that is bounded by a victim’s initial contact with a individual in authorization as a consequence of the committee of a condemnable act, to any concluding contacts with the tribunal or other justness bureaus post strong belief or sentence. [ 2 ] The justness bureaus that have been examined most strictly as prospective culprits of secondary exploitation in the UK include the constabulary services, the Victim Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, defense mechanism advocate and the bench. The look ‘second wound’ is the redolent analogy that has been employed in the academic literature to depict secondary exploitation. [ 3 ] Institutional patterns and values that place the demands of the organisation above the demands of victims are implicated in the job. [ 4 ] An of import issue that is frequently overlooked in the academic interventions of secondary exploitation is the inalterable fact the all signifiers of exploitation have a deeply subjective constituent – there are grades and variableness to victim position. The civil wrong jurisprudence panacea refering the thin skulled complainant is correspondent here. Part ( 1 ) Vulnerable and easy intimidated people are a cardinal component to the map of the condemnable justness system. It is singular that given the prominence of exposure in every facet of offense as either committed or prosecuted that the condemnable justness system initiatives to convey comfort to the vulnerable within the procedure have been so comparatively recent in beginning. There are three basic groupings of UK condemnable justness statute law ( and back uping instance jurisprudence ) that impact upon secondary exploitation constructs. These may be set out in chronological manner relation to the advancement of a typical condemnable proceeding: The first class includes the bond commissariats that are centred upon theBail Act, 1976and its legion subsequent amendments [ 5 ] . These commissariats represent the first legal agencies available to restrict secondary exploitation. The UK condemnable justness system rests on the cardinal rule of the given of artlessness, a rule that is besides the operative footing of bond. Home Office statistics confirm that 55 per centum of all UK [ 6 ] bond orders contain conditions that require the accused to stay off from another individual, frequently the purported victim or a informant. The same statistical mention provinces that over 30 per centum of juveniles and about 10 per centum of grownup individuals breach their bond conditions [ 7 ] . Bail is an imperfect mechanism with which to forestall secondary exploitation in the signifier of prohibited contact with a culprit. The 2nd grouping of available statutory protections for vulnerable individuals are the assorted regulations regulating test processs. The Condemnable Procedure Rules set up a series of protocols to be followed where an accused individual moving on his or her ain behalf proposes to traverse analyze a kid informant or an alleged sexual assault victim of any age or gender. [ 8 ] The Rule prevents such individuals from carry oning their ain defense mechanism in this manner. In fortunes where the exposure or fright on the portion of the victim / informant is established as a fact at test, the combined consequence of the Particular Measures Directions [ 9 ] and the Consolidated Criminal Practice Direction [ 10 ] have created a farther series of procedural devices that are designed to protect the vulnerable participants. These steps include: A screen fashioned over the witness enclosure to allow the accused individual from physically doing oculus contact with the informant without impairing the ability of the accused to hear the informant and therefore do full reply and defense mechanism. [ 11 ] A unrecorded telecasting nexus between a secure room and the tribunal room, where the vulnerable informant and a designated informant support individual are positioned to take part in existent clip but through the distant agencies of closed circuit telecasting [ 12 ] The proviso of a witness’ grounds through an sanctioned intermediary [ 13 ] Evidence obtained by manner of a picture entering [ 14 ] The progress redaction of statements to be tendered by the Crown where the personal identifiers of the informant are removed The exclusion of the populace from the tribunal room ; publication bans with regard to the individuality or other personal specifics of the informant In sexual assault prosecutions in the UK, it is the line of oppugning refering the anterior sexual history of the alleged victim that the accused is permitted to prosecute that frequently raises the more profound inquiries of secondary exploitation. The House of Lords inA, Roentgen[ 15 ] ruled that such inquiries were by and large allowable in a instance turning on the defense mechanism of consent ; the UK strong belief rate in sexual assault prosecutions is less than 10 per centum. [ 16 ] Such statistics beg the inquiry – is a individual a victim as a consequence of an act, or merely upon strong belief of the wrongdoer? The 3rd grouping of legislative commissariats directed at secondary exploitation applies to the station finding of fact / sentencing phase. Victim impact styled statements are admissible for the intents of condemning ; the positions of the victim, as expressed in unfastened tribunal or in composing have changing grades of impact upon the condemning procedure. Like bond conditions, condemning commissariats frequently provide a agency of legal protection for the victim through prohibitions sing contact from the accused. The blunt legalistic linguistic communication of all three types of commissariats does non adequately convey the ineluctable truth of the relationship between a victim of offense and the procedure – one time a individual becomes a victim and reports the happening, they are public belongings. [ 17 ] It is submitted that the victim asde facto‘public property’ and the primacy of the accused right to be presumed guiltless creates a fertile environment for secondary exploitation to boom. The justness system as it is presently constructed can neer neutralize the chance. Viewed from this position, Part ( 1 ) poses the incorrect inquiry – instead than see whether the support and aid rendered to victims and informants is appropriate, the analysis could get down with the proposition ‘what do victim / informantstrulydesire? ’ If the system were oriented to turn to a determineddemand, as opposed to legislatively expectingresult, the replies would be more enlightening. Stated another manner, the current UK system is geared to procure the engagement of the victims and informants who might otherwise baulk at being involved. The system is non designed to needfully supply them with satisfaction in the consequence. Given the primacy of the accused’s involvements within the justness system, the UK Victim Support system is unusually efficient and end directed. The chiefly voluntary construction of the service is alone among Commonwealth legal powers, where similar services are funded at least in portion by the same authorities responsible for the prosecution. [ 18 ] To return to the inquiry of what victims and informants truly want, modern academic commentaries may be distilled to this expression as an reply: Voice / Respect / Trust / Neutrality / Time to talk with the prosecution[ 19 ] Part ( 2 ) Art frequently imitates life ; the fictional barrister Horace Rumpole, whose clients neer plead guilty and for whom ‘the given of artlessness is the aureate yarn of English jurisprudence’ [ 20 ] , is an accurate imitation of the public perceptual experience of condemnable justness and the primary importance attached to the rights of the accused. So long as this involvement is the premier mover of the condemnable justness system, all other involvements including those of the victim will be secondary. As significantly, there is an built-in public involvement in the effectual and orderly control of the test procedure. This construct demands a centralized prosecution service, vested in the State. Assuming that the single rights of a victim or informant within the test procedure are free standing and non merely a sub-set of the State responsibility to direct prosecutions in the public involvement that includes victims, the right to act upon the procedure must hold bounds. The wide prosecutorial public involvement can non be embodied in the private involvements of a victim, no affair how obliging their fortunes or how vile the offense. The legal representation of a victim to actively direct or act upon the behavior of a public test would be the terminal of public condemnable justness. The cause of a peculiar victim would potentially supplant the rights of the accused. If the victim of an alleged serious offense had the right to private legal representation, irresolvable struggles would show themselves in the undermentioned cardinal countries of trail process: the power to traverse examine informant the possible that alternate theories of liability may be offered the chance of revoking prosecutions The rights of a victim, no affair how redolent, must give manner to the right of the broader public to drag equity, certainty and predictability. However, assorted victims’ rights advocators, peculiarly since the early 1990s, have taken a different tack, one where a victim has their ain built-in right to legal representation at every phase of the procedure to forestall farther exploitation by asseverating control over the procedure. Victims rights advocators have argued that a profound struggle of involvement arises when the prosecution represents both the populace involvements and those of the victim. This place was the drift to the emerging field of victim legal representation. The authoritative illustration is the determination of the prosecution to offer a supplication agreement to an accused that is unacceptable to the victim ; the victim can non supplant prosecutorial discretion. [ 21 ] It is further submitted that a Fuller scope of victim representations within the test procedure would function to rise, and non cut down the chance of secondary exploitation. Greater engagement and procedural visibleness would transport a corresponding greater figure of chances to re-live or otherwise addition behavior with an unwanted memory. The current system may be said to mistake on the side of restricting victim engagement ; but if it is assumed that the true involvement of victims in the condemnable procedure are accurately captured by the expression described at the decision of Part ( 1 ) [ 22 ] , the current duty upon the prosecution to maintain victim’s informed, to guarantee that a victim has a voice at the clip of sentence while understating secondary exploitation is a sensible attempt to accomplish the aims of victim engagement. Australian enterprises to forestall ‘re-victimisation’ follow a theoretical account approximately similar to the present UK procedure [ 23 ] . The cardinal facets of the Australian doctrine may be reduced to the undermentioned points: that the attempts to forestall rev-victimisation are victim driven within the over all prosecutorial construction that the attempts of victim services to back up victims are crystalline and adaptable to the demands of the single victim These doctrines are echoed in the victim services programmes established in Canada and New Zealand. [ 24 ] The differentiation between victim support and legal representation must besides be delineated. [ 25 ] The UK policy that provides for a ‘Witness Care Unit’ to move as ade factoaffair between victim / informants and the prosecution is besides employed in the other Commonwealth legal powers noted [ 26 ] . It is common to help victims with recommendations that the party seek independent advocate on issues such as condemnable hurt compensation applications or possible civil amendss actions, procedures that are related to but non an organic facet of condemnable prosecutions. [ 27 ] The Victims Rights contemplated by current UK pattern are chiefly informational, without promoting the victim to litigant position in the proceedings. There is a farther evidentiary trouble sing an extension of a victim’s right to legal representation in the test procedure. A cardinal procedural device in condemnable tests is exclusion of informants from the tribunal room to forestall the informant from hearing the other testimony and perchance orienting their ain grounds in response. While such regulations are non an Fe clad warrant of evidentiary pureness, it is submitted that the ability of the tribunal to except a prospective informant who is besides a victim with legal advocate in attending creates the possible visual aspect of exclusion while their designate is listening to the grounds on their behalf. The condemning circle has been employed as a justness tool by autochthonal peoples in North America and Australia for centuries prior to white colonisation. It is the lone mechanism in modern condemnable justness that establishes a victim on an equal terms with an accused individual within the test procedure. The CanadianCondemnable Codeprovides that in the instance of Aboriginal wrongdoers, the accused individual may be sentenced by agencies of the condemning circle as an option toCondemnable Codecountenances. [ 28 ] The condemning circle is likewise authorised in Australian jurisprudence. [ 29 ] The sentencing circle is comprised of representatives of the offender’s community, including the victim and other of their household or relations. While the test justice maintains the ultimate authorization over temperament, condemning circles allow a important chance for input to be obtained from both victims and the local community. There are no ‘prosecution’ or defence’ entries as to punishment ; in add-on to doing representations sing the wrongdoer and the appropriate countenance, a victim and local community members besides provide important input into both the footings of countenance and how the wrongdoer may be supervised within the community. [ 30 ] It is an sarcasm of modern condemnable justness that the philosophical foundation that has supported the building of luxuriant precautions of victim / informant involvements in UK condemnable tests might see the simpleness of native condemning tribunals as a theoretical account for true community based renewing justness. United kingdomLegislative acts Bail Act, 1976 Bail Amendment Act, 1993 Crime and Disorder Act, 1998 Condemnable Procedure Rules, Special Measures Directive Rule 29.1 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 Human Rights Act, 1998 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 United kingdomgovernments A, R v. [ 2001 ] UKHL 25 BailCrown Prosecution Servicehypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section14/chapter_l.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Cornwell, David ( 2006 ) Criminal Punishment and Restorative Justice. London: Waterside Press Fenwick, Helen ( 1997 ) Procedural Rights of Victims of Crime: Public or Private Ordering of the Criminal Justice Process? Modern Law Review 60 ( 3 ) , 317–333 Mortimer, John ( 1988 ) ‘Rumpole and the Age of Miracles’ ( Penguin ) ‘Rebuilding Lifes – Supporting Victims of Crime’ Secretary of State for the Home Department, ( December, 2005 ) pp. 1-54 Victims and Witnesss ( 2007 )Crown Prosecution Servicehypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/index.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Victim Support hypertext transfer protocol: //www.victimsupport.com/vs_england_wales/coping_with_crime/criminal_justice_system/index.php ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Youthful Wrongdoers and Child Witnesses ( 2007 )Crown Prosecution Service hypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section4/index.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) European Union European Forum for the Rights of Victims ( 2006 ) ‘The societal rights of victims of crime’ hypertext transfer protocol: //www.euvictimservices.org/EFVSDocs/social_rights.pdf ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Australia The Penalties and Sentences and Other Acts Amendment Bill, 2000 Patterson, Andrew ( 2005 )Preventing Re-Victimisation: The South Australian Experience hypertext transfer protocol: //www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/27/paterson.pdf ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) New Zealand Ministry of Justice / Restorative Justice ( 2006 ) hypertext transfer protocol: //www.justice.govt.nz/crrj/manual/module-3.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Canada An Act Respecting Victims of Crime Victims Bill of Rights, 1996 (Ontario ) Campbell, Rebecca and Sheela Raja(1999 )‘Secondary Victimization of Rape Victims: Penetrations from Mental Health Professionals Who Treat Survivors of Violence’Violence and Victims, V. 14 ( 3 ) R. v. Gladue [ 1999 ] 2 CNLR 252 ( SCC ) Wemmers, Jo-Anne and Katie Cyr ‘What equity means to offense victims: a societal psychological position on victim-offender mediation’Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 2006, 2 ( 2 ) Witness Protection Program Act, 1996 1

The Decline of Students Writing Skills Causes and Outcomes

The Decline of Students Writing Skills Causes and Outcomes The Decline of Students’ Writing Skills: Causes and Outcomes Writing is still the most common form of evaluating students’ achievements. You must write term papers, coursework, theses, and dissertations to prove that the teachers effort did not go to waste, and that you can acquire knowledge on your own. But something did go to waste, as more and more teachers begin to realize that they spend more time fixing grammar mistakes than focusing on the information related to topic of the work. So, what happened? If the problem keeps getting worse, maybe it’s high time to get to the bottom of it and find out the reasons for weak writing skills. Statistics on Student Writing Skills Numerous studies have been taken involving writing skills of grade-school to college age students. Annual reports from the National Center for Education Statistics show that the SAT mean scores in writing have dropped from 497 to 484 in 9 years (2006 – 2015). It’s already bad that the score is decreasing, but it also never stayed the same two years in a row during this period. Therefore, we can assume that the SAT result in writing will continue to decrease at the same rate. The same statistics show that SAT reading scores have also decreased in the same way. This also contributes to poor writing skills, particularly where analyzing and synthesizing sources is required. Causes of Students Poor Writing Skills Many teachers think that the main reason for poor writing is social media. Student paper writing seems to have shrunk to 140 characters in Twitter. But if you think about it, shouldnt these 140 characters teach young people how to express their thoughts concisely? Maybe the problem is not in the communication services that they use, but rather because they were never taught how to think and write properly. Actually, the basis of the problem lies in the limited skill set students get from secondary and high school education. They were not taught what they are required straight after entering college. Most of the time, high school students dont get to do anything more than argue an opinion in their essays. Analyzing and synthesizing information are neglected. Another point to consider is that more and more students are becoming reticent about sharing something personal, including their point of view on an essay topic. Possible Outcomes and Solutions Poor writing skills influence both employers and their prospective employees. Employers waste hundreds of dollars on training; that is, when they can attract applicants. If you’ve ever searched the job market, you’ve seen the error-filled job descriptions. Those vacancies are certainly not too appealing. On the other hand, if you’re a student looking for a job, writing skills are essential in writing a believable resume or cover letter. And in the future work place, you’ll have to write reports, business letters, and maybe even press-releases. This means you have to be prepared before you even start searching for a job. Writing is a way to communicate your thoughts, feelings and opinions. It’s an essential skill in everyday life, as well. Grade school should be the place to lay the basis for such skills. Considering that students come to colleges and universities unprepared, the grade school system should be altered to raise interest in writing and to develop the basic required knowledge for literacy. In the end, students should be encouraged to write rather than criticized. It’s one thing to evaluate grammar and structure, but if students feel like their personal opinions are evaluated, they’ll be hesitant to express them. Unfortunately, this is what grade school education is lacking today – freedom of expression.