They were devastated that George Zimmerman, the defendant, was found not guilty of manslaughter or murder. What does it say about criminal punishment — especially the reasons why we punish? Why did the Martin family want to see George Zimmerman go to jail?
In Australiavarious states and territories have adopted habitual offender legislation. New South Wales[ edit ] Under the provisions of the Habitual Criminals Act NSWan offender can be designated a habitual criminal and given an additional protective sentence of between five and 14 years imprisonment.
The offender must be at least 25 years of age, have served sentences for at least two indictable offenses, and the sentencing judge must decide that preventive detention is required to protect the public.
A judge must consider the potential of future harm that could be caused by offenders, the circumstances of their offenses, medical and psychiatric opinion and any other matters of relevance.
The decision passed by the court is not reviewable; the indeterminate sentence s commence upon the expiration of any determinate sentence imposed and release is by way of an order from the Supreme Court.
The indeterminate sentence s commence upon the expiration of any determinate sentence imposed, and release is through a Supreme Court Order or at the discretion of the Governor.
In South Australia, the indeterminate sentence s commence upon the expiration of any determinate sentence imposed, and are reviewed every three years after that. Release is only by way of an order from the Supreme Court. The indeterminate sentence s must be reviewed by the court when the nominal sentence the minimum term the offender would have been required to serve if they were not dangerous has expired, and every three years after.
An offender can be incarcerated indeterminately if there is a high probability, given the offender's character, the nature of their offense, psychiatric evidence as to the dangerousness of the defendant, and any other relevant circumstances, that the offender poses a serious threat to the community.
The longest nominal sentence on sentence s of indeterminate imprisonment is 30 years, currently being served by serial pedophile Geoffrey Robert Dobbs Queenslandwho pleaded guilty to sex offences and one count of attempting to pervert the course of justice committed against 63 girls aged between one month and 15 years including five family members under his care as a teacher and youth leader from to The law was repealed after a Law Commission Report of found it to be erratically applied and was often used against non-violent and non-dangerous offenders.
InPart XXIV of the Criminal Code was enacted for habitual offenders, providing for indeterminate or determinate sentences for offenders found to be dangerous who would be eligible for parole after three years and has the authority to extend such indeterminate non-parole period at any time.
Afterthe Allied military governments did not contest this law, and its regulations were taken over in into the German penal code Strafgesetzbuch.
Inthe liberalization of civil and penal law made it more difficult to impose preventive detention and other measures. Contrary to the situation in the USA, the discretion lies with the sentencing judge.
Hungary[ edit ] In Hungarythe Fidesz -dominated new parliament changed the Penal Code, introducing a "three-strikes law" for repeat offenders  on June 8, The change has been signed into law. After Independence, the leaders and social reformers paid attention to this problem.
Inthe Central government appointed a committee to study the utility of the existence of this law. The committee viewed that the act was against the spirit of the Indian Constitution.
It recommended suitable steps to be taken for amelioration of the pitiable conditions of the Criminal Tribes rather than stigmatising them as criminals. As a result, the Criminal Tribes Act of was repealed in and the Habitual Offenders Act was enacted in its place.
According to the Habitual Offenders Act, a habitual offender is one who has been a victim of subjective and objective influences and has manifested a set practice in crime, and also presents a danger to the society in which they lives. The Habitual Offenders are usually hardened criminals whose major part of life has been spent in jails.
It is because they commit offences at frequent intervals and are sent back to jail. The provisions are activated upon a second conviction for a crime with a minimum sentence of three years imprisonment.
The Guidelines for sentencing given to criminal court indicate that the discretion lies with the judge, and an enhanced sentence is not mandatory, and should usually not be given in less serious criminal cases such as petty theft or where the convictions are old.
The judge is expected to adopt an individualized view and tailor both the decision of awarding an enhanced sentence and the length of it to the case at hand. For this the transcripts of the previous trials can be used. Three strikes laws specifically target those who have been convicted of a serious criminal offense on three or more separate occasions.
There has been various criticism of Habitual Offender Laws.
Some examples are included below. Unjust and unusual results[ edit ] Habitual Offender laws, depending on their scope and discretionary room given to judges, can lead to persons being punished quite severely for relatively minor offenses.
The discretionary nature of the laws means that they can be applied unevenly. In Australia, laws relating to dangerous and Habitual offenders have been criticized as ignoring the principle of certainty in sentencing.
Another major concern in Australia is the considerable disparity that exists in the requirements for dangerous offender status and in the available sentences for such offenders across jurisdictions. Age and offense requirements, indeterminate or fixed sentencing provisions, and review procedures are quite different from state to state;  these inconsistencies have been removed to some extent in the past decade.
As a result, some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life in prison for such crimes as shoplifting golf clubs Gary Ewing, previous strikes for burglary and robbery with a knifenine videotapes Leandro Andrade50 years to life for two counts of shopliftingor, along with a violent assault, a slice of pepperoni pizza from a group of children Jerry Dewayne Williams, four previous non-violent felonies, sentence later reduced to six years on appeal.
Undue prosecutorial leverage[ edit ] Habitual Offender laws also give prosecutors more power to force a defendant to plea bargain, as often the only deviation from a mandatory minimum sentence is with prosecutor approval. In the US on March 5,the U. Supreme Court held by a 5—4 majority that such sentences do not violate the Eighth Amendment of the U.
Constitutionwhich prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment.Why the shift to preventive detention? Why the wish to keep the old criminal "punishment" facade? These are the starting points of inquiry in this Commentary. It concludes that the trend of the last decade--the shifting of the criminal justice system toward the detention of dangerous offenders--is a move in the wrong direction.
The difficulty. Regional politicians want to name and shame potentially dangerous and released offenders on the Internet. The federal government says that's the wrong way to protect the public. Secure Preventive Detention in Germany: Incapacitation or Treatment Intervention?
Felthous, Alan R.; Saß, Henning Secure preventive detention of dangerous offenders has been a major source of debate in German law and practice.
In Canada and England and Wales, certain convicted persons may be designated as dangerous offenders and subject to a longer, or indefinite, term of preventive detention in order to protect the public. Worldwide Canada. In Canadian criminal law, a convicted person who is designated a.
Pretrial detention may be used to protect the juvenile or to protect the community, as in cases of preventive detention. The present study examined the different purposes of detention and how these distinct objectives affect other decisions in the juvenile justice process.
preventive detention, outlining three regimes: indefinite detention for dangerous offenders, special indefinite detention for sex offenders, and post- sentence preventive detention and supervision.