Criminal Justice Ethics最新文献

Exposing, Reversing, and Inheriting Crimes as Traumas from the Neurosciences to Epigenetics: Why Criminal Law Cannot Yet Afford A(nother) Biology-induced Overhaul 从神经科学到表观遗传学，揭露、扭转和继承作为创伤的犯罪：为什么刑法还经不起另一场由生物学引发的大变革？

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-07-24 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2376444

Riccardo Vecellio Segate

引用次数: 0

Institutional Corruption, Institutional Corrosion and Collective Responsibility 机构腐败、机构腐蚀和集体责任

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-07-24 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2381295

Seumas Miller

引用次数: 0

Sentencing, Artificial Intelligence, and Condemnation: A Reply to Taylor 量刑、人工智能和谴责：对泰勒的答复

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2373604

Jesper Ryberg

引用次数: 0

Double Jeopardy, Autrefois Acquit and the Legal Ethics of the Rule Against Unreasonably Splitting a Case 一罪不二审、无罪释放与反对不合理分案规则的法律伦理

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2325795

Zia Akhtar

引用次数: 0

Ethical Resource Allocation in Policing: Why Policing Requires a Different Approach from Healthcare 警务工作中的道德资源分配：警务工作为何需要采用与医疗保健不同的方法

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-04-04 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2327819

Hannah Maslen, Colin Paine

引用次数: 0

Can Retributivism and Risk Assessment Be Reconciled? 报应主义和风险评估可以调和吗？

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-03-05 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2324541

Toby Napoletano, Hanna Kiri Gunn

引用次数: 0

Between Redemption and Retribution: Justifying Commutations for Life-without-parole Sentences in California 救赎与报应之间：加州无假释终身监禁减刑的合理性

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-03-04 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2323362

Doris Schartmueller

引用次数: 0

Fear and Actual Victimization: Exploring the Gap among Social Activists in India 恐惧与实际受害：探索印度社会活动家之间的差距

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2024-02-18 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2024.2318977

Michael L. Valan, Rohan Nahar, C. T. Coston

引用次数: 0

Gendered Challenges in the Line of Duty: Narratives of Gender Discrimination, Sexual Harassment and Violence Against Female Police Officers 执勤中的性别挑战:对女警察的性别歧视、性骚扰和暴力的叙述

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2023-11-08 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275965

R. A. Aborisade, O. G. Ariyo

{"title":"Gendered Challenges in the Line of Duty: Narratives of Gender Discrimination, Sexual Harassment and Violence Against Female Police Officers","authors":"R. A. Aborisade, O. G. Ariyo","doi":"10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275965","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275965","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractGender discrimination and sexual harassment of female police officers by their male counterparts remain areas of liability where police departments appeared to have failed to effectively confront the nagging issues. However, the appreciable level of research conducted on these issues in the global North has not been matched by the South, where issues bordering on sexual violence have cultural underpinnings. Drawing from the case of the Nigeria Police Force, feminist analysis was used to explore the lived reality of 43 female officers in a qualitative study. Participants expressed distress in abiding by structural discriminatory regulations against female officers which include non-admittance of married women into the force, forbidding unmarried officers from getting pregnant, and a stipulated minimum of three-year work period before a female officer can marry. Findings also indicated that participants suffer a variety of sexual harassment, intimidation, and, violence from their male colleagues, while they feel constrained in reporting their victimization. Important policy and practical implications requiring the Nigerian police to address hegemonic masculinity and promote gender equality were provided.Keywords: discriminationfemale officersgenderNigeria policesexual harassment Disclosure Statement:[No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).]Notes1 See McGoogan, “Every Woman Police Officer;” Taylor et al., “Sexual Harassment,” NP8456–58; Sands et al., “Police Sexual Violence,” 5; Rabe-Hemp, Female Police, 87–8; Rees and Strange, Real Lives of Policewomen, 122–4.2 See England et al., “Progress toward Gender Equality,” 6990; Hazel and Kleyman, “Gender and Sex Inequalities,” 281–84; SteelFisher et al., “Gender Discrimination,” 1442–1453.3 See Dowuona-Hammond et al., “Women’s Survival in Ghana,” 3; Espi et al., “Gender inequality,” 44–46; Gradin, “Occupational Gender Segregation,” 102–3; Gyasi et al., “Explaining the Gender Gap,” 1089–91; Maunganidze, “Dealing with Gender-related Challenges” 1–3; Scent et al., “Patriarchy on Women Police,” 39–41.4 See Aborisade, “Police Abuse of Sex Workers,” 407–9; “Pandemic Policing,” 6; Aborisade and Oni, “Crime Fighters,” 243–47; “Female Offenders as Victims,” 1182-–1204; Amnesty International, “Rape-The Silent Weapon;” Mbote, et al., “Police Discrimination,” 199–203; Salihu & Fawole, “Police Crackdowns” 40–45.5 See Aborisade, “Influence of Rape Myth,” 155; “Sexual Violence at Music Festivals,” 68–70.6 See Dowler and Arai, “Stress, Gender and Policing,” 123–26; Duxbury et al., “Bringing the Badge Home,” 997.7 See Akinjobi-Babatunde, “Women Police,” 438–440; Oluwafemi, “Gender Inequality,” 433.8 See Aborisade and Oni, “Women’s Inhumanity Towards Women?” 54–56; Buhari et al., “Career Prospects,” 252; Scent et al., “Patriarchy on Women Police,” 44; Yalley and Olutayo, “Gender, Masculinity and Policing,” 7.9 See Ivković et al., “Decoding the Code,” 172–8; Skolnick, “Blue Code of Silence,”","PeriodicalId":35931,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Justice Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135391261","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Justice by Algorithm: The Limits of AI in Criminal Sentencing 算法正义:人工智能在刑事量刑中的局限性

Criminal Justice Ethics Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI: 10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275967

Isaac Taylor

{"title":"Justice by Algorithm: The Limits of AI in Criminal Sentencing","authors":"Isaac Taylor","doi":"10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275967","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.2023.2275967","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractCriminal justice systems have traditionally relied heavily on human decision-making, but new technologies are increasingly supplementing the human role in this sector. This paper considers what general limits need to be placed on the use of algorithms in sentencing decisions. It argues that, even once we can build algorithms that equal human decision-making capacities, strict constraints need to be placed on how they are designed and developed. The act of condemnation is a valuable element of criminal sentencing, and using algorithms in sentencing – even in an advisory role – threatens to undermine this value. The paper argues that a principle of “meaningful public control” should be met in all sentencing decisions if they are to retain their condemnatory status. This principle requires that agents who have standing to act on behalf of the wider political community retain moral responsibility for all sentencing decisions. While this principle does not rule out the use of algorithms, it does require limits on how they are constructed.Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI)criminal justiceFeinbergJoelpunishmentsentencing algorithms [I am very grateful to audiences at the Higher Seminar in Philosophy of Law at Uppsala University; the Political Theory Seminar at Stockholm University; and the workshop on “Ethics of AI in the Public Sector” at KTH Royal Institute of Technology for discussions on previous drafts of this paper; as well as to the anonymous reviewers from Criminal Justice Ethics for very helpful comments.][Disclosure Statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s)].Notes1 Danziger, Levav and Avnaim-Pesso, “Extraneous Factors in Judicial Decisions.”2 Pamela McCroduck suggests that many members of disadvantaged groups may want to take their chances with an impartial computer over a (potentially biased) human judge. See McCorduck, Machines Who Think, 375.3 Yong, “A Popular Algorithm is No Better at Predicting Crimes Than Random People.”4 Angwin, Larson, Mattu, and Kirchner, “Machine Bias.” The question of whether algorithms can avoid objectionable forms of discrimination has been addressed in Davis and Douglas, “Learning to Discriminate: The Perfect Proxy Problem in Artificially Intelligent Criminal Sentencing.”5 Dressel and Farid, “The Accuracy, Fairness, and Limits of Predicting Recidivism.”6 One worry here is that there is no possible algorithm that can simultaneously meet various intuitively plausible criteria of fairness. See, for example, Chouldechova, “Fair Prediction with Disparate Impact.” I set this issue aside for the purposes of this paper, and assume that a fair algorithm is at least possible to construct. This might be because some of the purported criteria of fairness which cannot be met simultaneously are not, in fact, genuine moral requirements. Cf. Hedden, “On Statistical Criteria of Algorithmic Fairness;” Eva, “Algorithmic Fairness and Base Rate Tracking.”7 For the purposes of this paper, “","PeriodicalId":35931,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Justice Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135818630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0