Suchergebnisse

AbstractPre‐trial detention plays an important, and often contentious, role in the criminal justice process. Legal theorists have gone to great lengths to distinguish between preventive detention and punishment with respect to pre‐trial detention, as it would violate the principle of retribution and the presumption of innocence if yet‐to‐be convicted defendants were subjected to punishment. Nonetheless, the experiences of detainees remains an understudied area. The purpose of this article is not to dispute whether pre‐trial detention is, or can be justified as, a form of punishment, but it is to show that pre‐trial detention, at least in the minds of detained defendants, is punitive. Drawing on interviews with a sample of previously‐detained defendants in Hong Kong, it is found that they experience censure (stigma) and hard treatment during their time in pre‐trial detention. Implications and recommendations are discussed.

Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to highlight the provision of therapy for witnesses who have a learning disability prior to and following a criminal trial. Authors will reflect on clinical practice whilst stressing that this area of work is in its infancy and both continue to learn through continued reflection and each new experience.


Design/methodology/approach
– The paper broadly describes the nature of pre-trial therapy followed by reflection by a Counsellor and Supervisor on their clinical practice.


Findings
– Authors describe some of the common themes that arise whilst providing pre-trial therapy.


Social implications
– The authors hope that the paper will encourage professionals involved in Safeguarding cases to fully consider the emotional needs of victims and to seek timely therapeutic support where the need presents. They also hope that it will encourage practitioners from various professions to consider providing this specialist and delicate type of therapy whilst highlighting the need for good supervision.


Originality/value
– There is a paucity of written information about this specific subject area. Although safeguarding of vulnerable adults has grown considerably over the last decade and investigations are now more likely to lead to legal action, the availability of emotional support for victims who have learning disabilities needs to be addressed.

Pre-trial detention empowers criminal courts to imprison defendants before they have been convicted of an offence. This is a significant power which should be subject to a rigourous decision-making process. A 2016 study of pre-trial detention practice in England and Wales highlighted concerns about such processes, recommending changes to law and practice in that jurisdiction. In 2017, several of these recommendations became law. This article details a follow-up empirical study, conducted in 2020, which sought to examine the impact of these changes on day-to-day pre-trial detention practice in criminal courts. After analysing the data, the article concludes that the changes in fact had minimal impact on practice, and suggests that changing the law does not necessarily translate into a change in the culture of pre-trial detention practice.

This study tackles the legal regulation of electronic monitoring as an alternative measure to pre-trial detention in the Jordanian Criminal Legislation and the problems of its application. The study concludes that the Jordanian Legislator has stipulated the electronic monitoring system as an alternative to pre-trial detention to be limited to misdemeanors excluding repeating the defendant of the crime. Furthermore, the Jordanian Legislator has omitted to stipulate the conditions and operational mechanisms of the electronic monitoring, which has precluded its application as an alternative measure to pre-trial detention. The study has found the necessary legislative intervention of the Jordanian Legislator and the explicit stipulation of the conditions for applying electronic monitoring as an alternative to pre-trial detention in addition to identifying the operational mechanisms.