Criminal Justice What Do You Think Paradigm

Criminal Justice

What do you Think

Paradigm of Laws

Paradigm of Laws

• the paradigm of law your actions define and give reasons

Law and ethics applies to everyone whether free individuals or a prisoners. Everybody has the right of existence, justice and fairness. However, there are occasions when a prisoner cannot be offered the right of confidentiality and privacy. This is exactly what I have done to the inmate in state prison where I am a correctional officer. My paradigm of law does not believe in sincerity of inmates. Given the history of the prisoner who has deceived twice earlier, I cannot trust him again. Whatever he says or does, it has to be communicated to authorities so that they can take action.

The inmates are individuals that have caused harm to the society earlier thus they are in the prison. These people should not be blindly trusted. The inmates have the history of deviating the administration in wrong directions so that they can involve in crimes meanwhile. Thus they should not be believed. Gaining trust of one inmate is not more important than the welfare of society or police department. There can be an explosive at the site indicated by the inmate thus the information should be shared, verified and police should take action on the given information.

According to Kant's belief, no action is right or wrong in itself rather the scenario makes it so. Agreeing to Kant's notion, I informed the authorities about the inmate's information so that no harm is caused to the society due to smuggled goods or related evil.

• A justification of whether you lied to the inmate

A lie is a lie. A lie can often benefit more people than truth would but it does not make it a truth. Thus it is true that I lied to the inmate that I will keep his information a secret yet I disclosed it to police department. But this lie can be legally supported since often the solution to getting intelligence is to lie. The action is again justified in the light of Kantian ethics because it is aimed at achieving socially beneficial results.

• How you treated the inmate -- explaining whether you treated the inmate with respect

The inmates are a part of prison system and the jail administration gets several tasks done through these inmates. A well behaved treatment of inmates helps them trust the state prison department so that they can cooperate. I believe my treatment with inmates was good thus one of the inmates was tempted to tell me about a secret.

Inmates respect has many dimensions. Either an officer can avoid torture for getting information about illegal goods or he can listen to him with due consideration. Both these acts are the show of respect to the inmate. I have respected the inmate in this respect. I, however, did not respect his right of confidentiality. This is because the information was not limited to personal interest but the information could affect police department and could help them find out illegal activities going on.

• An explanation of whether the actions would be considered universally acceptable

Some actions are universally acceptable. Telling lie to get access to truth is one of these. For example, the mother tells lies to the child about a jinee standing out so that the kid never leaves the house alone. Likewise, a teacher tells pupils that she has eight eyes thus she can see them cheating so that they may avoid any intentions to cheat. In the same way, the police authorities can tell lies to the inmates to gain their trust so that they get access to secret information on the illegal activities going on in the prison. While lies are not universally acceptable, telling strategic lies as a part of plan to achieve greater good is always acceptable.

• An analysis of whether this is a form of retributive justice with reasons to support your analysis

The retributive justice means the punishment should be a fair response to crime. Thus, intentions to commit crime should not be punished as much as actually committing or preparing for crime. Hence, the retributive justice offers fair solution to those that have committed a crime. The crime against state is thus punished more severely than the crime against a small community. The case presented here is not a crime against an individual thus it is not restorative justice case. The crime against society or a community, department, should not be personally dealt by an individual. The solution to a retributive justice case is that it should be solved by a criminal justice system and not the individual or a community (Retributive vs. Restorative Justice, 2009). Referring the case to criminal justice system would mean a lot more. It will not only assess the given information rather it will also monitor the linked activities. For example there can be other illegal activities going on in the prison that are not in the knowledge of the police.

• An analysis of Kant's ethical formalism in view of the given scenario.

Kantian theory of formalism is a kind of deontological i.e. duty-oriented theories of ethics. It tells that an individual should know what are his duties and obligations. By fulfilling one's duty, he contributes something valuable to the society. Kant's ethics says that there is always a form or structure of a moral judgment (thus called formalism). This duty oriented approach demands that a person should do good even if does not bring benefits to the individual because duty is obligation that must be fulfilled whatever the case is.