V. Письменно переведите текст и выпишите слова юридической тематики.

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 9 из 23Следующая ⇒

Gestapo (Geheime Staatspolizei, or Secret State Police), common designation of the terrorist political police of the Nazi regime in Germany from 1933 to 1945; technically, however, the term refers only to its executive branch.

The Gestapo was founded by Hermann Gö ring, one of Adolf Hitler's lieutenants, in April 1933. As a nucleus he used the political section of the police of the Weimar Republic, but he extended it greatly, removed from it all legal and constitutional restraints, and gave the organization its name. Its new purpose was to persecute all political opponents of the Nazi regime (including dissenting Nazis), not only defensively, in cases of oppositional acts, but also preventively, in cases of suspected or potential opposition. In this role, the Gestapo was to collaborate with the SD (Sicherheitsdienst, or Security Service), an organization of the Nazi Party; the SD did the intelligence work that served as the basis for Gestapo operations. Suspects were arrested and usually placed in concentration camps. It was at the Gestapo's discretion whether or not the arrested were brought to trial and whether or not they were released if acquitted.

In April 1934, Gö ring's rival, Heinrich Himmler, who headed the paramilitary SS (Schutzstaffel, or Defense Squads; also called Black Shirts), won control over the Gestapo, a step in his ascendancy that in June 1936 carried him to the command of all German police forces. The SS then gradually infiltrated the police, which was reorganized in two divisions: the regular and the security police. The latter, the political police—headed until 1942 by Reinhard Heydrich and thereafter by Ernst Kaltenbrunner—then included the SD, also run by Heydrich; the Gestapo, led from 1936 to 1945 by Heinrich Mü ller; and the Kripo (Kriminalpolizei, or Criminal Police), a detective service aimed against nonpolitical criminals, run from 1936 to 1945 by Artur Nebe.

In September 1939, after the outbreak of World War II, the security police received a central staff, the RSHA (Reichssicherheitshauptamt, or State Security Head Office), thus preparing it to serve as a nearly omnipotent tool for Hitler's racist and terrorist plans in Nazi-controlled Europe, including extermination policies against Jews and other “undesirables.” Rivalries between the various branches nonetheless continued. Thus, the concentration camps, including the death camps, were actually run by the SS, although technically they were under the control of the Gestapo. After the war, the Gestapo was dissolved and declared a criminal organization.

Вариант 2

I. Образуйте сравнительную и превосходную степени для следующих прилагательных. Переведите полученные варианты.

Reasonable, far, bad, frequent, good, long, short, powerful, much.

II. Определите время сказуемого в предложениях. Переведите предложения.

1. Use of deadly force has been a major issue in police-minority relations.

2. Constitutional restrains have improved police training.

3. The Supreme Court has laid down definite limits on the use of deadly force.

4. Police departments have adopted new methods and standards of selection police officers.

5. By 1990 the number of policewomen had more than doubled to 8.6 percent.

6. The police organizations have found they need to reform to meet the needs of modern police officers.

7. The detective has questioned the crime victim to confirm the information already gathered by the patrol officers.

III. Заполните таблицу, поставив предложение в соответствующие времена.

время	предложение	обстоятельство	перевод
Present Indefinite	The officer interrogates the convict	every morning.	Офицер допрашивает обвиняемого.
Past Indefinite		two hours ago.
Future Indefinite		tomorrow morning.
Present Continuous		at the moment.
Past Continuous		at 10 o’clock yesterday.
Fututre Continuous		from 10 to 12 tomorrow morning.
Present Perfect		just.
Past Perfect		when the students came.
Future Perfect		by 12 o’clock tomorrow.

IV. Трансформируйте предложения из активного залога в пассивный.

1. Police departments distribute detectives within police organizations in a variety of ways depending on the administrative preferences of top police officials.

2. The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigates federal crimes.

3. In the early American towns constables performed law enforcement duties.

4. Occasionally officers use motorcycles, small motorbikes and bicycles to patrol streets.

5. The detective will call on a crime laboratory expert to dust for fingerprints and analyze bloodstains in the scene of crime.

V. Письменно переведите текст и выпишите слова юридической тематики.

Scotland Yard, popular name for the headquarters of London's Metropolitan Police Force, and especially its Criminal Investigation Department. The name is derived from a small area where the headquarters was situated from 1829 to 1890. The area, in turn, was named after a medieval palace in which the kings and queens of Scotland resided during state visits to London. The custom of referring to the headquarters and its officers as Scotland Yard began soon after the Metropolitan Police Force was reorganized by the British statesman Sir Robert Peel in 1829. The headquarters was moved in 1890 to new buildings erected on the Thames Embankment, which were known as New Scotland Yard. In 1967 the present headquarters, a modern 20-story building situated near the Houses of Parliament, was opened.

Scotland Yard has been famous around the world for many years. The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) is known for its extensive investigative techniques and activities. Its fingerprint division was the prototype of similar systems used by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and by many other modern police forces. In addition, the Yard maintains a criminal records office, forensic laboratories, a detective-training school, a criminal intelligence department, an antiterrorist unit, and fraud and drug squads. Besides its work in crime detection, Scotland Yard directs all metropolitan police activities, including traffic control. The CID is frequently called in to help local police in solving complex cases. Many authors have used Scotland Yard as a background for their mystery stories; among the most prolific, John Creasey, writing as J. J. Marric, chronicled the exploits of Gideon of the Yard.

Supplementary Reading

1. Attorney, in law, any person authorized by another to represent him or her. An agent who has been granted express authority to bind his or her principal is called an attorney in fact. Such authority is usually granted by a written instrument called a power of attorney. The powers conferred may be general, as when one gives another a mandate to manage all one's affairs during an absence, or special, as when the authority extends only to a particular business, or is otherwise limited or qualified. The term attorney at law is used in the United States to denote a legal adviser or representative in all manner of business. In Britain, upon the fusion of law and equity by the Judicature Act of 1873, the two classes of attorney and barrister were united under the name of solicitor in the High Court of Justice.

An attorney at law is an officer of the court, and as such is required, in the U.S., to take a binding oath of office to observe the U.S. Constitution and the constitution of the state of residence. Each state regulates by law the training and qualifications of attorneys. Usually a preliminary examination in general scholarship is required, followed by study at a school of law and sometimes by a clerkship or apprenticeship, varying from one to two years, in the office of a practicing attorney. Finally, an applicant must pass an examination in law before being admitted to the bar.

The duties of an attorney are to act with diligence and fidelity to one's client and to show average prudence, knowledge, and skill in professional dealings. In order to settle an action, the attorney requires, as a rule, the special authority of the client. No attorney can be compelled to reveal confidential information related by a client.

2. Advocate, in a general sense, one who pleads for another in a court of law or other tribunal. In the United Kingdom, professional advocates are called barristers and are permitted to plead or argue cases before the High Court of Justice; a barrister is distinguished from a solicitor, who may conduct litigation only in inferior courts (see Courts). The avocat and avoué in France are analogous to the barrister and solicitor in England. In the United States, most former British colonies, and some parts of Europe, the two branches of the legal profession are not separate (see Attorney).

In a narrower sense, the term advocate was formerly used in Britain to denote a member of the College of Advocates at Doctors' Commons (abolished in 1857). These advocates had the exclusive right to plead in the ecclesiastical and admiralty courts and took precedence over all ordinary barristers. In the U.S. Army, the judge advocate general is chief adviser to the army authorities in the administration of military law (see Military Courts).

3. Courts, branch of government established to administer the civil and criminal law. The term court is also applied to the international tribunals intended to provide for the resolution at law of controversies among governments, namely, the Permanent Court of International Justice, established by the League of Nations after World War I, and by the International Court of Justice, established by the United Nations after World War II.

Courts are classified in many ways. Among the more usual general classifications are courts of record and courts not of record; courts of superior jurisdiction and courts of inferior jurisdiction; trial courts and appellate courts; and civil courts and criminal courts. In courts of record the proceedings are recorded completely; no detailed record is made of the proceedings in courts not of record. Police and magistrate's courts in the United States are, in nearly all cases, courts not of record. Courts of superior jurisdiction, often called higher courts or appellate courts, are generally those to which appeals are made from decisions of courts of inferior jurisdiction, referred to as lower courts or trial courts. Civil and criminal courts deal with cases arising from infractions of the civil law and the criminal law, respectively. The judicial organs of military establishments are called military courts. Courts with special, limited jurisdictions are known by the names of those jurisdictions. For example, probate or surrogate's courts are tribunals dealing with the probate of wills and the disposition of estates; military courts have jurisdiction over infractions by military personnel; and admiralty courts have jurisdiction over cases arising from maritime contracts and from violations of maritime law.

Other courts are designated by the territorial limits of their jurisdictions. Included in this classification are the territorial and state courts of the United States and the county courts of the U.S. and the United Kingdom. Municipal courts generally are criminal courts; however, a number have restricted civil jurisdiction.

4. The recognized existence of even primitive courts implies a relatively high degree of social organization and the need for systematic adjudication of disputes on the basis of established customs and consciously formulated rules of social conduct. Archaeologists and anthropologists have established the existence of courts in simple societies over wide areas of Asia, Africa, and Europe; courts were not as widespread among the Native Americans of North and South America. Primitive courts formed part of a complex social structure in which administrative, judicial, and religious functions were intermingled. These courts were held in the open or in religious temples. More often than not, the judges were priests. Those who attended were considered part of the court, whether or not they had an immediate interest in the proceedings or in the judgments rendered. The proceedings consisted in large part of rituals designed to secure the redress of grievances presented by individuals against other individuals.

In the highly developed civilizations of antiquity, notably those of Assyria and Egypt, judicial and executive functions were undifferentiated and were centralized in the monarch as head of state. Insight into the structure and functions of Babylonian courts of the 18th century bc was obtained when the ancient legal document known as the Code of Hammurabi was discovered early in the 20th century. A highly developed judicial system existed also among the ancient Hebrews.

In the judicial system of ancient Athens, a unique feature, introduced by the lawgiver Solon in the 6th century bc, was the right of aggrieved litigants to appeal the decisions of magistrates to the people of Athens, assembled as a hē liaia (“public assembly”). In later years, these assemblies, referred to as heliastic courts, became courts of first resort presided over by magistrates who prepared cases for trial. The heliastic courts subsequently became unwieldy, and they were divided into sections called dicasteries.

The evolution of courts in ancient Rome was marked by the development of a complex structure in which criminal, civil, and other jurisdictions were differentiated and were exercised by separate courts and officials. Violations of criminal law were prosecuted by the state; higher and lower courts were organized; the right of appeal was juridically guaranteed; and a corps of professional jurists was established for the first time in the history of Mediterranean civilization. After Christianity became the state religion of Rome, the ecclesiastical courts, previously established by Christians who had refused to have recourse to pagan courts, became a part of the Roman legal system. As the Roman Empire disintegrated, the ecclesiastical courts survived and assumed jurisdiction over secular affairs.

5. Medieval courts were an outgrowth of the tribal courts of the Germanic peoples, among whom the highest judicial authority was that of the popular assemblies that met regularly throughout the year. The tribal judges supervised the proceedings and executed the judgments rendered by the assemblies. During the development of the Germanic tribal organization into territorial states, the primitive tribal courts underwent a corresponding evolution, increasing in number and becoming differentiated. Among the new features of this Teutonic system were a royal court, presided over by the king and modeled on the Roman system of courts; special lower courts under the control of royal officials who were called Grafen, which handled minor matters; and, later, a corps of permanent lay judges, with power to render judgments.

In the 8th century, when the Germanic territorial states were part of the realm of Charlemagne, the Teutonic judicial system experienced a further significant development: the practice, initiated by Charlemagne, of dispatching royal commissioners to examine the functioning of local courts and, when necessary, to supplement the justice they dispensed. In this innovation were the seeds of three later important legal developments: assize courts, circuit courts, and a central legal authority. This innovation was adopted by other feudal monarchs in their struggles with the landed nobility, who controlled the manorial, or seignorial, courts.

When the Normans conquered England in 1066, they imposed the Carolingian judicial system on the Anglo-Saxons. In the long struggle between king and landed nobility that ensued, one of the principal weapons of the Crown was the Curia Regis (king's court), which was held wherever the royal household was situated. The principal judicial strongholds of the nobility were the manorial courts, chiefly the courts baron and courts leet. Judicial supremacy eventually was won by the Crown, and, since the reign of King Edward I, in the 13th century, English courts have been organized on a centralized basis.

Before this victory of the Crown, however, King John had been compelled in 1215 to sign the Magna Carta, which initiated the gradual separation of judicial from executive and legislative governmental powers. The terms of this charter of liberty established the Court of Common Pleas as a court of a fixed location to try cases initiated by commoners against other commoners. The process of separation continued during the reign of Edward I with the establishment of the Court of Exchequer as a tribunal having exclusive jurisdiction over revenue cases arising out of unpaid debts to the Crown and the establishment of the Court of King's Bench, or the Court of Queen's Bench, as the supreme appellate tribunal of the realm, presided over by the monarch. The Court of King's, or Queen's, Bench also was invested with original jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases and thus encroached on the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas. In fact, the jurisdictions of all three courts overlapped and were not entirely differentiiated until much later. These courts later became bulwarks in the defense of civil and political liberties against the Crown.

Another momentous innovation during the reign of Edward I was provision for doing justice in situations in which the common law failed to afford a remedy to aggrieved litigants. This supplemental system of justice was administered by the Crown through the lord chancellor and was called chancery, or equity, jurisprudence.

In the centuries after the signing of the Magna Carta, Parliament acquired appellate jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases. This function was subsequently confined to the House of Lords and has survived to the present day. In 1701, Parliament enacted legislation establishing tenure of office for judges and made their removal from office conditional on the assent of Parliament, thus completing the separation of judicial from executive and legislative governmental powers. Like many other features of the English judicial system, this separation of powers was incorporated into the courts of the New World.

6. Administrative and structural changes in important but secondary features, such as those wrought by the Judicature Act of 1873, have been made. This act, which went into effect in 1875, preserved the role of the House of Lords as the chief appellate tribunal of England and Wales and consolidated all the superior civil courts into a Supreme Court of Judicature with two principal branches: the Court of Appeal, the highest appellate court below the House of Lords, and the High Court of Justice. The latter tribunal comprises three divisions: Chancery Division; King's, or Queen's, Bench Division; and Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division. Enactment of the Criminal Appeal Act of 1907 established the Court of Criminal Appeal as the highest appellate tribunal after the House of Lords in criminal cases. Besides the superior courts, the judicial system of England and Wales includes many lower courts organized into circuits. The highest civil court of Scotland is the Court of Session, and the highest criminal court is the High Court of Justiciary. Appeals may be taken from these courts to the House of Lords.

7. In France, the development of the judicial system after the breakup of the Carolingian Empire was similar to that in England: Both involved the vesting of central legal authority in the Crown after a protracted struggle with feudal manorial courts. The essential features of the judicial system now in effect in France were established after the French Revolution of 1789 by the Code Napolé on. This system includes lower courts of wide jurisdiction, intermediate courts of appeal, a court to resolve jurisdictional conflicts among courts, and a supreme appellate tribunal called the Court of Cassation. Many European and Latin American judicial systems are modeled on that of France.

In the Islamic world, the Qur'an (Koran) is the source of law; justice traditionally has been dispensed by specially trained priests in conjuction with the king, or sultan. In the 20th century, this system still prevails in such Islamic countries as Yemen and Saudi Arabia. In Turkey, however, executive, legislative, and judicial functions have been separated, and a judicial system similar to those of Western countries has evolved.

In other Middle Eastern and Asian countries that have attained independence since World War II, notably Sri Lanka, India, and Israel, the courts also operate similarly to those of the West, that is, as relatively independent institutions within a parliamentary framework.

In Communist countries, the judicial system was usually patterned after that of the USSR, which included a hierarchy of courts culminating in a supreme court. In the former Yugoslavia, however, all judges, even those of the highest tribunals, were elected, not appointed.

8. Ordeal, practice of referring disputed questions to the judgment of God, determined either by lot or by certain trials.

Throughout Europe the ordeal existed in various forms under the sanction of law and was closely related to the oath. The most prevalent kinds of ordeal were those of fire, water, and the wager of battle. Fire ordeal was allowed only to persons of high rank. The accused had to carry a piece of red-hot iron in the hand some distance or walk barefoot and blindfolded across red-hot plowshares. The hand or foot was bound up and inspected three days afterward. If the accused had escaped unhurt, the person was pronounced innocent; if hurt, the person was guilty. Water ordeal was the usual mode or trial allowed to members of the lower classes and was of two kinds, the ordeal of boiling water and of cold water. The ordeal of boiling water, according to the laws of Athelstan, the first king of England, consisted of lifting a stone out of boiling water, where the hand had to be inserted as deep as the wrist; the triple ordeal deepened the water to the elbow. The person allowed the ordeal of cold water, the usual mode of trial for witchcraft, was flung into a pool. If the accused floated he or she was guilty; if the accused sank he or she was acquitted. In the wager of battle the defeated party was allowed to live as a “recreant, ” that is, on retracting the perjury that had been sworn.

By the middle of the 13th century the ordeal had died out in England and on the Continent.

9. Criminal Punishment, penalties imposed by the government on individuals who violate criminal law. (Criminal law prohibits behavior deemed harmful to society as a whole, whereas civil law governs private interactions between individuals.) People who commit crimes may be punished in a variety of ways. Offenders may be subject to fines or other monetary assessments, the infliction of physical pain (corporal punishment), or confinement in jail or prison for a period of time (incarceration). In general, societies punish individuals to achieve revenge against wrongdoers and to prevent further crime—both by the person punished and by others contemplating criminal behavior. Some modern forms of criminal punishment reflect a philosophy of correction, rather than (or in addition to) one of penalty. Correctional programs attempt to teach offenders how to substitute lawful types of behavior for unlawful actions.

Throughout history and in many different parts of the world, societies have devised a wide assortment of punishment methods. In ancient times, societies widely accepted the law of equal retaliation (known as lex talionis), a form of corporal punishment that demanded “an eye for an eye.” If one person’s criminal actions injured another person, authorities would similarly maim the criminal. Certain countries throughout the world still practice corporal punishment. For instance, in some Islamic nations officials exact revenge-based corporal punishments against criminals—such as amputation of a thief’s hand—under the law of hudū d. Monetary compensation is another historic punishment method. In England during the early Middle Ages (5th century to 15th century) payments of “blood money” (wergeld) were required as compensation for death, personal injury, and theft.

Penology, the study of criminal punishment, is a subfield of criminology. Criminologists theorize about why people commit crimes and deviate from society’s norms of behavior. They also study how society punishes criminals because different methods of punishment may cause people to alter their behavior in different ways. Thus, criminologists devise theories that not only explain the causes of crime but that also address its prevention and control.

Although some societies still use ancient forms of harsh physical punishment, punishments have also evolved along with civilization and become less cruel. Punishments range in severity depending on the crime, with the most severe forms applied to individuals who commit the most serious crimes. In most industrialized societies, contemporary punishments are either fines or terms of incarceration or both. Contemporary criminal punishment also seeks to correct unlawful behavior, rather than simply punish wrongdoers.

Certain punishments require offenders to provide compensation for the damage caused by their crimes. There are three chief types of compensation: fines, restitution, and community service.

A fine is a monetary penalty imposed on an offender and paid to the court. Most criminal statutes in the United States and Canada contain provisions for the imposition of fines. However, fines have not been widely used as criminal punishment because most criminals do not have the money to pay them. Moreover, fining criminals may actually encourage them to commit more crimes in order to pay the fines.

The term restitution refers to the practice of requiring offenders to financially compensate crime victims for the damage the offenders caused. This damage may include psychological, physical, or financial harm to the victim. In most cases, crime victims must initiate the process of obtaining restitution from the offender. Thus, when the criminal is prosecuted, the victim must inform the court of financial losses or medical expenses. Otherwise, the judge may fail to require restitution. Judges may impose restitution in conjunction with other forms of punishment, such as probation (supervised release to the community) or incarceration.

In the United States, the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 authorizes restitution (along with incarceration) as a punishment for individuals who violate federal criminal laws. Under this act, judges may impose restitution when initially sentencing offenders for federal crimes. Alternatively, restitution may be included as a condition of an offender’s parole program. (Prisoners who receive parole obtain an early release from incarceration and remain free, provided they meet certain conditions.) In most U.S. states criminal laws also authorize restitution as a punishment option. Criminals in Canada may also be required to pay restitution to victims for personal injuries or property damage.

Offenders sentenced to community service perform services for the state or community rather than directly compensating the crime victim or victims. Some of the money saved by the government as a result of community service work may be diverted to a fund to compensate crime victims. Courts may also sentence offenders to community service to defray a portion of the administrative expenses of prosecution. Judges and parole authorities have discretion to determine the nature of the community service to be performed by the offender.

The most serious or repeat offenders are incarcerated. In the United States about one-fourth of all persons who are convicted of a crime are incarcerated. Canada incarcerates about one-third of all convicted offenders. However, inmates in Canada are eligible for parole at earlier points in their sentence. Criminals may be incarcerated in jails or in prisons. Jails are locally operated facilities that house criminals sentenced to less than one year of incarceration. Jails typically house persons convicted of misdemeanors (less serious crimes), as well as individuals awaiting trial. Prisons are state or federally operated facilities that house individuals convicted of more serious crimes, known as felonies. Offenders sentenced to a year or more of incarceration are housed in prisons rather than jails. Canada uses a similar bifurcated system of local correctional centers and provincial and federal prisons.

Restrictions on incarcerated offenders vary. Some offenders are kept in solitary confinement or maximum security with no opportunity to interact with other inmates. In minimum-security facilities, the most common form of incarceration, inmates are housed together in large cells or in dormitory-like facilities.

Prisons deprive inmates of virtually all liberty and control over their lives. Each aspect of an inmate’s daily life is regulated by others and highly structured. Many prisons offer self-help educational and counseling programs. In some prisons, inmates may be able to work at different trades to acquire vocational and technical skills. However, a majority of inmates do not utilize these rehabilitation-oriented programs because the programs typically are not compulsory. Instead, prisons often function as long-term warehouses where offenders are merely housed and forgotten. Rates of recidivism (repeated criminal behavior) are fairly high for former inmates in the United States, averaging about 60 percent. Rates in Canada are substantially lower, at 40 percent.

In a variation of incarceration known as shock probation, first-time offenders are placed on probation after having served only a short amount of the incarceration that they had expected to serve. Some offenders receive a split sentence, serving some time in jail before being released on probation. The theory behind these practices is that the jail time, albeit brief, will shock the criminal into acceptable behavior. In another variation, called intermittent sentencing, offenders spend weekends in jail but return to the community during the week. This practice enables offenders to maintain jobs and remain in contact with their families while also being punished.

In the United States and Canada, younger offenders may be sentenced to highly regimented, military-style correctional programs known as boot camps. Generally, offenders volunteer to participate in boot camp programs to avoid other types of incarceration. At boot camps, officials subject offenders to strict discipline and physical training. They also provide educational or vocational programs. Boot camps serve as an alternative to traditional, long-term incarceration and attempt to train offenders to be law-abiding. Typically, boot camp sentences range from two to six months.

Throughout history, societies have used corporal punishments to inflict physical pain on wrongdoers. Tribal societies find these punishments particularly appealing, since they are immediate and direct, and often debilitating. Such societies often lack the facilities to confine offenders, and corporal punishment offers a more direct application of penalties for violating community rules. Many people believe that corporal punishments, which graphically demonstrate the consequences of crime, help deter future wrongdoing. Harsh physical punishment also satisfies the goal of retribution (revenge).

In Europe during the Middle Ages, entire families would take revenge against members of rival families for crimes or wrongs committed by one or more members of the rival family. Some of these blood feuds lasted for many years—even several generations. In some tribal societies, entire tribes would feud with other tribes, and members of rival tribes would hunt and kill one another. Because ongoing feuds among kin groups were disruptive, various European countries drafted agreements setting societal policies concerning punishment. For example, in 1215 King John of England signed the Magna Carta, which provided that accused criminals could not be executed or incarcerated prior to a trial by a jury of their fellow citizens.

Governmental and religious authorities also used many forms of corporal punishment, often to torture persons into confessing to a crime or heresy (unorthodox religious belief). During the 13th century the Roman Catholic Church established the Inquisition, a judicial institution charged with finding, trying, and punishing heretics. Forms of torture used by inquisitors included flogging, boiling, and stretching on a device known as the rack. A person who underwent the rack torture was forced to lie on a long board. After the person’s hands and feet were tied to mechanisms at opposite ends of the board, pressure on the mechanisms was increased in opposite directions. Frequently the person’s arms and legs would pop from their sockets. This painful torture was sometimes fatal and commonly resulted in permanent physical injuries.

The colonists who settled North America used several types of corporal punishment, including the use of the ducking stool. In this punishment, a criminal was tied to a chair at the end of a long pole and lowered into a lake or river and nearly drowned. Branding—the searing of flesh with a hot iron—was another form of punishment used by the colonists. Persons convicted of adultery (having sexual relations with someone other than one’s spouse) were sometimes branded with the letter A on their faces or foreheads. During the late 1700s many of these corporal punishments were discontinued in favor of more humane methods, such as incarceration.

Some societies punish certain undesirable individuals, such as criminals and political and religious dissidents, with banishment or exile. In ancient times banishment was a common form of punishment, and it often amounted to capital punishment because authorities would deny food and shelter within a certain distance to those banished. The Old Testament of the Bible contains the story of Adam and Eve, who were banished from the Garden of Eden for their disobedience to God.

During the 18th and 19th centuries officials in various Chinese provinces used banishment as a punishment. It ranked second only to death as the most serious punishment imposed. China and other countries also used banishment as a means to colonize regions. For example, from 1788 to 1868 England banished more than 160, 000 prisoners to Australia or Africa to work in labor colonies they established.

Banishment has also been used in modern times. In 1993, for example, tribal officials banished two teenaged members of the Tlingit tribe of Native Americans as punishment for a robbery. The offenders were sent from their home in Everett, Washington, to a desolate island off Alaska to live in isolation for several months.

10. The most extreme form of punishment is death. Execution of an offender is known as capital punishment. Like corporal punishment and banishment, capital punishment has been used since ancient times. The Old Testament of the Bible prescribes death as the punishment for over 30 crimes. The Romans executed Jesus Christ by crucifixion, a common form of capital punishment between the 6th century bc and the 4th century ad. In England in the 1800s more than 200 crimes were punishable by death.

In the late 18th century, social commentators began to criticize penal practices they considered brutal and unnecessary. Many of these philosophers condemned the use of capital punishment, initiating a debate that has continued to modern times. During the 19th century, legal reformers in England and the United States helped enact laws limiting the death penalty to the most serious crimes. Shortly after World War II (1939-1945), many countries in Western Europe, beginning with Italy and Germany, abolished capital punishment. Britain, Canada, and Australia followed suit. A similar abolition movement coincided with the breakup of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1991, when several nations in Eastern Europe eliminated capital punishment. The use of the death penalty has become increasingly controversial, especially in the United States and Japan, the only industrialized democracies that continue to practice capital punishment.

In the U.S. system of government, power is divided between a central (federal) authority and smaller local units of government (the states). Federal law authorizes capital punishment for more than 40 offenses, including premeditated murder, treason, and murder related to aircraft hijacking, drug trafficking, and civil rights violations. The majority of states also authorize the death penalty for violations of state criminal law, including such crimes as treason, murder, and rape. As of early 2005, 12 states did not permit capital punishment. Methods for executing offenders vary among the states. The majority of states that have the death penalty execute offenders by means of lethal injection—the administration of fatal amounts of fast-acting drugs and chemicals. Other common methods include lethal gas and electrocution. Three states execute criminals by hanging and three states provide for execution by firing squad.

In the 1972 case of Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the procedures leading to imposition of the death penalty in Georgia were unlawful. Although the Court indicated that capital punishment was not necessarily a “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Constitution of the United States, it determined that allowing a jury unlimited discretion to choose between a death sentence and a prison sentence is unconstitutional. Because all of the states that provided for capital punishment at that time also used a standardless system—that is, a system in which the sentencing decision of jurors was unguided—this ruling invalidated every state’s death penalty statute. Following the Furman decision, many states passed new death penalty legislation. These laws still gave the jury the discretion to choose between imprisonment or death, but they also restricted the types of crimes for which death could be imposed and provided instructions to guide the jury’s determination of punishment. In 1976 the Supreme Court ruled such systems constitutional.

Opponents of capital punishment see it as barbaric and degrading to the dignity of the individual. Many believe it poses too great a risk of executing an innocent person. Supporters respond that the death penalty provides a uniquely effective punishment. They consider it a necessary form of retribution for terrible crimes. Opponents of the imposition of capital punishment in the United States assert that authorities apply the death penalty unfairly. These critics emphasize the disproportionate numbers of African Americans on death row and also note that the race of the crime victim provides a statistically clear determinant of whether an offender receives a sentence of death or imprisonment. Although about half of all murder victims are nonwhite, 80 percent of death sentences are imposed for murders of whites. Those who believe capital punishment is not imposed unfairly attribute this trend to differences in the types of crimes involving white victims.

Those who support capital punishment believe it serves an important function of vengeance. Some proponents of the death penalty argue that those who kill should also be killed because death is the only fitting punishment for an individual who takes another’s life. Supporters of capital punishment also believe that executing offenders will deter others from committing similar crimes.

Modern forms of criminal punishment include alternatives that contrast vividly with corporal punishments and large-scale warehousing of offenders in prisons. Modern programs increasingly emphasize an individualized approach to the rehabilitation and treatment of offenders.

In the United States and Canada, persons convicted of crimes are most often placed on probation. A person who receives probation remains in the community but is subject to supervision and must comply with various conditions. The conditions may include mandatory group or individual psychological counseling sessions, classes, or vocational training. Because growing numbers of offenders have drug or alcohol dependencies, drug rehabilitation programs are often included as a condition of probation.

Probationers who have committed more serious crimes require tight supervision, including house arrest and electronic monitoring. People under house arrest must remain in their house and may leave only for periods of work during the day. They must observe rigid curfews and allow probation officers to enter their homes at any time to inspect the premises for illegal drugs or other contraband. Electronic monitoring is often used in conjunction with house arrest. The offender must wear electronic bracelets or anklets that emit electronic signals and permit probation officers to detect whether the probationer is where he or she is supposed to be. Another type of electronic monitoring involves a telephonic device that reads the electronic signal of the probationer’s bracelet. When probation officers call at random times, offenders must insert their bracelets into the device so that the officers can ascertain the offender’s location.

Prison inmates who are within six months of their release date or who have recently been released may qualify for special transitional programs. Inmates who wish to enroll in colleges or perform work outside the prison during their final months of incarceration may request study- or work-release time. If such time is granted, prison officials will permit the inmates daily unescorted leaves from prison for such purposes. Vermont developed the first work- and study-release programs in the United States in 1906. In 1998 about 25, 000 U.S. prisoners participated in work- or study-release programs. Canada instituted work-release programs in 1992. In 1998 about 1, 200 inmates in Canada received work releases.

Some inmates may be granted furloughs(temporary leaves) so that they can spend weekends visiting with their families at home. Furlough programs originated in Mississippi in 1918. By 1998 approximately 10, 000 prisoners in the United States received furloughs each year. Canada does not utilize furloughs. However, a small portion of inmates are granted day parole.

Parole boards place some paroled inmates in halfway houses. These community residences, staffed by counselors and aides, assist offenders in making the transition back into community life. Halfway houses provide released prisoners with a place to sleep and eat. In addition, halfway-house personnel help parolees find jobs and get access to needed services. Halfway houses originated in England during the 1800s. Pennsylvania established the first halfway house in the United States in 1817. Today there are hundreds of halfway houses in the United States helping former prisoners cope with their freedom.

11. Goals of Criminal Punishment. The major driving force underlying all punishment is revenge, also referred to as retribution. The word retribution derives from a Latin word meaning “to pay back.” In retaliation for wrongdoing, societies seek to punish individuals who violate the rules. Criminal punishment is also intended as a deterrent to future criminality. Offenders who are punished may be deterred from future wrongdoing because they fear additional punishment. Others who contemplate crime may also be deterred from criminal behavior. Societies also impose punishments in order to incapacitate dangerous or unlawful individuals by restricting their liberty and to rehabilitate these wrongdoers and correct their behavior.

The various goals of criminal punishment may conflict with one another. For instance, the goal of incapacitation may be achieved by confining offenders for long prison terms. However, inmates who are warehoused in large prisons where they associate closely with other criminals and lack control over their life may develop additional antisocial behaviors. Consequently, punishment may perpetuate criminal dispositions and behaviors rather than eliminate them.

Retribution is probably the oldest goal of criminal punishment. The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, dating from the 18th century bc, contained this principle of equal retaliation. Similarly, the laws of the ancient Hebrews demanded “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” The corporal punishments used in England and the American colonies were based on retribution.

Over time many came to believe that the brutal punishments imposed on offenders far exceeded the seriousness of the crimes. French novelist Victor Hugo satirized criminal punishment in France during the 19th century in his novel Les Miserables (1862), in which a character is sentenced to 20 years of hard labor after stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family. When the character later escapes, officials hound him for years as though he had committed murder. Although extreme, this fictional account captured the vengeful nature of punishment in those times.

In the United States, the retributionist philosophy remains apparent in the sentencing practices of courts, the laws enacted by state legislatures and Congress, and the rules and regulations of various correctional programs. Common punishments include restitution; fines; and victim compensation for losses, pain, and suffering resulting from crimes. Furthermore, offenders perform hundreds of hours of public service work as restitution to the state in partial payment for the losses resulting from their crimes.

There is little evidence to indicate that criminals change their behavior as a result of government-imposed retribution. Many released prisoners and former probationers repeatedly commit crimes. The value of retribution to society may be ritualistic. That is, when formal measures of retribution are imposed citizens may feel satisfied that crime has been appropriately addressed.

Another goal of punishment is deterrence —the prevention of crime. There are two types of deterrence: specific and general. Specific deterrence refers to the preventive effect of a specific punishment, such as a large fine and a long prison sentence, on a specific individual for committing a specific crime. Many believe that imposing a sufficiently severe punishment on an offender will deter that individual from future crime. General deterrence is intended to apply to any person who contemplates committing a crime. For example, advocates of the death penalty believe that imposition of such a severe punishment on murderers will prevent others from killing people.

Modern punishments seek to incapacitate certain offenders who are believed to pose a threat to the community. Incapacitation involves restricting offenders’ movement or liberty. In contemporary practice, the goal of incapacitation is associated with attempts to punish offenders in a manner proportionate to the seriousness of the crime.

Isolating criminals from society through confinement or incarceration is the most direct method of crime prevention. Containing offenders in prisons and jails prevents them from harming others or damaging property. For many offenders incapacitation is also psychologically painful. Most people consider incarceration a sound defensive strategy to protect the public and combat crime. However, because many criminals remain undetected, unapprehended, and unrestrained, the defensive value of incarceration may be overrated.

In the United States, severe prison overcrowding frustrates efforts to incarcerate all offenders who deserve to be incarcerated. Even with new construction, it will remain impossible to incarcerate all eligible offenders. Furthermore, prison and jail construction is costly and often unpopular. In certain communities a “not in my backyard” syndrome typifies citizen reaction to proposed prison or jail construction.

Contemporary criminal punishment seeks to correct criminals and transform their behavior, rather than merely penalize wrongdoers. As early as 1787 the Society of Friends (Quakers) in Pennsylvania espoused inmate reform as a major aim of prisons. Prisons became known as penitentiaries because the Quakers believed that prisons could help criminals become penitent (remorseful) and change their behavior. However, it was not until the late 19th century that rehabilitation became an acknowledged goal of criminal punishment in the United States. Rehabilitation programs of this era differed from the reform-oriented practices promoted by the Quakers. Rather than requiring solitary religious study, prisons began to emphasize basic education and skills training. At its first convention in 1870, the National Congress on Penitentiary and Reformatory Discipline officially recognized rehabilitation as a valid and useful function of incarceration. Shortly thereafter, American prison administrator Zebulon Brockway established the Elmira Reformatory in Elmira, New York. The reformatory’s stated goals included rehabilitation and reform of inmates. Between 1876 and 1920 a fourth of the states modeled the construction and administration of their prisons on the Elmira Reformatory. These institutions provided vocational training and other programs to promote inmate rehabilitation.

The rehabilitation philosophy of punishment dominated in the United States through the first half of the 20th century. However, high recidivism rates among former inmates caused many experts to become skeptical of rehabilitation programs. Increasingly, the goal of rehabilitation has received lower priority in corrections. Today the primary emphasis of punishment in the United States is ensuring that offenders receive penalties commensurate with the seriousness of their offenses. The primary philosophy of Canadian corrections is rehabilitation. Since 1992, Canada has worked to reduce its incarcerated population by implementing various alternatives to incarceration and accelerating parole release of incarcerated offenders.

12. Attitudes about Criminal Punishment. During the late 1700s and early 1800s, several French, English, and Italian philosophers and social reformers achieved prominence through their criticisms of corporal punishments. For example, in Des L’espirit des lois (1748; translated as The Spirit of the Laws, 1750), French political theorist Montesquieu criticized the French penal code and the inhuman punishments suffered by prisoners. He believed that punishments should fit the crimes committed and that more humane conditions should be provided for incarcerated offenders. French philosopher and social critic Voltaire also objected to injustices against criminals, such as arbitrary sentencing practices and secret trials. Denis Diderot, another French philosopher, campaigned for political reforms to eliminate punishments he believed to be cruel and inhuman.

During the late 1700s, British philosopher and economist Jeremy Bentham, who founded the doctrine of utilitarianism, became an outspoken critic of penal policy in England. In An Introduction to the Principles and Morals of Legislation (1789), Bentham applied his philosophy of utilitarianism to crime and punishment. Bentham believed that criminals engage in crime for pleasure and calculate the gains and losses (or pleasures and pains) associated with criminal conduct. He argued that a utilitarian philosophy of punishment would be useful in deterring crimes by minimizing or eliminating the pleasures offenders obtain from wrongdoing. Bentham proposed that the punishment inflicted should offset the pleasure offenders achieve from their crimes. He also believed that people would be more effectively deterred from crime if they did not consider punishments arbitrary and capricious. Many of Bentham’s ideas were adopted by the British legislature, including the limitation of capital punishment to only the most serious crimes.

One of the most influential writers of this time, Italian jurist and economist Cesare Beccaria, built on the work of Montesquieu and Voltaire. Like Voltaire, Beccaria objected to judicial tyranny and injustice, as well as torturous corporal punishments. Beccaria’s work, Tratto dei delitti e delle pene, (1764; translated as An Essay on Crimes and Punishments, 1880), contained the basic principles of the classical school of criminology. These include (1) the best approach to crime is prevention and prevention is maximized by establishing written legal codes that define prohibited behaviors and the punishments for them; (2) law serves the needs of society rather than enforces moral virtues and therefore should be limited to the most serious offenses; (3) all persons should be considered innocent until proven guilty; (4) punishment should be swift and certain, with no regard for personalities or social characteristics of offenders; and (5) punishment should be retributive and the degree of retribution should fit the seriousness of the crime.

Many countries, including Canada, England, France, and Italy, have incorporated Beccaria’s principles into their legal system and jurisprudence (legal philosophy). When Beccaria originally proposed his ideas, many considered them antithetical to the existing legal system. Prior to Beccaria’s time, only those with wealth, property, and political influence possessed legal rights and privileges. His work influenced several of the authors of the U.S. Constitution. The language of many U.S. criminal laws reflects Beccaria’s ideas.

13. Crime, commission of an act or act of omission that violates the law and is punishable by the state. Crimes are considered injurious to society or the community, as distinguished from torts and breach of contract.

As defined by law, a crime includes both the act, or actus rea, and the intent to commit the act, or mens rea. Criminal intent involves an intellectual apprehension of factual elements of the act or acts commanded or enjoined by the law. It is usually inferred from the apparently voluntary commission of an overt act. Criminal liability is relieved in the case of insanity. Legal minors are also relieved of criminal liability, as are persons subjected to coercion or duress to such a degree as to render the commission of criminal acts involuntary. In most countries, crimes are defined and punished pursuant to statutes. Punishments may include death, imprisonment, exile, fines, forfeiture of property, removal from public office, and disqualification from holding such office.

Unless the act of which a defendant is accused is expressly defined by statute as a crime, no indictment or conviction for the commission of such an act can be legally sustained. This provision is important in establishing the difference between government by law and arbitrary or dictatorial government.

Under common law, a crime was generally classified as treason, felony, or misdemeanor, but many offenses could not be defined exactly, and the rule was adopted that any immoral act tending to the prejudice of the community was, per se, a crime, and punishable by the courts. Crimes are now usually classified as mala in se, which includes acts, such as murder, so offensive to morals as to be obviously criminal; and mala prohibita, which are violations of specific regulatory statutes, such as traffic violations, that ordinarily would not be punishable in the absence of statutory enactments prohibiting the commission of such acts. In most cases, crimes, including treason, that are mala in se are called felonies and are punished more severely than those that are mala prohibita, most of the latter falling into the category of misdemeanors.

14. Treason, criminal offense involving the attempt, by overt acts, to overthrow the government to which the offender owes allegiance, or to betray the state to a foreign power.

Two grades of treason existed in early English law: high treason, which was directed against the Crown, and petty treason, which consisted of a crime against a subject, such as a wife killing her husband, or a servant murdering his master.

In early English statutes the more serious offenses were compassing or imagining the death of the sovereign, adhering to the sovereign's enemies and giving them aid and comfort, and levying war against the sovereign. Statutes were changed from time to time between the reign of Edward III and that of Elizabeth I. After the Restoration the Stuart judges used “constructive treason” to discourage resistance to the Crown. They extended the offenses to include words as well as deeds. In 1663, a writer was convicted of treason for writing an article suggesting that the king was accountable to the people.

Article III, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution follows the English law: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”

In the early days of the American colonies the codes defining treason used such terms as desertion, mutiny, sedition, attempts to subvert or alter government, and “public rebellion.” Toward the end of the 17th century colonial law followed more closely the English law of treason. During the French and Indian War some colonies considered trading with the enemy treasonous. Massachusetts in 1706 declared “correspondence” with the enemy to be treason. During the 1680s, Virginia attempted to punish the destruction of young tobacco plants, in order to control prices, as treason. In colonial days the penalty for conviction of treason followed the English law, providing for attainder, forfeiture, or loss of property, and the loss of all rights of inheritance. The sentence included the practice of hanging and quartering. Often, however, the colonial governor received a reversal of the judgment from the Crown.

Just before the American Revolution, efforts were made to prosecute certain leaders for treason. Those who participated in the Boston Tea Party and in burning the ship Gaspé e in Rhode Island were suspect. Convictions could not be obtained in the colonies, because juries would not convict and witnesses could not be found even after offers were made to give cash rewards and full pardons to informers against those who burned the Gaspé e.

During the American Revolution, charges of treason were brought against American supporters of the British government. Congress authorized the death penalty for American soldiers who supported King George III. Several men were hanged for enlisting soldiers in the king's army and for various other violations, such as furnishing supplies to the British. Many convicted traitors were pardoned.

The most famous treasonous activity of the Revolution was the planned surrender to the British of the fort at West Point, New York, by the American general Benedict Arnold. His plan was discovered in 1780 when the British soldier John André was captured with documents detailing the surrender.

In 1790, Congress fixed the penalty for treason as death by hanging. The accused was to enjoy certain procedural rights: a copy of the indictment; a list of jurors and witnesses at least three days before trial; representation by counsel; compulsory process for witnesses on behalf of the accused; and preemptory challenge of 35 members of the jury panel.

Perhaps the most celebrated American trial for treason in the 19th century was that of the statesman Aaron Burr, who completed his term as vice president in March 1805. He was unpopular with many persons because he had killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. In conspiracy with others, Burr proposed a grandiose scheme for establishing a kingdom west of the Appalachians, raiding Spanish lands, and settling the lands in the Washita Valley. Burr was tried for treason but was acquitted after a long trial. The case turned partly on the point that Burr was not present when the one overt act that was charged took place.

Few cases of treason occurred in U.S. courts for more than a century after Burr's trial. During the American Civil War, no judicial determination was made as to whether or not leaders and supporters of the Confederacy were guilty of treason against the U.S. Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy, was indicted, but he never came to trial.

In the 20th century, several Americans were accused of treasonous acts during World War II. Iva Ikuko Toguri D'Aquino, a Japanese American born in Los Angeles and known as Tokyo Rose, conducted broadcasts in English to American servicemen in the Pacific area. She was convicted of treason and served a long prison term. Mildred Elizabeth Gillars of Portland, Maine, known as Axis Sally, served a sentence for broadcasting for the Germans.

15. Felony, in common law, the second in seriousness of three classifications of crimes. The first classification is treason and the third, covering all minor offenses, is misdemeanors. The distinction between felonies and misdemeanors is artificial and corresponds roughly to that between grave offenses and those less heinous in character. Formerly, a felony was any crime punishable by the criminal's forfeiture of any lands or goods, or both; other punishment might be added to the forfeiture, according to the degree of guilt. In England, for a long time, most felonies were punishable by death.

⇐ Предыдущая 4 5 6 7 8910 11 12 13 Следующая ⇒