Alternatives to Prison in Dealing with Offenders

Alternatives to Prison in Dealing with Offenders Assess the alternatives to prison in dealing with offenders We live in a society that is screaming for help. When it comes to a medical illness that a doctor can cure, he is allowed to go through great lengths to provide the best care possible. The same applies to the government who relies on the prison system to maintain law and order in dealing with offenders in order to live in a peaceful society. The idea for the use of a prison as a whole is to rehabilitate and, in most cases, restructure the way of living so that, when released, a person is better off in society than behind bars. However, there are several alternatives to prison that can be considered according to the offence committed. A well known alternative to prison is the system of fines. Fines are known as monetary sanction imposed upon a convicted offender which can vary according to where the crime was committed and the gravity of the crime. Offences which warrant a fine are classified according to the level of seriousness; the more serious offence obviously refers to a higher fine. This method is normally used for small offences committed. Fines are not considered appropriate for murder, rape, serious drug offences, aggravated robberies, and major re-offences by any member state. Any offence carrying a maximum prison sentence of at least three years in Croatia, any ‘intentional violent crime’ in Moldova, and any war crime conviction in Bosnia Herzegovina cannot be dealt with by a fine.(2010) However, this method did not prove to be quite effective since it concludes that if people could afford the fine, the punishment would not be effective, and where people could not pay the fine, it was lik ely that their family would suffer the financial consequences. Pre trial detention is the time period that an offender is incarcerated between being arrested and his trial.Detentionis only supposed to be used so as to ensure that the person will not pose a danger to other people. It undermines the chance of a fair trial and the rule of law in a number of ways. People in pre-trial detention are particularly likely to suffer violence and abuse. Without the protection of law, and isolated from their family, it is difficult to withstand such pressure. High rates of pre-trial detention are also contributing to prison overcrowding, poor prison conditions and growing the risk of torture. Pre-trial detention has a hugely damaging impact on defendants, their families and communities. Even if a person is acquitted and released, they may still have lost their home and job. They face the stigma of having been in prison when they return to the community. Unfortunately, in many countries pre-trial detention continues to be imposed systematically on those susp ected of a criminal offence without considering whether or not it is necessary, or whether less intrusive measures could be applied. A good alternative to prison is education as it has the potential to be a major driver of rehabilitation. At best, it opens prisoners’ minds to new possibilities and ways of understanding that can give them a way out of the cycle of reoffending. It can also have positive effects elsewhere, for example by raising prisoners’ skills so that they are more likely to be able to access a stable job after release, which in itself will help with reintegration. Considered more broadly, courses that encourage prisoners to think in a different light about family and other personal relationships may lead to better communication within families and a more positive, stable home environment. Education helps one broaden his mind and also helps a person to think more positively. Due to an advancing technological world, a new way of dealing with offenders has been found. The use of electronic monitoring was first applied in a criminal justice case in England and Wales in 1989, when a man was granted bail on condition that he ‘voluntarily agreed’ to have a device attached to him (Lilly and Himan, 1993:1)119 The use of electronic monitoring is becoming increasingly widespread and is now used to monitor over 10,000 offenders in Europe on any given day. Where it has been established, electronic monitoring of a curfew has become an ever-more important part of criminal justice systems and is used at various stages of criminal cases: as a condition of granting bail before trial; as a sentence in its own right; and as a condition of early release from prison. When an offender is monitored electronically, a tracking device is fitted to their ankle and a monitoring unit is positioned in the person’s house or other place of curfew. Currently, the equ ipment is based on radio frequency technology where the tag acts as a transmitter. The tag sends signals to the monitoring unit which in turn send signals to a control centre. Dick Whitfield stated that one common thread that can be observed within Europe is that the growth of EM has been ‘very largely politically driven(2007) much more than most criminal justice developments.( It means it is also politically more vulnerable, too’. This method is mostly used for small offences; this also helps to control prisons in a better way since many small offenders can stay at home with this device. It is also safe since the offender will not be able to move a long distance due to this electronic tag. A good prison policy aiming at the social reintegration of prisoners is an important factor when considering the social life of an offender after imprisonment. Even though the purpose of a prison sentence is to punish offenders and put them where they can do no harm, while preparing them for subsequent release and reintegration into society, , imprisonment does not achieve the second objective as a large number of former prisoners reoffend within five years of their release. There are many causes for this, including socialisation to prison culture, lack of family support, lack of education and vocational training and social prejudices. Spending many years in prison may be a factor in de-socialisation as it very often destroys prisoners’ ties with their families, friends and the rest of society. The chances of successful social reintegration also depend on the nature of the offence committed and the sentence served. In this connection, the possibility of alternatives to impriso nment for petty offenders might be social integration. Community service has proved to be an effective solution while dealing with offenders. Judges can sentence defendants to perform unpaid community work called community service to repay a debt to society for having committed the offense. The defendant may be required to perform community service in addition to receiving some other form of punishment, such as probation, a fine, or restitution. In 1992, Zimbabwe introduced Community Service(2004). Very quickly this alternative proved itself to be more humane, less expensive and a more efficient response to crime. An example of community service would be: Someone convicted of persistently dropping litter may be sentenced to pick up litter, or a convicted drunk driver may be required to appear before school groups to explain why drink driving is a crime and an ethical breach. This in fact makes the offender realise that whatever offence he committed was wrong. Therefore this method psychologically helps the offender to be a responsible ci tizen instead of ruining his life by going to jail. Death penalty can be considered as an option while dealing with offenders. This form of punishment has in fact been banned in many countries due to the beliefs of each of them, for example, a country might have religious beliefs about taking the life of someone as something wrong. However, it is not always the case since the offender must have done something which is not humane to deserve this form of punishment. If someone may allow himself to rape/kill/murder another person, then why should he be allowed to stay alive? This form of punishment has been a debatable one over years; yet many do not believe in it. Death penalty should actually be applicable to offenders who commit serious offences who would instead have a lifetime imprisonment as punishment. This would also increase the economic budget of a society which would have to spend unnecessary money on such offenders; this money could instead be used to reduce poverty. We certainly cannot have a specific alternative to prison in dealing with offenders, but we can surely choose the best punishment according to the offence committed. This would help to reduce the number of criminals in our society since many of the offenders stand a chance of being re-integrated in the society instead of becoming a worse person by going to jail. References 1. Loffmann.M, Morten.F. (2010)  Investigating Alternatives to Imprisonment.[online] The Quaker Council for European Affairs.  Place of publication: Europe. Available from-  http://www.qcea.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/rprt-alternatives-en-jan-2010.pdf 2. Whitfield Dick, Electronic Monitoring: Ethics, Politics and Practice, keynote presentation 10 May 2007 in the Netherlands [on-line], accessed 10 December 2007, available at: http://www.cepprobation.org/uploaded_files/pres EM 07 whitfield.pdf 3. PRI(2004) Alternatives to imprisonment, Pre-trial justice, Prison conditions, Rehabilitation and reintegration[online] . Available from: http://www.penalreform.org/resource/community-service-africa-alternative-imprisonment/

Beyond Tests: Alternatives in Assessment

AWANG INDRA S. / 107835010 BEYOND TESTS: ALTERNATIVES IN ASSESSMENT This chapter tries to discuss alternative in assessment and the problems found in alternative in assessments. Performance Based Assessment Performance based assessment implies productive, observable skills, such as speaking and writing of content valid tasks.According to O’malley and Valdez Pierce (1996), the characteristics of performance assessment are 1) students make a constructed response, 2) They engage in higher order thinking, with open-ended tasks, 3) tasks are meaningful, engaging and authentic, 4) tasks call for the integration of language skills, 5) both process and product are assessed, 6) depth of a student’s mastery is emphasized over breadth. Portfolios One of the most popular alternatives in assessment, especially within a framework of communicative language teaching, is portfolio development.Portfolios include materials such as: a. Essays and compositions in draft and final forms, b. Reports, project outlines, c. Poetry and creative prose, d. Artwork, photos, newspaper or magazine clippings, e. Audio and/or video recordings of presentations, demonstrations, etc, f. Journals, diaries, and other personal reflection, g. Test, test scores, and written homework exercises, h. Notes on lecturer, i. Self-and peer- assessments-comments, and checklists. Journals A journal is a log or account of one’s thoughts, feelings, reactions, assessment, ideas, or progress toward goals, usually written with little attention to structure, form, or correctness.Categories or purposes in journal writing, such as the following: a. Language learning logs, b. Grammar journals, c. Responses to readings, d. Strategies based learning logs, e. Self-assessment reflections, f. Diaries of attitudes, feelings, and other affective factors, g. Acculturation logs. Conferences Conferences are not limited to drafts of written work including portfolios and journals. Conferences must assume that the teacher plays the role of a facilitator and guide, not of an admini strator, of a formal assessment. Conferences are by nature formative, not summative and their primary purpose is to offer positive washback.Interviews This term is intended to denote a context in which a teacher interviews a student for a designated assessment purpose. Interview may have one or more of several possible goals in which the teacher:1. Assesses the student’s oral production, 2. Ascertains a students need before designing a course of curriculum, 3. Seeks to discover a students’ learning style and preferences, 4. Asks a student to assess his or her own performance, 5. Requests an evaluation of a course.ObservationsAll teachers, whether they are aware of it or not, observe their students in the classroom almost constantly. One of the objectives of such observation is to assess students without their awareness (and possible consequent anxiety) of the observation so that the naturalness of their linguistic performance can be maximized. 7. Self – and Peer Assessments Most successful learners extend the learning process well beyond the classroom and the presence of a teacher or tutor, autonomously mastering the art of self-assessment. Where peers are available to render assessment, the advantage of such additional input is obvious. According to Brown (2004), there are five categories of self and peer assessment:1.Assessment of performance, in this category, a student typically monitors him or herself in either oral or written production and renders some kind of evaluation of performance.2. Indirect assessment of competence, indirect assessment targets larger slices of time with a view to rendering an evaluation of general ability as opposed to one to one specific, relatively time constrained performance.3. Metacognitive assessment for setting goals, some kind evaluation are more strategic in nature, with the purpose not just of viewing past performance or competence but of setting goals and maintaining an eye on the process of their pursuit.4. Socioaffective assessment, yet another type of self and peer assessment comes in the form of methods of examining affective factors in learning. Such assessment is quite different from looking at and planning linguistic aspects of acquisition.5. Student generated tests, a final type of assessment that is not usually classified strictly as self or peer assessment is the technique of engaging students in the process of constructing tests themselves. Guidelines for self-and peer assessmentSelf-and peer assessment are among the best possible formative types of assessment and possibly the most rewarding, but they must be carefully designed and administered for them to reach their potential. Four guidelines will help teachers bring this intrinsically motivating task into the classroom successfully.Tell students the purpose of assessmentDefine the task clearlyEncourage impartial evaluation of performance or abilityEnsure beneficial washback through follow up tasks

Definition and Examples of Lists in Composition

Contract Law Problem Question - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 8 Words: 2484 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Argumentative essay Level High school Tags: Act Essay Contract Law Essay Did you like this example? Contract law problem question – Posh Posters (2500 words) This scenario relates to two companies, Pretty Paintings Limited (â€Å"Paintings†), and Posh Posters Limited (â€Å"Posters†), who are engaged in the poster trade. They have entered into commercial relations with one another in respect of some stock, namely 1000 posters, which Paintings has offered to sell to Posters. This offer has been made by way of a letter to Posters. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Contract Law Problem Question" essay for you Create order We will look at what, if any, contractual obligations and rights have arisen in the dealings between the two parties in respect of this stock. As often happens in commercial relationships, certain problems develop in relation to the delivery of the posters. In order to assess whether either party has contractual recourse in these circumstances will depend on what terms are considered to constitute the contract between the two. We will look at the correspondence between Paintings and Posters in order to establish what terms governed the commercial relationship in order to assess whether Posters is able to bring a claim for breach of contract against Paintings. We will begin by considering the correspondence between the parties chronologically in order to establish what, if anything, constitutes the binding contractual agreement between the two parties. The starting point in any discussion of contractual arrangements is that contracts are fundamentally premised on the fact of agreem ent between the parties; this is, after all, the purpose of contracts. In the present case, for example, there is certainly an agreement between Paintings and Posters that 1000 posters will be sold to Posters by Paintings for a consideration of  £1000. This is not, of course, sufficient on its own to amount to a contract imposing obligations on either party. Furthermore, as Norweb Plc v Dixon (1995) tells us, in order for a contract to be found, the agreement in question must have been entered into voluntarily by the parties (as opposed, for example, to being entered by legal compulsion). It is clearly the case here, however, that the two commercial parties have freely chosen to enter into this commercial relationship. We have seen that the basis of any contractual arrangement, agreement between the parties, is present in this case. We have also seen that this arrangement was entered into through the choice of the parties in question. What, then, were the terms of this agreemen t? Steyn LJ famously considered there to be four important aspects of contract formation in G Percy Trentham Limited v Archital Luxfer Limited (1993). Firstly, English law will generally adopt an objective theory of contract formation.[1] Secondly, in the vast majority of cases, the coincidence of offer and acceptance will represent the mechanism of contract formation. Thirdly, where a transaction has already been performed the court is more likely to find a binding contract, and fourthly in such cases as this, where the contract results from performance, the contract is likely to cover the precontractual performance of the parties.[2] It is the first two of Steyn LJ’s principles that are of relevance to the present circumstances. We must look, objectively, at the relations and dealings between Paintings and Posters in order to assess whether there is a contract between the two, and hence whether Posters has any contractual recourse when the delivery is delayed. Secondly, we should consider whether there was a genuine offer and acceptance with which to analyse the contract. In Gibson v Manchester City Council (1979), Lord Diplock considered the best way of analysing offer and acceptance was on the true construction of the documents.[3] This can be contrasted with an earlier approach adopted by Lord Denning (in the same case in the Court of Appeal), in which Denning had advocated looking at the correspondence as a whole and the conduct of the parties. In the present case, whichever approach is adopted, there is a clear offer made by Paintings to Posters in its letter to Posters. The offer states that Paintings will sell the 1000 posters to Posters â€Å"subject to Pretty Paintings’ terms and conditions†. One such term states that â€Å"in no event shall Pretty Paintings Limited be liable for any delay†. Secondly, the terms and conditions state that no delivery will be made until payment has been received. This is a clear offer. Once the offer is made, the onus is on Posters to accept that offer. This acceptance must be in the form of a final and unqualified acceptance of the precise terms of the offer made. Upon receiving Paintings’ offer, Posters states that it will be â€Å"happy to accept the offer†. In its acceptance letter, however, Posters states that it is accepting for delivery in June 2008, and that all its orders are subject to its terms. This has become a â€Å"battle of the forms†. In Butler Machine Tool Co v Ex-Cell-o Corporation Limited (1979), similar circumstances prevailed. The problem is that in order for a contract to be based upon offer and acceptance, the acceptance must precisely mirror the terms of the offer. In the Butler Machine Tool case, which had considerable similarities to the present one, an offer was made by the plaintiff in respect of the sale of machine tools, which offer was subject to the plaintiff’s terms and conditions. The defendants place d an order which was subject to the defendants’ terms and conditions. The defendants’ order contained a cut-off clip for completion by the plaintiff stating â€Å"we accept your order on the terms and conditions stated thereon.†[4] This slip was completed and returned to the defendants by the plaintiffs. The crucial difference between the plaintiff’s terms and those of the defendants was that the plaintiff’s contained a price variation clause, which the plaintiffs subsequently relied upon. Such a clause was not present in the defendants’ terms, and the defendants refused to pay an increased price claimed by the plaintiffs. When the matter was litigated, it was found in the Court of Appeal that the contract between the plaintiff and the defendants was governed by the defendants’ terms. Upon a conventional offer-and-acceptance analysis, the defendants had never accepted the plaintiff’s â€Å"offer† to sell, because in i ts â€Å"acceptance†, the defendants had imposed additional, different, terms. In Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co (1877), Lord Cairns LC had stated that â€Å"there may be a consensus between the parties far short of a complete mode of expressing it, and that consensus may be discovered from letters or from other documents of an imperfect and incomplete description.†[5] Lord Denning drew upon this in the Butler Machine case, and stated that â€Å"applying this guide, it will be found in most cases where there is a â€Å"battle of forms† there is a contract as soon as the last of the forms is sent and received without objection being taken to it.†[6] The defendants’ â€Å"acceptance†, then, was not an acceptance at all; rather it constituted a rejection of the offer and a counter-offer, which the plaintiff had accepted by returning the cut-off slip. How, then, does this apply to Paintings and Posters? The initial offer was made by Painti ngs subject to its terms and conditions, with no delivery date stated. Posters purported to accept this, subject to its own terms and conditions and with a delivery date of June 2008. adopting the reasoning in the cases mentioned, it is clear that in fact, as between these two letters, there was no acceptance at all. By seeking to impose both a delivery date and make the contract subject to its own terms, Posters in fact rejected Paintings’ offer and made a counter-offer. The position at this stage, then, is that there is in fact no contract between the parties, as no acceptance of identical terms has been made. Again following the facts of the Butler Machine case, Posters’ counter-offer contains a cut-off slip at the bottom, which Paintings signs and returns to Posters. This sounds as though the last form sent and accepted between the parties was Posters’ terms and conditions, which would impose a condition that delivery takes place in June 2008. If this wer e the case, upon Paintings’ failure to deliver the posters in June 2008, Posters would be entitled to repudiate the contract for breach of a condition (discussed below). With the cut-off slip, however, Paintings also sends a covering letter, which states that â€Å"we are happy to confirm your order for delivery in June 2008. However, we really must insist on our terms.† Two weeks after this, Posters makes payment of  £5000 to Paintings in respect of its order. This is now the end of May 2008. Adopting a â€Å"battle of forms† analysis, it would appear that once again the offer has been rejected, and a counter-offer made. There is still, apparently, no agreement on whose terms are to govern the contract. There is a general recognition at common law, however, that to base any finding of a contractual agreement purely on the existence of correspondence is wrong. It is considered that an offer can be accepted also by words and conduct. In Brogden v Metropolita n Railway Co (1877) (referred to above), for example, the two parties who had been engaged in a commercial relationship for the supply of coal agreed to draft a contract governing the terms of their relationship. The draft was never formally accepted, but the relationship continued adhering to the terms of the draft. When relations broke down between the parties, and it was suggested that there was in fact no contract at all because the draft had, albeit inadvertently, never been accepted, the court held that a binding agreement did in fact exist because the parties had treated it as binding and had acted in reliance upon it. In the present case, the last form to be sent was Paintings’ insistence upon its own terms governing. Posters’ payment of the consideration at the end of May 2008 is likely to be seen as assenting to this offer, and to have been made in reliance upon the latest terms. It is worth noting the views of the Vice-Chancellor expressed in Society of L loyd’s v Twinn (2000), which was reported in the Times. He stated that â€Å"there was no reason why an offeree should not accept an offer unconditionally and, at the same time, make a collateral offer to the original offer.†[7] This will, of course, be a question of fact dependant upon the particular circumstances of the case. How does this view influence the present case? It is clear that Paintings’ initial â€Å"offer† was rejected by Posters who made a counter-offer. It is possible that this counter-offer was accepted by Paintings, incorporating a delivery date of June 2008, and its insistence upon its own terms prevailing was in fact a collateral offer. If this is the case, the delivery date of June 2008 will constitute a condition, and the exclusion of liability in Paintings’ terms will not (as this collateral offer was never accepted by Posters). In such circumstances, when delivery is delayed, Posters will have the right to repudiate the co ntract. Assuming that it is found that there is a binding contractual arrangement between Paintings and Posters, what are the actual terms of that agreement? In Paintings’ initial offer, although no time for delivery is stated, one of the standard terms states that Paintings shall not be liable for any delay in delivery. As discussed above, however, this is rejected by Posters, which then counter-offers. It is established at common law that in order for something to be a true term of a contract, it must be intended to be such by the parties (see, for example, Bannerman v White (1861)). It subsequently becomes clear that both parties do include something to be a term of their contract. This relates to the delivery in June 2008, which Paintings states in its letter that it is happy to agree to. Regardless of whose standard terms are found to prevail in governing the contract, it is quite likely that there would, at least, be found to be a collateral contract between Posters and Paintings relating to Paintings delivering the order of posters to Posters in June 2008. This would suggest, then, that whether as a part of the same contract for the sale and purchase of the 1000 posters at  £5 each, or indeed as a collateral contract, there is a contractual obligation upon paintings to deliver the posters in June 2008. This is a term of the contract. Posters has acted in reliance upon this term by making payment for the posters two weeks after receiving Paintings’ second letter. What options are open to Posters now then? On 5 July Posters writes to Paintings stating that it is terminating the contract. Is Posters justified in doing this? In The Mihalis Angelos (1970), it was established that in circumstances where a party breaches a term of a contract, the injured party may choose to repudiate the contract. Whether Posters has the right to repudiate the contract will depend upon whether it is considered that the delivery date (June 2008) was a term or not. As discussed above, it seems that the parties both intended this to be a term and as such, given that Paintings has breached this, Posters is entitled to repudiate the contract. It is not, however, as simple as this. The cases in this area show that some consideration will be given to the seriousness of the breach. Only can the injured party (Posters in this case) treat the contract as repudiated if the breach of the term by Paintings represents a substantial failure of performance. This is illustrated in the case of Poussard v Spiers (1876), in which a singer fell seriously ill prior to the commencement of a three-month run of a show. This was held to enable the defendant to treat the contract as repudiated. In Bettini v Gye (1876), on the other hand, the breach of the term was not considered sufficient to enable the injured party to repudiate. A delay in performance of three days was not considered to prevent substantial performance. In the present case, however, it is likely that time would be considered to be â€Å"of the essence†, and as such, by breaching the delivery term, it is likely that a court would find that Posters was, indeed, able to repudiate the contract and treat it as discharged by Paintings’ breach. BIBLIOGRAPHY Cases Bannerman v White (1861) 10 CBNS 844 Bettini v Gye (1876) 1 QBD 183 Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co (1877) 2 App Cas 666 Butler Machine Tool Co v Ex-Cell-o Corporation Limited [1979] 1 All ER 965 Gibson v Manchester City Council [1979] 1 All ER 972 G Percy Trentham Limited v Archital Luxfer Limited [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 25 Norweb Plc v Dixon [1995] 1 WLR 636 Poussard v Spiers (1876) 1 QBD 410 Society of Lloyd’s v Twinn (2000) Times, 4 April The Mihalis Angelos [1970] 3 All ER 125 Secondary sources McKendrick, E. (2004) Contract Law (London: Palgrave) Poole, J. (2008) Casebook on Contract Law (Oxford: OUP) Footnotes [1] [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 25, per Steyn LJ at 27 [2] Ibid [3] [1979] 1 All ER 972, per Lord Diplock at 974 [4] Quoted at [1979] 1 All ER 965, per Lord Denning MR at 967 [5] (1877) 2 App Cas 666, per Lord Cairns LC at 672 [6] [1979] 1 All ER 965, per Lord Denning MR at 968 [7] Quote in the Times, 4 April 2000