Psychiatric and case-study methods

Bentham approach

Neoclassical school

Preventive approach

TREATMENT OF CRIMINALS

(1) Various correctional approaches developed in the wake of causation theories. The old theological and moralistic theories encouraged punishment as retribution by society for evil. This attitude, indeed, still exists. The 19^th-century British jurist and philosopher Jeremy Bentham tried to make the punishment more precisely fit the crime. Bentham believed that pleasure could be measured against pain in all areas of human choice and conduct and that human happiness could be attained through such hedonic calculus. He argued that criminals would be deterred from crime if they knew, specifically, the suffering they would experience if caught. Bentham therefore urged definite, inflexible penalties for each class of crime; the pain of the penalty would outweigh only slightly the pleasure of success in crime; it would exceed it sufficiently to act as a deterrent, but not so much as to amount to wanton cruelty. This so-called calculus of pleasures and pains was based on psychological postulates no longer accepted.

(2) The Bentham approach was in part superseded in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries by a movement known as the neoclassical school. This school, rejecting fixed punishments, proposed that sentences vary with the particular circumstances of a crime, such as the age, intellectual level, and emotional state of the offender; the motives and other conditions that may have incited to crime; and the offender's past record and chances of rehabilitation. The influence of the neoclassical school led to the development of such concepts as grades of crime and punishment, indeterminate sentences, and the limited responsibility of young or mentally deficient offenders.

(3) At about the same time, the so-called Italian school stressed measures for preventing crime rather than punishing it. Members of this school argued that individuals are shaped by forces beyond their control and therefore cannot be held fully responsible for their crimes.They urged birth control, censorship of pornographic literature, and other actions designed to mitigate the influences contributing to crime. The Italian school has had a lasting influence on the thinking of present-day criminologists.

(4) The modern approach to the treatment of criminals owes most to psychiatric and case-study methods. Much continues to be learned from offenders who have been placed on probation or parole and whose behavior, both in and out of prison, has been studied intensively. The contemporary scientific attitude is that criminals are individual personalities and that their rehabilitation can be brought about only through individual treatment.Increased juvenile crime has aroused public concern and has stimulated study of the emotional disturbances that foster delinquency. This growing understanding of delinquency has contributed to the understanding of criminals of all ages.

(5) During recent years, crime has been under attack from many directions. The treatment and rehabilitation of criminals has improved in many areas. The emotional problems of convicts have been studied and efforts have been made to help such offenders. Much, however, remains to be done. Parole boards have engaged persons trained in psychology and social work to help convicts on parole or probation adjust to society.Various states have agencies with programs of reform and rehabilitation for both adult and juvenile offenders.

Many communities have initiated concerted attacks on the conditions that breed crime. Criminologists recognize that both adult and juvenile crime stem chiefly from the breakdown of traditional social norms and controls, resulting from industrialization, urbanization, increasing physical and social mobility, and the effects of economic crises and wars.Most criminologists believe that effective crime prevention requires community agencies and programs to provide the guidance and control performed, ideally and traditionally, by the family and by the force of social custom. Although the crime rate has not drastically diminished as a result of these efforts, it is hoped that the extension and improvement of all valid approaches to prevention of crime eventually will reduce its incidence.

Exercise 2: Write down the translation of the sentences from the text above given in bold type.

Exercise 3: Find in the text the English equivalents for the following words and expressions:

1. бессмысленная жестокость
2. досрочное освобождение
3. задержание, арест
4. общественные организации
5. ограниченная ответственность
6. освобождение на поруки
7. порождать преступление
8. преступления, совершенные несовершеннолетними
9. привлекать внимание общественности
10. совет по условно-досрочному освобождению
11. упадок традиционных общественных норм

Exercise 4: Give Russian equivalents for the following general types of punishment. Put them in descending order of severity.

• Capital punishment

• Community service

• Disciplinary training in a detention centre

• Fixed penalty fine

• Life imprisonment

• Probation

• Short-term imprisonment

• Suspended sentence

• Long-term imprisonment

Exercise 5: Study the following list of offences. Rate them on a scale from 1 to 10 (1 is a minor offence, 10 is a very serious crime). They are in no particular order. You don't have to apply your knowledge of existing laws — your own opinion is necessary:

□ driving in excess of the speed limit

□ common assault (e.g. a fight in a disco-club)

□ drinking and driving

□ malicious wounding (e.g. stabbing someone in a fight)

□ murdering a policeman during a robbery

□ murdering a child

□ causing death by dangerous driving

□ smoking marijuana

□ selling drugs (such as heroin)

□ stealing £1,000 from a bank by fraud

□ stealing £1,000 worth of goods from someone's home

□ rape

□ grievous bodily harm (almost killing someone)

□ shop-lifting

□ stealing £1,000 from a bank by threatening someone with a gun

□ possession of a gun without a licence

Text 2:Translate the following texts:

Manslaughter

In 1981 Marianne Bachmeir, from Lubeck, West Germany, was in court watching the trial of Klaus Grabowski, who had murdered her 7 year-old daughter. Grabowski had a history of attacking children. During the trial, Frau Bachmeir pulled a Beretta 22 pistol from her handbag and fired eight bullets, six of which hit Grabowski, killing him. The defence said she had bought the pistol with the intention of committing suicide, but when she saw Grabowski in court she drew the pistol and pulled the trigger. She was found not guilty of murder, but was given six years imprisonment for manslaughter. West German newspapers reflected the opinion of millions of Germans that she should have been freed, calling her 'the avenging mother'.

Crime of Passion

Bernard Lewis, a thirty-six-old man, while preparing dinner became involved in an argument with his drunken wife. In a fit of a rage Lewis, using the kitchen knife with which he had been preparing the meal, stabbed and killed his wife. He immediately called for assistance, and readily confessed when the first patrolman appeared on the scene with the ambulance attendant. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The probation department's investigation indicated that Lewis was a rigid individual who never drank, worked regularly, and had no previous criminal record. His thirty-year-old deceased wife, and mother of three children, was a 'fine girl' when sober but was frequently drunk and on a number of occasions when intoxicated had left their small children unattended. After due consideration of the background of the offence and especially of the plight of the three motherless youngsters, the judge placed Lewis on probation so that he could work, support and take care of the children. On probation Lewis adjusted well, worked regularly, appeared to be devoted to the children, and a few years later was discharged as 'improved' from probation.

Murder

In 1952 two youths in Mitcham, London, decided to rob a dairy. They were Christopher Craig, aged 16, and Derek William Bentley, 19. During the robbery they were disturbed by Sydney Miles, a policeman. Craig produced a gun and killed the policeman. At that time Britain still had the death penalty for certain types of murder, including murder during a robbery. Because Craig was under 18, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. Bently who had never touched the gun, was over 18. He was hanged in 1953. The case was quoted by opponents of capital punishment, which was abolished in 1965.

Assault

In 1976 a drunk walked into a supermarket. When the manager asked him to leave, the drunk assaulted him, knocking out a tooth. A policeman who arrived and tried to stop the fight had his jaw broken. The drunk was fined 10 pounds.

Shop-lifting

In June 1980 Lady Isabel Barnett, a well-known TV personality was convicted of stealing a tin of tuna fish and a carton of cream, total value 87p, from a small shop. The case was given enormous publicity. She was fined 75 pounds and had to pay 200 pounds towards the cost of the case. A few days later she killed herself.

Fraud

This is an example of a civil case rather than a criminal one, A man had taken out an insurance policy of 100,000 pounds on his life. The policy was due to expire at 3 o'clock on a certain day. The man was in serious financial difficulties, and at 2.30 on the expire day he consulted his solicitor. He then went out and called a taxi. He asked the driver to make a note of the time, 2.50. He then shot himself. Suicide used not to cancel an insurance policy automatically. (It does nowadays.) The company refused to pay the man's wife, and the courts supported them.

UNIT 15. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

Text 1: Match the following headings with the sections of the text below:

• Effectiveness

• History

• Moral aspect

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: HISTORY

(1) Capital punishment is a legal infliction of the death penalty, in modern law, corporal punishment in its most severe form. The usual alternative to the death penalty is long-term or life imprisonment.

The earliest historical records contain evidence of capital punishment. It was mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi. The Bible prescribed death as the penalty for more than 30 different crimes, ranging from murder to fornication. The Draconian Code of ancient Greece imposed capital punishment for every offence.

In England, during the reign of William the Conqueror, the death penalty was not used, although the results of interrogation and torture were often fatal. By the end of the 15^th century, English law recognized six major crimes: treason, murder, larceny; burglary, rape, and arson. By 1800, more than 200 capital crimes were recognized, and as a result, 1000 or more persons were sentenced to death each year (although most sentences were commuted by royal pardon). In early American colonies the death penalty was commonly authorized for a wide variety of crimes. Blacks, whether slave or free, were threatened with death for many crimes that were punished less severely when committed by whites.

Efforts to abolish the death penalty did not gather momentum until the end of the 18^th century. In Europe, a short treatise, On Crimes and Punishments, by the Italian jurist Cesare Beccaria, inspired influential thinkers such as the French philosopher Voltaire to oppose torture, flogging, and the death penalty.

The abolition of capital punishment in England in November 1965 was welcomed by most people with humane and progressive ideas. To them it seemed a departure from feudalism, from the cruel pre-Christian spirit of revenge: an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Many of these people think differently now. Since the abolition of capital punishment crime — and especially murder — has been on increase throughout Britain. Today, therefore, public opinion in Britain has changed. People who before, also in Parliament, stated that capital punishment was not a deterrent to murder — for there have always been murders in all countries with or without the law of execution — now feel that killing the assassin is the lesser of two evils. Capital punishment, they think, may not be the ideal answer, but it is better than nothing, especially when, as in England, a sentence of life imprisonment only lasts eight or nine years.

(2)The fundamental questions raised by the death penalty are whether it is an effective deterrent to violent crime, and whether it is more effective than the alternative of long-term imprisonment.

DEFENDERS of the death penalty insist that because taking an offender's life is a more severe punishment than any prison term, it must be the better deterrent. SUPPORTERS also argue that no adequate deterrent in life imprisonment is effective for those already serving a life term who commit murder while being in prison, and for revolutionaries, terrorists, traitors, and spies.

In the U.S. those who argue against the death penalty as a deterrent to crime cite the following: (1) Adjacent states, in which one has a death penalty and the other does not, show no significant differences in the murder rate; (2) states that use the death penalty seem to have a higher number of homicides than states that do not use it; (3) states that abolish and then reintroduce the death penalty do not seem to show any significant change in the murder rate; (4) no change in the rate of homicides in a given city or state seems to occur following an expository execution.

In the early 1970s, some published reports showed that each execution in the U.S. deterred eight or more homicides, but subsequent research has discredited this finding. The current prevailing view among criminologists is that no conclusive evidence exists to show that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent to violent crime than long-term imprisonment.

(3)The classic moral arguments in favor of the death penalty have been biblical and call for retribution. "Whosoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" has usually been interpreted as a divine warrant for putting the murderer to death. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is its secular counterpart; both statements imply that the murderer deserves to die. DEFENDERS of capital punishment have also claimed that society has the right to kill in defense of its members, just as the individual may kill in self-defense. The analogy to self-defense, however, is somewhat doubtful, as long as the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent to violent crimes has not been proved.

The chief objection to capital punishment has been that it is always used unfairly, in at least three major ways. First, women are rarely sentenced to death and executed, even though 20 per cent of all homicides in recent years have been committed by women. Second, a disproportionate number of non-whites are sentenced to death and executed. Third, poor and friendless defendants, those with inexperienced or court-appointed attorney, are most likely to be sentenced to death and executed. DEFENDERS of the death penalty, however, have insisted that, because none of the laws of capital punishment causes sexist, racist, or class bias in its use, these kinds of discrimination are not a sufficient reason for abolishing the death penalty. OPPONENTS have replied that the death penalty can be the result of a mistake in practice and that it is impossible to administer fairly.

Exercise 1: Find in the text the English equivalents for the following words and expressions related to punishment:

1. возмездие
2. долгосрочное тюремное заключение
3. допрос
4. отбыть срок в тюрьме
5. отмена смертной казни
6. пожизненное тюремное заключение
7. показательная казнь
8. приговаривать к смерти
9. пытка
10. смягчить приговор
11. телесные наказания

Exercise 2: Translate the following passage into English paying special attention to the words in bold type:

На протяжении веков смертная казнь назначалась засамые разные виды преступлений. В середине века человека могли казнить за хищение имущества, изнасилованиеи даже поджог. Государственная измена была и остается во многих странах преступлением, наказуемым смертной казнью. Существует мнение, что даже долгосрочное или пожизненное тюремное заключение является бессмысленным наказанием для так называемых «идеологических» преступников: предателей, шпионов, террористов. Смертная казнь для такого рода преступников – меньшее из двух зол.

Exercise 3: Continue the table below with the following words and expressions describing polar views. The first few are done for you:

FOR	AGAINST
proponent to argue in favour of amth.	opponent to argue against smth.

● con ● to consent to smth.

● defender ● to contradict to smth.

● pro ● to accept smth.

● supporter ● to disagree with smth.

● to deny smth. ● to agree to/with smth.

● to admit smth. ● to oppose smth.

● to object to smth. ● to confirm smth.

● to reject smth.

Exercise 4: Translate the following famous statements:

AGAINST	FOR
1. “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth!” – This is a cruel pre-Christian spirit of revenge. We are civilized now – let’s give it up and be humane!...	1. “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth!” – We should admit this Biblical principle. It’s eternal!...
2. “Let the punishment fit the crime”- We can not accept fixed punishments for crimes. Circumstances should be taken into account.	2. “Let the punishment fit the crime”- Those who steal should be deprived of their property, those who kill should be deprived of their own lives!
3. “It is much more prudent to acquit two persons, though actually guilty, than to pass a sentence oа condemnation on one that is virtuous and innocent.” (Voltaire)	3. “The pain of the penalty should outweigh only slightly the pleasure of success in crime.” (J. Bentham)
4. “An evil deed is not redeemed by an evil deed of retaliation.” (C.S. King)	4. “The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is to redress the disorder caused by the offence.” (Pope John Paul II)
	5. “Whosoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” (The Bible)

Text 2: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: FOR AND AGAINST

Perhaps all criminals should be required to carry cards which read: "Fragile: Handle With Care". It will never do, these days, to go around referring to criminals as violent thugs. You must refer to them politely as 'social misfits'. The professional killer who wouldn't think twice about using his cosh or crowbar to batter some harmless old lady to death in order to rob her of her meagre life-savings must never be given a dose of his own medicine. He is in need of 'hospital treatment'. According to his misguided defenders, society is to blame. A wicked society breeds evil — or so the argument goes. When you listen to this kind of talk, it makes you wonder why we aren't all criminals. We have done away with the absurdly harsh laws of the nineteenth century and this is only right. But surely enough is enough. The most senseless piece of criminal legislation in Britain and a number of other countries has been the suspension of capital punishment.

The violent criminal has become a kind of hero-figure in our time. He is glorified on the screen; he is pursued by the press and paid vast sums of money for his 'memoirs'. Newspapers which specialize in crime-reporting enjoy enormous circulations and the publishers of trashy cops and robbers stories or 'murder mysteries' have never had it so good. When you read about the achievements of the great train robbers, it makes you wonder whether you are reading about some glorious resistance movement. The hardened criminal is cuddled and cosseted by the sociologists on the one hand and adored as a hero by the masses on the other. It's no wonder he is a privileged person who expects and receives VIP treatment wherever he goes.

Capital punishment used to be a major deterrent. It made the violent robber think twice before pulling the trigger. It gave the cold-blooded poisoner something to ponder about while he was shaking up or serving his arsenic cocktail. It prevented unarmed policemen from being mowed down while pursuing their duty by killers armed with automatic weapons. Above all, it protected the most vulnerable members of society, young children, from brutal sex-maniacs. It is horrifying to think that the criminal can literally get away with murder. |We all know that 'life sentence' does not mean what it says. After ten years or so of 'good conduct', the most desperate villain is free to return to society where he will live very comfortably, thank you, on the proceeds of his crime, or he will go on committing offences until he is caught again. People are always willing to hold liberal views at the expense of others. It's always fashionable to pose as the defender of the under-dog, so long as you, personally, remain unaffected. Did the defenders of crime, one wonders, in their desire for fair-play, consult the victims before they suspended capital punishment? Hardly. You see, they couldn't, because all the victims were dead.

Exercise 5: Explain the meaning of the following words and expressions:

• a brutal sex-maniac • to batter

• a cold-blooded poisoner • to breed evil

• a desperate villain • to cosset

• a hardened criminal • to cuddle

• a professional killer • to deter criminals

• a social misfit • to do away with

• a train robber • to get away with murder

• a violent criminal • to go on committing offences

• a violent robber • to mow down

• a violent thug • to think twice

• to pull the trigger

• to rob

Exercise 6: Read the text below and translate it paying special attention to the words and expressions in bold type.

Пришло время отменить смертную казнь. С каждым годом это становится все более очевидным. Опыт всех стран показывает, что смертная казнь приводит к ожесточению в обществе. В ряде стран смертные приговоры применяются в основном к представителям неимущих слоев населениялибо расовыхили этнических меньшинств.

В некоторых странах смертная казнь считается мерой, без которой невозможно остановить распространение наркотиков,ликвидировать политический терроризм, экономическую коррупциюили искоренить супружескую неверность. Однако нет никаких доказательств, что ее применение способно снизить уровень преступности илиполитического насилия. Смертную казнь часто используют как средство политических репрессий, а смертные приговоры выносятся и приводятся в исполнение произвольно.

Оправдывая смертную казнь, чаще всего говорят, что она необходима, по крайней мере временно, для блага общества.

Однако имеет ли государство право лишать человека жизни?

Смертная казнь – это предумышленное и хладнокровное убийство человека государством. Само существование этой меры наказания является попранием основных прав человека: международное право запрещает жестокие, негуманные или унижающие человека наказания.

Многовековой опыт применения высшей меры наказания и научные исследования о взаимосвязи смертной казни и уровня преступности не дали убедительных доказательств, что смертная казнь способна эффективно защитить общество от преступности или способствовать правосудию. Ни одна система уголовной юстиции не доказала свою способность последовательно и справедливо решать, кто должен жить и кто – умереть. Некоторым удается избежать смертной казни с помощью квалифицированных защитников; другим – потому что их судят мягкосердечные судьи или присяжные; третьим помогают их политически связи или положение в обществе.

Существует определенный процент судебных ошибок, последствия которых особенно трагичны при приведении смертного приговора в исполнение.

Text 3: Translate the following facts and arguments:

Financial Costs

The death penalty is not now, nor has it ever been, a more economical alternative to life imprisonment. A murder trial normally takes much longer when the death penalty is at issue than when it is not. Litigation costs — including the time of judges, prosecutors, public defenders, and court reporters, and the high costs of briefs — are all borne by the taxpayer.

Inevitability of Error

In 1975, only a year before the Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of capital punishment, two African-American men in Florida were released from prison after twelve years awaiting execution for the murder of two white men. Their convictions were the result of coerced confessions, erroneous testimony of an alleged eyewitness, and incompetent defense counsel. Though a white man eventually admitted his guilt, a nine-year legal battle was required before the governor would grant them a pardon. Had their execution not been stayed while the constitutional status of the death penalty was argued in the courts, these two innocent men probably would not be alive today.

Barbarity

The latest mode of inflicting the death penalty, enacted into law by nearly two dozen American states, is lethal injection, first used in Texas in 1982. It is easy to overstate the humaneness and efficacy of this method. There is no way of knowing that it is really painless. As the U.S. Court of Appeals observed, there is "substantial and uncontroverted evidence ... that execution by lethal injection poses a serious risk of cruel, protracted death.... Even a slight error in dosage or administration can leave a prisoner conscious but paralyzed while dying, a sentient witness of his or her own asphyxiation."

Deterrence

Gangland killings, air piracy, drive-by shootings, and kidnapping for ransom are among the graver felonies that continue to be committed because some individuals think they are too clever to get caught. Political terrorism is usually committed in the name of an ideology that honors its martyrs; trying to cope with it by threatening terrorists with death penalty is futile.

Exercise 7: “Pros” and “Cons” for capital punishment

Cons (against)	Pros (for)
It’s useless.Statistics demonstrates that its retention or suppression has no effect on the number of crimes committed. Furthermore, the death of the offender neither benefits anyone nor restores anything. For example, if a 40-year-old man, who has no family, no money and no home kills a 20-year-old student who has parents, who is young, happy and has all his life ahead, would the capital punishment be fair or would it compensate anything?	The murderer is a threat to society and society must protect itself
It’s immoral. The criminal may be a pervert, mentally sick or be not adequate in some other ways. Furthermore there’s always the possibility of an error of judgment which is totally uncorrectable.	The death of one offender should be the frightening example for another one.
It’s unnecessary.For the defense of society it is enough to shut the offender away.	That very offender who was sentenced will never escape or repeat his offence again. Furthermore, the murderer is able to manipulate other people from inside the prison and make them commit murders or other offences.
It’s pessimistic.Death penalty means that we deny all the possibilities of redemption that we refuse to admit that we may change or improve.	Society has the right to kill in defense of its members, just as individual may kill in self-defense.
It’s unjust. A competitive and consumer society makes its weak members scapegoats for sins which belong largely to society as a whole.	Because taking an offenders life is a more severe punishment than any prison term, it must be the better deterrent.
It’s antichristian. The general orientation of the Bible is clearly in favour of life, forgiveness and hope. And it is to be applied not only to the conduct of the individual but also to the whole society. Revenge and murder are not Christian notions.	No adequate deterrent in life imprisonment is effective for those already serving a life term who commit murder while being in prison, and for revolutionaries, terrorists, traitors, and spies.
We shouldn’t be blinded over emotional arguments: glorification of criminal on screen, etc., irrelevant.
Those in favour of capital punishment are motivated only by desire for revenge and retaliation.
Hanging, electric chairs, garroting, etc., are barbaric practices, unworthy of human beings.
Capital punishment creates, it does not solve, problems. Solution lies elsewhere: society is to blame. Overcrowding, slums, poverty, broken homes: these are the factors that lead to crime. Crime can only be drastically reduced by the elimination of social injustices – not by creating so-called “deterrents” when the real problems remain unsolved.

Text 4: ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

The quantity of countries which submit a plan for abolishing the capital punishment increases quickly. At the end of 1995 capital punishment was abolished in 72 countries (among which are Greece, Italy, the USA, Romania, Hungary, Russia, Spain, the South African Republic) and in 90 countries it is still preserved. At the same time the evolution in this direction is not occurring everywhere. In some countries we can see the opposite tendencies: either to restore capital punishment (as in 2 states of the USA) or to enlarge the sphere it is applied to (Korea, China, Nigeria and some Arabian countries). While examining the question concerning capital punishment, the journalists made inquires and cited statistics (80% are for the implementation of capital punishment, and 12% are for life imprisonment).

The following analysis enables us to differentiate the attitude towards capital punishment among the different social groups. As it turned out the men are more likely to be the defenders of capital punishment, but at the same time 77% of women are usual victims. There are not so many supporters of capital punishment among coloured people (2 times as little as among whites). With the increase of age the quantity of the voters against capital punishment visibly decreases while the great quantity of its supporters is youth. The explanation of such a conformity depends upon the fact that 25% of all the victims are young people at the age of 18-24. The inhabitants of rural districts and suburbs vote for capital punishment.

The most interesting is the statistics which reflects the connection between the attitude to the capital punishment and religious convictions. Among the supporters of capital punishment there are 27% of Christians and 10% of the representatives of Moslems.

The most important reason for the implementation of capital punishment is enormous expenditures on maintenance of the offenders in jails. The second one is insecurity of citizens, disbelief in the legal system.

The reasons against capital punishment are: there is always the fear of the jury error and also the psychologists made the research work and proved that neither the implementation nor the abolishment of capital punishment influence the dynamics of felonies.

There was another point for discussion – for whom the discounts should be made. The world community decided to abate pregnant women, mentally deficient people, juveniles, elderly people. They voted for the change of capital punishment into life imprisonment. In accordance with our legislation capital punishment is not implemented to pregnant women as the lawyers make a discount to their emotional and physical state, but statistics shows that they commit crimes driven to the despair by their husbands for the sake of children. As far as juveniles are concerned, some countries increased the age of implementation up to 20 or 22, but again statistics shows that the most brutal, cruel crimes are committed in adolescence. Every case concerning juveniles is supposed to be examined individually. But here the jury must take into account the juveniles’ emotional state, they just act according to emotions, outbursts while committing crimes.

Тексты для дополнительного чтения и перевода

Содержание:

PART I

TEXT 1: A GLIMPSE OF BRITISH POLITICAL HISTORY………………………..141

TEXT 2: THE ENGLISH POLITICAL HERITAGE………………………………….142

TEXT 3: THE IDEAS OF JOHN LOCKE…………………………………………….142

TEXT 4: THE LEGAL HERITAGE OF FRANCE……………………………………143

TEXT 5: THE ROOTS OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT…………………………...143

TEXT 6: THE INDIAN SELF-GOVERNMENT IN NORTH AMERICA……………144

TEXT 7: GOVERNMENT IN THE COLONIES……………………………………...145

TEXT 8: COLONIAL LEGISLATURES……………………………………………...145

TEXT 9: COLONIAL SELF-GOVERNMENT………………………........................146

TEXT 10: DEMOCRACY……………………………………………………………...146

TEXT 11: ELEMENTS OF DEMOCRACY…………………………………………...147

TEXT 12: CHARACTERISTICS OF DEMOCRACY………………………………...147

TEXT 13: THE SOIL OF DEMOCRACY……………………………………………..148

TEXT 14: OLIGARCHY……………………………………………………………….148

TEXT 15: AUTOCRACY……………………………………………….......................149

TEXT 16: THE AMERICAN CIVIL SERVICE……………………………………….150

TEXT 17: THE ORIGINS OF THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM……………………..150

TEXT 18: THE CONCEPT OF BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE……………………..151

TEXT 19: US CONGRESS RULES...............................………………………………151

TEXT 20: LAWMAKING IN THE SENATE…………………………………………152

TEXT 21: CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT……………………………………..152

TEXT 22: VOTING IN THE USA……………………………………………………..153

TEXT 23: PARTIES AND PARTY SYSTEMS……………………………………….153

TEXT 24: RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS………154

TEXT 25: PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED………………………154

TEXT 26: CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT………………………………..155

TEXT 27: FREEDOM OF THE PRESS……………………………………………….156

TEXT 28: FREE PRESS AND FAIR TRIAL………………………………………….156

TEXT 29: FREEDOM OF SPEECH…………………………………………………...157

TEXT 30: FREEDOM OF RELIGION………………………………………………...157

TEXT 31: MASS MEDIA IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY………………………….158

TEXT 32: THE PENTAGON PAPERS………………………………………………..158

TEXT 33: WATERGATE……………………………………………….......................159

TEXT 34: LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN BRITAIN…..159

TEXT 35: CHARLES I AND THE CIVIL WAR……………………………………...160

TEXT 36: THE ROYALISTS AND THE PARLIAMENTARIANS………………….161

TEXT 37: THE END OF THE CIVIL WAR…………………………………………..161

TEXT 38: THE HISTORY OF SPEAKERSHIP IN BRITAIN………………………..162

TEXT 39: THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS………........................162

TEXT 40: THE SPEAKER'S DUTIES………………………………….......................163

TEXT 41: DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS………………………………163

TEXT 42: UNPARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE…………………………………….164

PART II.

FAMOUS LEGAL DOCUMENTS THROUGHOUT HISTORY (EXTRACTS)

TEXT 1: Hammurabi's Code of Laws (1758 B.C.)……………………………………..……...130

TEXT 2: The Laws of William the Conqueror (1066 - 1087)……………………….......……..131

TEXT 3: The Magna Carta (1215)………………………………………………………..……132

TEXT 4: The Petition of Rights (1628)………………………………………………..……….135

TEXT 5: The English Bill of Rights (1689)………………………………………..…………..137

TEXT 6: The U.S. Declaration of Independence (1776)……………………………………….141

TEXT 7: The U.S. Bill of Rights (1791)…………………………………..…………………...142

TEXT 8: European Prison Rules (1990s)………………………………………………..……..143

PHILOSOPHERS OF LAW

TEXT 9: Sir Thomas More, 1478 - 1535………………...……………………………………..148

TEXT 10: John Locke, 1632 - 1704…………………………………...……………………….148

TEXT 11: Charles-Louis de Secondat Montesquieu, 1689 - 1755…………….……..………...149

TEXT 12: Voltaire, 1694 - 1778…………………………………………….……………….....149

TEXT 13: Jeremy Bentham, 1748 - 1832……………….………………………..…………….150

NOTORIOUS CRIMINALS

TEXT 14: Cain…………………………………………………………………...……………..152

TEXT 15: Marcus Junius Brutus, 85 - 42 B.C., Gaius Longinus Cassius, d. 42 B.C…….…….152

TEXT 16: Caligula, A.D. 12 - 41……………………………………………………...……….152

TEXT 17: Colonia Agrippina, A.D. 16 - 59……………….………………..………………….152

TEXT 18: Guy Fawkes, 1570 - 1606………………………...………………………………...153

TEXT 19: Captain William Kidd, 1645 - 1701……………………………...…………………153

TEXT 20: Alessandro Cagliostro, 1743 - 1795………………………………...……………...153

TEXT 21: Billy the Kid (William Bonny), 1860 - 1881………………………..……………...153

TEXT 22: Jack the Ripper ………………………………..…………………………………...154

TEXT 23: Roy Bean, d. 1903……………………………………………..……………………154

TEXT 24: Butch Cassidy, 1866—1910 and the Sundance Kid, d. 1910………………...……..154

TEXT 25: Mata Hari (born Gertruda Margarete Zelle), 1876—1917 …………………………154

TEXT 26: Captain Alfred Dreyfus, 1859—1935………………………………………………155

TEXT 27: Lizzie Borden, 1860—1927………………………………………………………...155

TEXT 28: Dr. Hawley Harvey Crippen, 1882—1910………………………….........................155

TEXT 29: Bonnie and Clyde (Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow), d. 1934………………..…..156

TEXT 30: 'Ma' Barker, d. 1935……………………………………………..………………….156

TEXT 31: Bruno Hauptmann, d. 1936……………………………………………..…………..156

TEXT 32: Hans Van Meegeren, 1889—1947………………………………….........................157

TEXT 33: Alphonse Capone, 1899—1947…………………………………….........................157

TEXT 34: 'Lucky Luciano', 1897—1962………………………………………………………157

TEXT 35: Frank Costello, 1891—1973………………………………………………………..157

TEXT 36: George Blake, b. 1922………………………………………………………………158

TEXT 37: Lee Harvey Oswald, 1940—1963…………………………………………………..158

FAMOUS DETECTIVES

TEXT 38: Father Brown………………………………………………………………………..159

TEXT 39: Sherlock Holmes……………………………………………………………………159

TEXT 40: Ellery Queen ………………………………………………………………………..159

TEXT 41: Hercules Poirot……………………………………………………………………...159

TEXT 42: Inspector Jules Maigret……………………………………………………………...160

TEXT 43: Perry Mason ………………………………………………………………………...160

THE STUPIDEST CRIMINALS

TEXT 44: Bank Bobbers……………………………………………………………………….161

TEXT 45: MuggersThieves…………………………………………………….........................162

TEXT 46: Thieves……………………………………………………………………………...162

TEXT 47: Escape Artists……………………………………………………….........................163

TEXT 48: Shop-Lifters………………………………………………………………………...163

TEXT 49: Robbers……………………………………………………………………………...164

TEXT 50: Burglars……………………………………………………………………………..164

TEXT 51: 'Miscellaneous' Crooks……………………………………………………………...165

TEXT 52: Outrageous Lawsuits………………………………………………………………..165

PART I.