Consistent Crime Control Philosophy and Policy: A Theoretical Analysis

The primary objectives of this analysis are to: articulate clearly the central premises of each of the theories of punishment (retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation) and, to explore the policy implications that flow from each of the justifications. The differences among the theoretical justifications of punishment range from obvious to extremely subtle. This analysis clearly delineates the differing premises of the theories that underlie criminal justice. Attention then turns to the policies that would be pursued if any one of the justifications of punishment were used as the primary basis of the criminal justice system. The major conclusion is that the poli cies derived from the competing theories lead in divergent and often contradictory directions. Finally, bureaucratic accommodations such as plea bargaining are explored in terms of their relationship to the theories of punishment. It is contended that plea bargaining and failure to prosecute multiple charges tend to run counter to all of the justifications of the criminal sanction. The failure to address the policies of criminal justice with reference to the theories of punishment means that the system will have great difficulty achieving any particular goals.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/66475/2/10.1177_073401688601100205.pd