Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**files (4)**
– ## Discussion1520.docx
– ## Chapter1.pdf
– Chapter31.pdf
– Chapter2.pdf
**## Discussion1520.docx**
**Due 8/21/2026**
**500 words for references, use open access articles**
Review the Case Study Options. Conduct a cursory internet search identifying three (3) different real-world initiatives or programs that align with the case study options. Provide a brief overview of the initiative or program and explain how the program aligns with the selected case study category.
The case study option is:
**Focus on a reentry initiative that bridges corrections and community service.**
**## Chapter1.pdf**
Justice Administration: Police,
Courts, and Corrections Management
Tenth Edition
Chapter 1
The Study and Scope of
Justice Administration
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Why Study Justice Administration?
• Administration is a science that can be taught, not a talent
one must be born with.
• Often learned through on-the-job training.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Roles
• Administrator
– The person who focuses on the overall organization,
its mission, acquisition and use of resources, and
agency relationships with external organizations and
groups.
• Manager
– Persons (captains, lieutenants) in the intermediate
level of management, responsible for carrying out the
policies and directives of upper-level administrators
and supervising subordinate managers and
employees.
• Supervisor
– Persons (sergeants) typically in the field who plan,
organize, and direct staff members in their duties.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A True System of Justice?
• Each system component—police, courts, and
corrections—has varying degrees of responsibility and
discretion for dealing with crime.
• Relations among and between these components are
often characterized by friction, conflict, and deficient
communication.
• This criticism of the justice system or process—that it is
fragmented and rife with role conflicts and other
problems—is a common refrain.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
• Our C J S may not be a system at all.
– May be better described as a criminal justice process.
• It involves the decisions and actions taken by an
institution, offender, victim, or society that influence the
offender's movement into, through, or out of the justice
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
• At one end of this process are the police.
– View primary role as getting lawbreakers off the street.
• At the other end are the corrections officials.
– View their role as being primarily custodial in nature.
• Somewhere in between are the courts that try to ensure a
fair application of the law to each case.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
• In criminal justice planning jargon, "You can't rock one
end of the boat without it affecting another part.”
– Every action has a reaction, especially in the justice
process.
– Actions and reactions of each component will send
ripples throughout the process.
• Fragmentation exists among the components and within
the individual components.
– This contributes to much of the failure to deal with
crime effectively.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
• Others argue that U.S. justice systems constitute a
criminal justice network.
• The justice system’s components cooperate and share
similar goals but operate largely independently and
compete for funding.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
• The criminal justice network is said to be based on several
key, yet erroneous, assumptions:
1. The components of the network cooperate and share
similar goals.
2. The network operates according to a set of formal
procedural rules to ensure uniform treatment of all
persons, the outcome of which constitutes justice.
3. Each person accused of a crime receives due
process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
4. Each person receives a speedy public trial before an
impartial jury of their peers and is represented by
competent legal counsel.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
• Reasons the assumptions are erroneous:
1. The three components have incompatible goals and
continually compete with one another for dollars.
2. Evidence indicates that individuals of different races,
genders, and classes receive differential treatment in
the criminal justice network.
3. Some persons are prosecuted, some are not; some
are involved in plea bargaining, others are not; some
are convicted and sent to prison, whereas other
convicted persons are not.
4. The current backlog of cases does not ensure a
speedy trial, even though a vast majority (at least
90%) of all arrestees plead guilty prior to trial.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(1 of 3)
• Many observers argue that the components of the C J S
comprise a criminal justice nonsystem.
– The police, courts, and corrections do not function
harmoniously.
– They are not a coordinated structure.
– They are neither efficient nor fair enough to create fear
of punishment or respect for its values.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(2 of 3)
• Cohn and Udolf stated that criminal justice "is not a
system, and it has little to do with justice as that term is
ordinarily understood.“
• Wright and Fox asserted that "the criminal justice
system… is frequently criticized because it is not a
coordinated structure—not really a system. In many ways
this is true."
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(3 of 3)
• System fragmentation is believed to affect the amount and
type of crime that exists in the U.S.
– Involves the view that members of C J S agencies have
tremendous discretion and their own perception of the
offender.
– Fragmentation results in goal conflict: polarity in
identifying and establishing the primary goals of the
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice
System?
• The justice system elements work and interact to
function like a process, a network, or even a
nonsystem.
• However, it may still constitute a true system.
• It may be that a very efficient system may not be what
a democracy wants or needs.
• Given the decentralized and fragmented nature of the
C J S, coordination, unification, and communication will
always be lacking.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
From Nonsystem to System
Redefining Performance Measures
• Despite the C J S being decentralized and fragmented,
there is a set of common goals.
• DiIulio advocates for a democratic vision of the C J S that
includes doing justice, securing communities, restoring
crime victims, and promoting noncriminal options.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (1 of 5)
• U.S. society has innumerable lawbreakers.
– Most are easily handled by the police, do not challenge the
legitimacy of the law when arrested and incarcerated, or
challenge the system of government that enacts the laws or
agencies that carry them out.
• According to John Locke, people were created by God to be
free, equal, independent, and with inherent inalienable rights to
life, liberty, and property.
– Each person has the right of self-protection against those
who would infringe on these liberties.
– Although most people are good, some will likely prey on
others, who in turn would constantly have to be on guard
against such evildoers.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (2 of 5)
• In Locke's view, people join together and form
governments to which they surrender their right of self-
protection.
• In return, they receive governmental protection of their
lives, property, and liberty.
• Each side has benefits and considerations:
– People give up their right to protect themselves and
receive protection in return.
– Governments give protection and receive loyalty and
obedience in return.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (3 of 5)
• Locke believed the chief purpose of government was the
protection of property
– Locke's theory of tacit consent: "Every Man . . . doth hereby
give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to
Obedience to the Laws of the Government.”
– This essentially describes an association of landowners
• Thomas Hobbes – social contract theory
– People are essentially irrational and selfish but have
enough rationality to come together to form governments
for self-protection.
– People exist in a state of consensus with their
governments.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (4 of 5)
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a conflict theorist, argued that
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.“
– Described conflict between the ruling group and the
other groups in society.
– Differed from Locke, who described consensus within
the ruling group.
• The primary difference between consensus and conflict
theorists concerns their evaluation of the legitimacy of the
actions of ruling groups in contemporary societies.
– Differences is important because it involves the
competing views of humankind toward its ruling group.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (5 of 5)
• Consensus model:
– The view of the criminal justice system in which it is
assumed that all parts of the system work toward a
common goal.
• Conflict model:
– The view that actors within the criminal justice system
are self-serving, with pressures for success, promotion,
and general accountability and resulting in fragmented
efforts.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Crime Control vs. Due Process
• Due process model
– The idea that the accused should be presumed
innocent and have their rights protected, while police
must act only in accordance with the Constitution.
• Crime control model
– A philosophy that states crime must be repressed, the
accused presumed guilty, legal loopholes eliminated,
offenders swiftly punished, and police and prosecutors
given a high degree of discretion.
• Neither model completely dominates a particular
community or controls U.S. crime policy.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Due Process Model
1. C J must provide due process, fairness, and a focus on
defendants’ rights, as provided in the Bill of Rights.
2. Police powers should be limited to prevent oppression.
3. Constitutional rights aren’t “technicalities,” so
police/prosecutors should be held accountable to ensure
fairness.
4. The C J process should resemble an obstacle course,
with impediments/safeguards to protect the innocent and
convict the guilty
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Crime Control Model
1. The repression of crime is of utmost importance, to provide order.
2. C J focus should be on helping victims rather than on defendants’
rights.
3. Police powers should be expanded, legal technicalities eliminated,
for ease of arrest, search and seizure, conviction.
4. The C J process should operate like an assembly line, moving cases
through swiftly.
5. There should generally be a presumption of guilt of the accused
(and police/prosecutors’ views trusted).
Note: No city will be wholly in one or the other model; also, the political climate determines
which model shapes criminal justice policy at a specific point in time.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Public vs. Private Sector
Administration
• Private businesses and corporations can use various
extrinsic (external) rewards to motivate and reward their
employees.
– Examples: financial bonuses, private office, key to the
executive washroom, paid trips, company car, awards,
expense account, membership in country clubs and
organizations, prestigious job title, etc.
• People working in the public sector must acquire job
satisfaction primarily through intrinsic (internal) rewards:
– Examples: doing work that is gratifying and intrinsically
making them feel good about themselves and what
they accomplish.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(1 of 3)
• In the past, change in criminal justice agencies typically
occurred slowly and incrementally.
• Today, change is a constant rather than an exception.
• If unplanned, programs will often fail, result in negative
consequences in the workplace, and have severe
repercussions on other C J S components.
– Three-strikes laws
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(2 of 3)
• Change in criminal justice should not—and typically does
not—occur accidentally or haphazardly.
– Justice administrators must know how to plan,
implement, and evaluate interventions that address
problems in their organizations/systems while
considering all other components.
• Planned change is a rational approach that involves
problem analysis, setting goals and objectives, program
and policy design, developing an action plan, and
monitoring and evaluation.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(3 of 3)
• Creating a policy is one way to effect planned change.
• Policies vary in complexity and in the amount of discretion
given to those who apply them.
• Policymaking involves:
1) Developing plans that are used by an organization or
government as a basis for making decisions;
2) Establishing rules, principles, or guidelines to govern
actions by ordinary citizens and persons in positions
of authority.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Force-Field Analysis
• C J organizations always have barriers and resistance to
change.
– Such barriers may be physical, social, financial, legal,
political, and/or technological in nature.
• Force-field analysis is a technique for identifying sources
of resistance and support that involves:
1. Identifying driving forces (those supporting change)
and restraining forces (those resisting change),
2. Analyzing forces identified in Step 1, and
3. Identifying alternative strategies for changing each
force identified in step 1 and focusing on reducing
forces of resistance.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Consequences of Not Planning for
Change
• Not planning for change can lead to negative
consequences.
• Proactive planning for change can be advantageous over
forced change based on events that already have
occurred (reactionary change).
– Team policing
– Events in the C J S in 2020-2021 during the COVID-19
pandemic
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright
This work is protected by United States copyright laws and is
provided solely for the use of instructors in teaching their
courses and assessing student learning. Dissemination or sale
of any part of this work (including on the World Wide Web) will
destroy the integrity of the work and is not permitted. The work
and materials from it should never be made available to students
except by instructors using the accompanying text in their
classes. All recipients of this work are expected to abide by
these restrictions and to honor the intended pedagogical
purposes and the needs of other instructors who rely on these
materials.
– Slide 1: Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management
– Slide 2: Why Study Justice Administration?
– Slide 3: Roles
– Slide 4: A True System of Justice?
– Slide 5: A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
– Slide 6: A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
– Slide 7: A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
– Slide 8: A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
– Slide 9: A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
– Slide 10: A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
– Slide 11: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (1 of 3)
– Slide 12: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (2 of 3)
– Slide 13: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (3 of 3)
– Slide 14: Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice System?
– Slide 15: From Nonsystem to System Redefining Performance Measures
– Slide 16: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (1 of 5)
– Slide 17: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (2 of 5)
– Slide 18: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (3 of 5)
– Slide 19: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (4 of 5)
– Slide 20: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (5 of 5)
– Slide 21: Crime Control vs. Due Process
– Slide 22: Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
– Slide 23: Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
– Slide 24: Public vs. Private Sector Administration
– Slide 25: Planned Change and Policymaking (1 of 3)
– Slide 26: Planned Change and Policymaking (2 of 3)
– Slide 27: Planned Change and Policymaking (3 of 3)
– Slide 28: Force-Field Analysis
– Slide 29: Consequences of Not Planning for Change
– Slide 30: Copyright
**Chapter31.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter31-pdf-10587673)
**Chapter2.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter2-pdf-10587675)
**Chapter2.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter2-pdf-10587675)
**## Discussion1520.docx**
**Due 8/21/2026**
**500 words for references, use open access articles**
Review the Case Study Options. Conduct a cursory internet search identifying three (3) different real-world initiatives or programs that align with the case study options. Provide a brief overview of the initiative or program and explain how the program aligns with the selected case study category.
The case study option is:
**Focus on a reentry initiative that bridges corrections and community service.**
**## Chapter1.pdf**
Justice Administration: Police,
Courts, and Corrections Management
Tenth Edition
Chapter 1
The Study and Scope of
Justice Administration
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Why Study Justice Administration?
• Administration is a science that can be taught, not a talent
one must be born with.
• Often learned through on-the-job training.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Roles
• Administrator
– The person who focuses on the overall organization,
its mission, acquisition and use of resources, and
agency relationships with external organizations and
groups.
• Manager
– Persons (captains, lieutenants) in the intermediate
level of management, responsible for carrying out the
policies and directives of upper-level administrators
and supervising subordinate managers and
employees.
• Supervisor
– Persons (sergeants) typically in the field who plan,
organize, and direct staff members in their duties.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A True System of Justice?
• Each system component—police, courts, and
corrections—has varying degrees of responsibility and
discretion for dealing with crime.
• Relations among and between these components are
often characterized by friction, conflict, and deficient
communication.
• This criticism of the justice system or process—that it is
fragmented and rife with role conflicts and other
problems—is a common refrain.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
• Our C J S may not be a system at all.
– May be better described as a criminal justice process.
• It involves the decisions and actions taken by an
institution, offender, victim, or society that influence the
offender's movement into, through, or out of the justice
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
• At one end of this process are the police.
– View primary role as getting lawbreakers off the street.
• At the other end are the corrections officials.
– View their role as being primarily custodial in nature.
• Somewhere in between are the courts that try to ensure a
fair application of the law to each case.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
• In criminal justice planning jargon, "You can't rock one
end of the boat without it affecting another part.”
– Every action has a reaction, especially in the justice
process.
– Actions and reactions of each component will send
ripples throughout the process.
• Fragmentation exists among the components and within
the individual components.
– This contributes to much of the failure to deal with
crime effectively.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
• Others argue that U.S. justice systems constitute a
criminal justice network.
• The justice system’s components cooperate and share
similar goals but operate largely independently and
compete for funding.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
• The criminal justice network is said to be based on several
key, yet erroneous, assumptions:
1. The components of the network cooperate and share
similar goals.
2. The network operates according to a set of formal
procedural rules to ensure uniform treatment of all
persons, the outcome of which constitutes justice.
3. Each person accused of a crime receives due
process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
4. Each person receives a speedy public trial before an
impartial jury of their peers and is represented by
competent legal counsel.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
• Reasons the assumptions are erroneous:
1. The three components have incompatible goals and
continually compete with one another for dollars.
2. Evidence indicates that individuals of different races,
genders, and classes receive differential treatment in
the criminal justice network.
3. Some persons are prosecuted, some are not; some
are involved in plea bargaining, others are not; some
are convicted and sent to prison, whereas other
convicted persons are not.
4. The current backlog of cases does not ensure a
speedy trial, even though a vast majority (at least
90%) of all arrestees plead guilty prior to trial.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(1 of 3)
• Many observers argue that the components of the C J S
comprise a criminal justice nonsystem.
– The police, courts, and corrections do not function
harmoniously.
– They are not a coordinated structure.
– They are neither efficient nor fair enough to create fear
of punishment or respect for its values.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(2 of 3)
• Cohn and Udolf stated that criminal justice "is not a
system, and it has little to do with justice as that term is
ordinarily understood.“
• Wright and Fox asserted that "the criminal justice
system… is frequently criticized because it is not a
coordinated structure—not really a system. In many ways
this is true."
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(3 of 3)
• System fragmentation is believed to affect the amount and
type of crime that exists in the U.S.
– Involves the view that members of C J S agencies have
tremendous discretion and their own perception of the
offender.
– Fragmentation results in goal conflict: polarity in
identifying and establishing the primary goals of the
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice
System?
• The justice system elements work and interact to
function like a process, a network, or even a
nonsystem.
• However, it may still constitute a true system.
• It may be that a very efficient system may not be what
a democracy wants or needs.
• Given the decentralized and fragmented nature of the
C J S, coordination, unification, and communication will
always be lacking.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
From Nonsystem to System
Redefining Performance Measures
• Despite the C J S being decentralized and fragmented,
there is a set of common goals.
• DiIulio advocates for a democratic vision of the C J S that
includes doing justice, securing communities, restoring
crime victims, and promoting noncriminal options.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (1 of 5)
• U.S. society has innumerable lawbreakers.
– Most are easily handled by the police, do not challenge the
legitimacy of the law when arrested and incarcerated, or
challenge the system of government that enacts the laws or
agencies that carry them out.
• According to John Locke, people were created by God to be
free, equal, independent, and with inherent inalienable rights to
life, liberty, and property.
– Each person has the right of self-protection against those
who would infringe on these liberties.
– Although most people are good, some will likely prey on
others, who in turn would constantly have to be on guard
against such evildoers.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (2 of 5)
• In Locke's view, people join together and form
governments to which they surrender their right of self-
protection.
• In return, they receive governmental protection of their
lives, property, and liberty.
• Each side has benefits and considerations:
– People give up their right to protect themselves and
receive protection in return.
– Governments give protection and receive loyalty and
obedience in return.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (3 of 5)
• Locke believed the chief purpose of government was the
protection of property
– Locke's theory of tacit consent: "Every Man . . . doth hereby
give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to
Obedience to the Laws of the Government.”
– This essentially describes an association of landowners
• Thomas Hobbes – social contract theory
– People are essentially irrational and selfish but have
enough rationality to come together to form governments
for self-protection.
– People exist in a state of consensus with their
governments.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (4 of 5)
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a conflict theorist, argued that
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.“
– Described conflict between the ruling group and the
other groups in society.
– Differed from Locke, who described consensus within
the ruling group.
• The primary difference between consensus and conflict
theorists concerns their evaluation of the legitimacy of the
actions of ruling groups in contemporary societies.
– Differences is important because it involves the
competing views of humankind toward its ruling group.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (5 of 5)
• Consensus model:
– The view of the criminal justice system in which it is
assumed that all parts of the system work toward a
common goal.
• Conflict model:
– The view that actors within the criminal justice system
are self-serving, with pressures for success, promotion,
and general accountability and resulting in fragmented
efforts.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Crime Control vs. Due Process
• Due process model
– The idea that the accused should be presumed
innocent and have their rights protected, while police
must act only in accordance with the Constitution.
• Crime control model
– A philosophy that states crime must be repressed, the
accused presumed guilty, legal loopholes eliminated,
offenders swiftly punished, and police and prosecutors
given a high degree of discretion.
• Neither model completely dominates a particular
community or controls U.S. crime policy.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Due Process Model
1. C J must provide due process, fairness, and a focus on
defendants’ rights, as provided in the Bill of Rights.
2. Police powers should be limited to prevent oppression.
3. Constitutional rights aren’t “technicalities,” so
police/prosecutors should be held accountable to ensure
fairness.
4. The C J process should resemble an obstacle course,
with impediments/safeguards to protect the innocent and
convict the guilty
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Crime Control Model
1. The repression of crime is of utmost importance, to provide order.
2. C J focus should be on helping victims rather than on defendants’
rights.
3. Police powers should be expanded, legal technicalities eliminated,
for ease of arrest, search and seizure, conviction.
4. The C J process should operate like an assembly line, moving cases
through swiftly.
5. There should generally be a presumption of guilt of the accused
(and police/prosecutors’ views trusted).
Note: No city will be wholly in one or the other model; also, the political climate determines
which model shapes criminal justice policy at a specific point in time.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Public vs. Private Sector
Administration
• Private businesses and corporations can use various
extrinsic (external) rewards to motivate and reward their
employees.
– Examples: financial bonuses, private office, key to the
executive washroom, paid trips, company car, awards,
expense account, membership in country clubs and
organizations, prestigious job title, etc.
• People working in the public sector must acquire job
satisfaction primarily through intrinsic (internal) rewards:
– Examples: doing work that is gratifying and intrinsically
making them feel good about themselves and what
they accomplish.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(1 of 3)
• In the past, change in criminal justice agencies typically
occurred slowly and incrementally.
• Today, change is a constant rather than an exception.
• If unplanned, programs will often fail, result in negative
consequences in the workplace, and have severe
repercussions on other C J S components.
– Three-strikes laws
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(2 of 3)
• Change in criminal justice should not—and typically does
not—occur accidentally or haphazardly.
– Justice administrators must know how to plan,
implement, and evaluate interventions that address
problems in their organizations/systems while
considering all other components.
• Planned change is a rational approach that involves
problem analysis, setting goals and objectives, program
and policy design, developing an action plan, and
monitoring and evaluation.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(3 of 3)
• Creating a policy is one way to effect planned change.
• Policies vary in complexity and in the amount of discretion
given to those who apply them.
• Policymaking involves:
1) Developing plans that are used by an organization or
government as a basis for making decisions;
2) Establishing rules, principles, or guidelines to govern
actions by ordinary citizens and persons in positions
of authority.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Force-Field Analysis
• C J organizations always have barriers and resistance to
change.
– Such barriers may be physical, social, financial, legal,
political, and/or technological in nature.
• Force-field analysis is a technique for identifying sources
of resistance and support that involves:
1. Identifying driving forces (those supporting change)
and restraining forces (those resisting change),
2. Analyzing forces identified in Step 1, and
3. Identifying alternative strategies for changing each
force identified in step 1 and focusing on reducing
forces of resistance.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Consequences of Not Planning for
Change
• Not planning for change can lead to negative
consequences.
• Proactive planning for change can be advantageous over
forced change based on events that already have
occurred (reactionary change).
– Team policing
– Events in the C J S in 2020-2021 during the COVID-19
pandemic
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright
This work is protected by United States copyright laws and is
provided solely for the use of instructors in teaching their
courses and assessing student learning. Dissemination or sale
of any part of this work (including on the World Wide Web) will
destroy the integrity of the work and is not permitted. The work
and materials from it should never be made available to students
except by instructors using the accompanying text in their
classes. All recipients of this work are expected to abide by
these restrictions and to honor the intended pedagogical
purposes and the needs of other instructors who rely on these
materials.
– Slide 1: Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management
– Slide 2: Why Study Justice Administration?
– Slide 3: Roles
– Slide 4: A True System of Justice?
– Slide 5: A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
– Slide 6: A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
– Slide 7: A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
– Slide 8: A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
– Slide 9: A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
– Slide 10: A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
– Slide 11: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (1 of 3)
– Slide 12: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (2 of 3)
– Slide 13: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (3 of 3)
– Slide 14: Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice System?
– Slide 15: From Nonsystem to System Redefining Performance Measures
– Slide 16: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (1 of 5)
– Slide 17: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (2 of 5)
– Slide 18: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (3 of 5)
– Slide 19: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (4 of 5)
– Slide 20: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (5 of 5)
– Slide 21: Crime Control vs. Due Process
– Slide 22: Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
– Slide 23: Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
– Slide 24: Public vs. Private Sector Administration
– Slide 25: Planned Change and Policymaking (1 of 3)
– Slide 26: Planned Change and Policymaking (2 of 3)
– Slide 27: Planned Change and Policymaking (3 of 3)
– Slide 28: Force-Field Analysis
– Slide 29: Consequences of Not Planning for Change
– Slide 30: Copyright
**Chapter31.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter31-pdf-10587673)
**Chapter2.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter2-pdf-10587675)
**## Discussion1520.docx**
**Due 8/21/2026**
**500 words for references, use open access articles**
Review the Case Study Options. Conduct a cursory internet search identifying three (3) different real-world initiatives or programs that align with the case study options. Provide a brief overview of the initiative or program and explain how the program aligns with the selected case study category.
The case study option is:
**Focus on a reentry initiative that bridges corrections and community service.**
**## Chapter1.pdf**
Justice Administration: Police,
Courts, and Corrections Management
Tenth Edition
Chapter 1
The Study and Scope of
Justice Administration
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Why Study Justice Administration?
• Administration is a science that can be taught, not a talent
one must be born with.
• Often learned through on-the-job training.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Roles
• Administrator
– The person who focuses on the overall organization,
its mission, acquisition and use of resources, and
agency relationships with external organizations and
groups.
• Manager
– Persons (captains, lieutenants) in the intermediate
level of management, responsible for carrying out the
policies and directives of upper-level administrators
and supervising subordinate managers and
employees.
• Supervisor
– Persons (sergeants) typically in the field who plan,
organize, and direct staff members in their duties.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A True System of Justice?
• Each system component—police, courts, and
corrections—has varying degrees of responsibility and
discretion for dealing with crime.
• Relations among and between these components are
often characterized by friction, conflict, and deficient
communication.
• This criticism of the justice system or process—that it is
fragmented and rife with role conflicts and other
problems—is a common refrain.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
• Our C J S may not be a system at all.
– May be better described as a criminal justice process.
• It involves the decisions and actions taken by an
institution, offender, victim, or society that influence the
offender's movement into, through, or out of the justice
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
• At one end of this process are the police.
– View primary role as getting lawbreakers off the street.
• At the other end are the corrections officials.
– View their role as being primarily custodial in nature.
• Somewhere in between are the courts that try to ensure a
fair application of the law to each case.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
• In criminal justice planning jargon, "You can't rock one
end of the boat without it affecting another part.”
– Every action has a reaction, especially in the justice
process.
– Actions and reactions of each component will send
ripples throughout the process.
• Fragmentation exists among the components and within
the individual components.
– This contributes to much of the failure to deal with
crime effectively.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
• Others argue that U.S. justice systems constitute a
criminal justice network.
• The justice system’s components cooperate and share
similar goals but operate largely independently and
compete for funding.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
• The criminal justice network is said to be based on several
key, yet erroneous, assumptions:
1. The components of the network cooperate and share
similar goals.
2. The network operates according to a set of formal
procedural rules to ensure uniform treatment of all
persons, the outcome of which constitutes justice.
3. Each person accused of a crime receives due
process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
4. Each person receives a speedy public trial before an
impartial jury of their peers and is represented by
competent legal counsel.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
• Reasons the assumptions are erroneous:
1. The three components have incompatible goals and
continually compete with one another for dollars.
2. Evidence indicates that individuals of different races,
genders, and classes receive differential treatment in
the criminal justice network.
3. Some persons are prosecuted, some are not; some
are involved in plea bargaining, others are not; some
are convicted and sent to prison, whereas other
convicted persons are not.
4. The current backlog of cases does not ensure a
speedy trial, even though a vast majority (at least
90%) of all arrestees plead guilty prior to trial.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(1 of 3)
• Many observers argue that the components of the C J S
comprise a criminal justice nonsystem.
– The police, courts, and corrections do not function
harmoniously.
– They are not a coordinated structure.
– They are neither efficient nor fair enough to create fear
of punishment or respect for its values.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(2 of 3)
• Cohn and Udolf stated that criminal justice "is not a
system, and it has little to do with justice as that term is
ordinarily understood.“
• Wright and Fox asserted that "the criminal justice
system… is frequently criticized because it is not a
coordinated structure—not really a system. In many ways
this is true."
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
A Criminal Justice Non-system?
(3 of 3)
• System fragmentation is believed to affect the amount and
type of crime that exists in the U.S.
– Involves the view that members of C J S agencies have
tremendous discretion and their own perception of the
offender.
– Fragmentation results in goal conflict: polarity in
identifying and establishing the primary goals of the
system.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice
System?
• The justice system elements work and interact to
function like a process, a network, or even a
nonsystem.
• However, it may still constitute a true system.
• It may be that a very efficient system may not be what
a democracy wants or needs.
• Given the decentralized and fragmented nature of the
C J S, coordination, unification, and communication will
always be lacking.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
From Nonsystem to System
Redefining Performance Measures
• Despite the C J S being decentralized and fragmented,
there is a set of common goals.
• DiIulio advocates for a democratic vision of the C J S that
includes doing justice, securing communities, restoring
crime victims, and promoting noncriminal options.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (1 of 5)
• U.S. society has innumerable lawbreakers.
– Most are easily handled by the police, do not challenge the
legitimacy of the law when arrested and incarcerated, or
challenge the system of government that enacts the laws or
agencies that carry them out.
• According to John Locke, people were created by God to be
free, equal, independent, and with inherent inalienable rights to
life, liberty, and property.
– Each person has the right of self-protection against those
who would infringe on these liberties.
– Although most people are good, some will likely prey on
others, who in turn would constantly have to be on guard
against such evildoers.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (2 of 5)
• In Locke's view, people join together and form
governments to which they surrender their right of self-
protection.
• In return, they receive governmental protection of their
lives, property, and liberty.
• Each side has benefits and considerations:
– People give up their right to protect themselves and
receive protection in return.
– Governments give protection and receive loyalty and
obedience in return.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (3 of 5)
• Locke believed the chief purpose of government was the
protection of property
– Locke's theory of tacit consent: "Every Man . . . doth hereby
give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to
Obedience to the Laws of the Government.”
– This essentially describes an association of landowners
• Thomas Hobbes – social contract theory
– People are essentially irrational and selfish but have
enough rationality to come together to form governments
for self-protection.
– People exist in a state of consensus with their
governments.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (4 of 5)
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a conflict theorist, argued that
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.“
– Described conflict between the ruling group and the
other groups in society.
– Differed from Locke, who described consensus within
the ruling group.
• The primary difference between consensus and conflict
theorists concerns their evaluation of the legitimacy of the
actions of ruling groups in contemporary societies.
– Differences is important because it involves the
competing views of humankind toward its ruling group.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Consensus versus Conflict
Debate (5 of 5)
• Consensus model:
– The view of the criminal justice system in which it is
assumed that all parts of the system work toward a
common goal.
• Conflict model:
– The view that actors within the criminal justice system
are self-serving, with pressures for success, promotion,
and general accountability and resulting in fragmented
efforts.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Crime Control vs. Due Process
• Due process model
– The idea that the accused should be presumed
innocent and have their rights protected, while police
must act only in accordance with the Constitution.
• Crime control model
– A philosophy that states crime must be repressed, the
accused presumed guilty, legal loopholes eliminated,
offenders swiftly punished, and police and prosecutors
given a high degree of discretion.
• Neither model completely dominates a particular
community or controls U.S. crime policy.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Due Process Model
1. C J must provide due process, fairness, and a focus on
defendants’ rights, as provided in the Bill of Rights.
2. Police powers should be limited to prevent oppression.
3. Constitutional rights aren’t “technicalities,” so
police/prosecutors should be held accountable to ensure
fairness.
4. The C J process should resemble an obstacle course,
with impediments/safeguards to protect the innocent and
convict the guilty
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
Herbert Packer’s Crime Control/Due Process Models of
Criminal Justice: A Synopsis
Crime Control Model
1. The repression of crime is of utmost importance, to provide order.
2. C J focus should be on helping victims rather than on defendants’
rights.
3. Police powers should be expanded, legal technicalities eliminated,
for ease of arrest, search and seizure, conviction.
4. The C J process should operate like an assembly line, moving cases
through swiftly.
5. There should generally be a presumption of guilt of the accused
(and police/prosecutors’ views trusted).
Note: No city will be wholly in one or the other model; also, the political climate determines
which model shapes criminal justice policy at a specific point in time.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Public vs. Private Sector
Administration
• Private businesses and corporations can use various
extrinsic (external) rewards to motivate and reward their
employees.
– Examples: financial bonuses, private office, key to the
executive washroom, paid trips, company car, awards,
expense account, membership in country clubs and
organizations, prestigious job title, etc.
• People working in the public sector must acquire job
satisfaction primarily through intrinsic (internal) rewards:
– Examples: doing work that is gratifying and intrinsically
making them feel good about themselves and what
they accomplish.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(1 of 3)
• In the past, change in criminal justice agencies typically
occurred slowly and incrementally.
• Today, change is a constant rather than an exception.
• If unplanned, programs will often fail, result in negative
consequences in the workplace, and have severe
repercussions on other C J S components.
– Three-strikes laws
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(2 of 3)
• Change in criminal justice should not—and typically does
not—occur accidentally or haphazardly.
– Justice administrators must know how to plan,
implement, and evaluate interventions that address
problems in their organizations/systems while
considering all other components.
• Planned change is a rational approach that involves
problem analysis, setting goals and objectives, program
and policy design, developing an action plan, and
monitoring and evaluation.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Planned Change and Policymaking
(3 of 3)
• Creating a policy is one way to effect planned change.
• Policies vary in complexity and in the amount of discretion
given to those who apply them.
• Policymaking involves:
1) Developing plans that are used by an organization or
government as a basis for making decisions;
2) Establishing rules, principles, or guidelines to govern
actions by ordinary citizens and persons in positions
of authority.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Force-Field Analysis
• C J organizations always have barriers and resistance to
change.
– Such barriers may be physical, social, financial, legal,
political, and/or technological in nature.
• Force-field analysis is a technique for identifying sources
of resistance and support that involves:
1. Identifying driving forces (those supporting change)
and restraining forces (those resisting change),
2. Analyzing forces identified in Step 1, and
3. Identifying alternative strategies for changing each
force identified in step 1 and focusing on reducing
forces of resistance.
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Consequences of Not Planning for
Change
• Not planning for change can lead to negative
consequences.
• Proactive planning for change can be advantageous over
forced change based on events that already have
occurred (reactionary change).
– Team policing
– Events in the C J S in 2020-2021 during the COVID-19
pandemic
Copyright © 2023, 2019, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright
This work is protected by United States copyright laws and is
provided solely for the use of instructors in teaching their
courses and assessing student learning. Dissemination or sale
of any part of this work (including on the World Wide Web) will
destroy the integrity of the work and is not permitted. The work
and materials from it should never be made available to students
except by instructors using the accompanying text in their
classes. All recipients of this work are expected to abide by
these restrictions and to honor the intended pedagogical
purposes and the needs of other instructors who rely on these
materials.
– Slide 1: Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management
– Slide 2: Why Study Justice Administration?
– Slide 3: Roles
– Slide 4: A True System of Justice?
– Slide 5: A Criminal Justice Process? (1 of 3)
– Slide 6: A Criminal Justice Process? (2 of 3)
– Slide 7: A Criminal Justice Process? (3 of 3)
– Slide 8: A Criminal Justice Network? (1 of 3)
– Slide 9: A Criminal Justice Network? (2 of 3)
– Slide 10: A Criminal Justice Network? (3 of 3)
– Slide 11: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (1 of 3)
– Slide 12: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (2 of 3)
– Slide 13: A Criminal Justice Non-system? (3 of 3)
– Slide 14: Or, Is It a True Criminal Justice System?
– Slide 15: From Nonsystem to System Redefining Performance Measures
– Slide 16: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (1 of 5)
– Slide 17: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (2 of 5)
– Slide 18: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (3 of 5)
– Slide 19: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (4 of 5)
– Slide 20: The Consensus versus Conflict Debate (5 of 5)
– Slide 21: Crime Control vs. Due Process
– Slide 22: Figure 1.2 (1 of 2)
– Slide 23: Figure 1.2 (2 of 2)
– Slide 24: Public vs. Private Sector Administration
– Slide 25: Planned Change and Policymaking (1 of 3)
– Slide 26: Planned Change and Policymaking (2 of 3)
– Slide 27: Planned Change and Policymaking (3 of 3)
– Slide 28: Force-Field Analysis
– Slide 29: Consequences of Not Planning for Change
– Slide 30: Copyright
**Chapter31.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter31-pdf-10587673)
**Chapter2.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/chapter2-pdf-10587675)