Criminal Justice Ethics Scenarios

Criminal Justice 2011
Class Name,
Instructor Name
Date, Semester

© 2012 by Pearson Higher Education, Inc
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458 • All Rights Reserved
BASIC FRAMEWORK FORMULA
Facts of the Issue or Situation (1 & 2)
+
Moral Criteria (e.g., goods, principles, virtues) (3) =
Practical Conclusion (good decisions, actions) (4)
2

A BASIC APPROACH
1. Examine the facts and circumstances of the
situation
2. Determine alternatives
3. Identify relevant and desirable moral criteria
4. Determine which alternative is consistent with
the criteria identified
3

MORAL CRITERIA
• Consequences and goods
• Duties and principles
• Virtues
4

MORAL CRITERIA
• When Goods Collide
Basic Goods Outweigh Secondary Goods
Intrinsic Goods Outweigh Instrumental Goods
• When Duties and Obligations Collide
Determine which of the competing duties is
more important
It may be less clear which duty or obligation
is primary
• When Moral Criteria Collide
5

EVALUATING CONSEQUENCES
Each of these dimensions carries moral significance
•Predictable or unpredictable
•Intended or unintended
•Immediate or long-term
•Minor or major
•Physical, emotional, financial
•Obvious or subtle
•Consequential to large numbers of people, or to as
few as one
6

MAKING DECISIONS
• Deciding with Duties
• Deciding with Consequences
• Deciding with Virtue
• Deciding with Care
7

SCENARIOS FOR DISCUSSION
The following slides contain scenarios for class
discussions
8

NEW FACULTY MEMBER
Suppose that the criminal justice department of
a local university consists of two male faculty
members and six female faculty members. With
a new faculty position open for the upcoming
year, the chair of the department would like to
hire a male to help offset the dominant female
voice of the department
9

NEW FACULTY MEMBER
1. Should the chair’s freedom to hire whomever
she/he chooses outweigh interests of equal
opportunity and nondiscrimination?
2. What rights and duties are at issue?
3. Which alternative demonstrates respect for
legal and moral rights?
4. What are the relevant obligations to the
department? The students? The applicants?
10

NEW FACULTY MEMBER
5. Are we treating everyone involved with
respect and dignity?
6. If we hire a male, are we exploiting him
(using him) as a means only?
7. What course of action could we take will that
all other chairs in similar situations would
take?
8. Can you think of other questions or concerns
that might be relevant from a Kantian
perspective?
11

SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS
• Law enforcement agencies often set up sobriety
checkpoints on major roadways and highways—
especially on weekends, holidays, and other times
when people are more likely to be drinking. In theory,
checkpoints can get unsafe drivers off of the road, as
well as deter would-be drunk drivers from getting on
the roads. At the same time, some argue that
checkpoints are not only inconveniences, but serious
infringements on privacy rights.
12

SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS
1. For all affected, what goods come of
checkpoints?
2. For all affected, what harms come of them?
3. Are there long-term consequences?
4. Are there indirect or unintended
consequences?
5. Do the overall good or beneficial effects
outweigh the overall harm caused by
sobriety checkpoints?
13

CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS
• Criminal defense attorneys are sometimes placed in
the difficult situation of defending a client whom they
know to be guilty of a serious crime. Utilitarian ethics
might encourage us to consider the consequences of
vigorously defending—to the point of acquittal—a
“guilty” defendant. Duty-based ethics might draw
attention to the defendant’s legal rights and the
attorney’s relevant duties and obligations to that
client.
• Notwithstanding these concerns, how might virtue
ethics inform an attorney’s decisions and actions in
such a situation?
14

CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS
1. What character traits would we want in an “ideal”
defense attorney?
2. Are attorneys likely to fall victim to negative emotions
that would hinder their performance?
3. An attorney’s legal duties notwithstanding, is it in
some sense dishonest to refrain from revealing
information that is pertinent to a case?
4. To what degree are the following virtues desirable in
this context: compassion, honesty, loyalty, mercy,
non-harm, respect, integrity, and tolerance?
5. How would these traits materialize in the attorney’s
decisions and actions?
15

EXCESSIVE FORCE
• John Doe attempted to resist arrest for possessing illegal
substances and for carrying a concealed weapon without
a permit. In an effort to contain/control him, he was
seriously beaten by six police officers—ultimately resulting
in permanent brain damage. The officers claimed that the
use of brutal force, which occurred before Mr. Doe was
taken into custody, was necessary.
16

EXCESSIVE FORCE
1. From a utilitarian perspective, on what grounds could
we claim that the use of force in this and similar
situations is justified?
2. From a Kantian perspective, are there grounds on
which we could claim that excessive force was not
justified?
17

BABYSITTER
• In January of 2009, a four-year-old Ohio boy retrieved
a shotgun from the closet of his home, returned to the
living room, and proceeded to shoot his eighteen-
year-old babysitter (who was not seriously injured in
the incident). According to reports, the child was
angry that the babysitter had stepped on his foot.
Following the incident, local prosecutors had no plans
to charge the boy with a crime, but were considering
charges against the parents.
• Utilizing a care approach, how might we resolve this
situation in a way that takes into consideration the
underlying relationships and the needs of the boy, his
family, the babysitter, the babysitter’s family, etc.?
18

BABYSITTER
1. What relationships have been damaged?
2. How has each person involved been
affected by the situation and what does
each need from the situation?
3. Would a care approach justify treating the
boy as a delinquent?
4. Criminal charges against the boy’s parents?
5. A restorative approach?
19

JURY NULLIFICATION
• Jury nullification occurs when the jury returns a verdict
of “not guilty” despite evidence that the defendant is
legally guilty of the crime for which she or he is
charged. In effect, the jury determines that the
existing law is immoral or has been wrongfully applied
in a particular instance. Jurors may, for instance,
refuse to find a defendant guilty of a “mercy killing,”
despite overwhelming evidence that the killing
violated the expressed purpose of the law.
20

JURY NULLIFICATION
1. Employing utilitarian, Kantian, or virtue ethical
perspectives, on what grounds could we claim that
the practice of jury nullification in a given case is
morally justified? Morally unjustified?
21

WHITE COLLAR
• In some cases, persons convicted of white-
collar or corporate offenses receive lighter
sentences relative to those convicted of street
crimes. Someone who is convicted of
embezzling 1 million dollars may receive a
lighter sentence than someone convicted of
stealing 200 dollars in a liquor store robbery; a
corporation which markets unsafe products,
resulting in hundreds of injuries, illnesses,
and/or deaths, may be punished less severely
than a person who seriously injures or kills one
person in a street fight.
22

WHITE COLLAR
1. Utilizing utilitarian, Kantian, and virtue ethical
frameworks, are there any grounds on which
we can morally justify more lenient sentences
for white-collar offenses?
2. Are there any grounds on which we could
morally justify harsher sentences?
23

SON OF SAM
• Following the arrest and conviction of serial killer
David Berkowitz, the state of New York implemented
what are often called “Son of Sam” provisions.
Recognizing that Berkowitz could have profited
substantially from selling the rights to his story, the “Son
of Sam” provisions allowed for the confiscation of any
royalties that criminals might earn as a result of their
crimes. The money, in principle, would then go toward
helping the victims and their families.
24

SON OF SAM
1. With moral considerations in mind, on what grounds
can we justify appropriating monies that criminals (or
non-criminals) earn from writing books, selling media
rights, selling personal items, or other means?
25

DRUG RESEARCH
• A chemistry professor at a major Southeastern
University conducts research on the ways in which
drugs interact with the brain. Much of his research has
focused on illegal substances and involves, in part,
creating new compounds that resemble current drugs
of abuse. His colleagues in academia are not the only
ones paying attention to his published research. In
fact, makers of designer drugs have been known to
use his research to produce new street drugs. A
handful of new designer drugs have hit the street as a
result of his publications, and several deaths have
even been linked to substances produced by
amateur chemists based on his research.
26

DRUG RESEARCH
1. What moral issues arise from the professor’s research?
2. To whom does the professor owe duties?
3. What duties?
4. How might we assess the issue of free exchange of
scientific information if we were to assume a
consequentialist stance on this matter?
27

HOMELESS MAN
• Police have received a complaint from community
residents about what the residents describe as a
homeless man sleeping on a bench in the local park.
As far as anyone knows, the man has not harmed
anyone and does not appear to pose an immediate
threat. There is a local law prohibiting people from
sleeping in public, and the fact that a complaint has
been received suggests that residents are at least
uncomfortable about the situation. Upon speaking
with the man, police learn that he is simply very tired,
has no permanent residence and no money for a
motel room, and no other place to go. He pleads for
police to give him just a couple of hours of rest and
promises he will then be on his way.
28

HOMELESS MAN
1. How might a utilitarian approach resolve this issue?
2. What moral duties might be relevant?
3. How might an ethic of care approach this matter
differently?
4. What alternatives might allow for compromise and
accommodation of the needs of everyone?
29

UNDERCOVER POLICE
• Undercover police work necessarily requires that
officers of the law participate in activities that
would, under most circumstances, be deemed
illegal. For example, police have been noted to
transport drugs into prisons, launder drug money,
fence stolen goods, and print counterfeit money.
These and many other examples involve law
enforcement officers’ willingly and knowingly
engaging in behaviors that are legally prohibited
for the sake of gathering evidence against other
criminals. Except in cases in which officer behavior
goes well beyond what is necessary for their role,
they are immune from prosecution.
30

UNDERCOVER POLICE
1. Relying on one or more of the normative theories
outlined in the text and above, what moral issues are
presented by undercover police work?
2. Do the ends justify the means?
3. Where might we draw the line between moral and
immoral?
31

Criminal Justice Ethics Scenarios

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Criminal Justice Ethics Scenarios

Similar to Criminal Justice Ethics Scenarios (20)

More from ryaekle

More from ryaekle (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Criminal Justice Ethics Scenarios

Editor's Notes