Enhancing Public Safety and Reducing Crime Rates

This assignment delves into the realm of public safety and crime reduction, presenting a comprehensive analysis of various strategies employed by cities like Washington DC and Boston to ensure the well-being of youth and prevent violent crimes. It also touches upon the importance of community engagement, coordination with local partners, and investment in programs aimed at reducing criminal offenses. The assignment draws from relevant literature, including books and journals, as well as online resources such as FACT SHEET: Enhancing the Fairness and Effectiveness of the Criminal Justice System.

Public Services

Today, in 21st century, expectations of public are much high from organisations to get
safe and sustainable life. When it comes to crime factors or criminal justice, they are no longer
satisfied with such a system, which is process driven. Public demands not to get only criminal
justice services which is capable of delivering right justice. But they also want to get strict laws
which are based on criminal preventions and are underpinned by core quality, that secure them
from criminal activities (Rees and Mullins, 2016). In this regard, the vast majority of cases in
UK are generally prosecuted by Crown Prosecution Services (CPS), that are investigated by
Office for National Statistics (ONS) and police force. Merging of these public organisations
including police and National Crime Agencies (NCA) aid to concern more on reducing criminal
activities in UK. Present essay is going to explore and assess the functions, roles and
responsibilities performed by public organisations, in delivering the criminal justice processes. It
further access the effectiveness of same in reducing re-offending and provide safety to public.
The common thread which has bound the different investigating agencies of criminal
justice system of UK, is centred upon crime and make prevention from same (Schön, 2017). It
includes Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), police force, courts, probation and prison service
etc., where all have separated as well as distinctive functions. But they operate for overreaching a
common goal i.e. to control crime. All these are considered as public organisations of criminal
justice, which are characterised by different roles and responsibilities. It has been argued here,
through perception of Kirkham (2016), that determining which public organisation in UK, that is
associated with criminal justice system is complex because of nature and operation they
performed and entails great multiplicity. In this regard, the core agencies in respective country
of the criminal justice system can be identified in following manner:-
The Police force of UK are divided into three distinct groups as per roles and
responsibilities. It includes the local branches of police, the national police bodies (Organised
Crime Agency, British Transport Police and more), and specialist agency watchdogs (Health and
Safety Executive that concerns on certain types of criminality). As per the Pace Act i.e. Police
and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, police officers have the right 'to stop and identify suspected
people' search their property, collect evidence against them if they found guilty then arrest them
(Evans, 2016). After complete interrogation police administration has to compile reports then
send to CPS, who will allow officers to exercise their public duty. This duty refers to a
characteristics that determine nature of manner in which criminal laws operate. It leads to
1

underpins the role of police officers in operations within criminal justice. Along with this, the
main responsibility of this department is to manage and control crime as much as possible. The
Crown Prosecution Service here, is mainly responsible to decide whether investigation report
prepared by police force should proceed to further prosecution or not in courts (Sarker and et. al.,
2017). Within criminal justice system, courts occupy a neutral position but a special terrain to
provide both sides equality, so that case can be proceed in equal and fair manner. In this regard,
main responsibility of jurisdictions in courts is to make correct judgement then sentenced the
offenders as per law who are found guilty. The Prison Service is another main public
organisation which is charged to deal with offenders who are convicted and sentenced to a
particular custodial sentence (Edmiston and Nicholls, 2018). The main role of this service within
criminal justice is argued as dual as firstly to deprive all dangerous offenders as per sentence of
court who use their liberty in negative manner and secondly to rehabilitate them back to society.
In criminal justice system, the common responsibility of prison service is to facilitate crime
control as well as contributes to rehabilitation offenders back to society. The Probation Service is
also occupied which is charged to dealing with those offenders who come out of prison, then
support them to integrate back into society and live without crime.
Youth Offending Team is also occupied a special position in criminal justice system,
which includes police officers, probation officers, social workers, charities, loyal community and
Health & Education members. The main responsibilities of this are to support youth to prevent
themselves from offending, reduce chance of further offending, support youth who are on bailed
to release from custodial sentences (Buck, Kirkham and Thompson, 2016). They also look out
into background of a young person to keep them stay from crime and run crime prevention
programs also.
The common and main purpose of all above public organisations that are associated with
Criminal Justice System is to make efforts for delivering an efficient, transparent, effective and
fair justice processes. Considering this appeal related to a utilitarian efficiency, public
organisations focuses on punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent from crimes. Here,
prisons concern more on reducing crime by incorporating with three main principles. It includes
incapacitating offenders, punishing them and deterring others who may commit crimes. The
Administration of UK also continues in pursuing efforts for improve the juvenile justice system .
Here, they prioritize for juvenile re-entry, that includes support efforts for reducing recidivism as
2

well as enhancing post-juvenile systems education, parenting skills, job-training, counselling and
health care. The effectiveness of such system can be proven by a new statement where, The last
President of UK Obama in 2009 has directed the Justice Department for launching the National
Forum on Youth Violence Prevention (Newbury-Birch and et. al., 2016). It brings together a
network of communities as well as federal agencies for reducing youth violence, gang activity,
build local capacity and improve safety procedures for public. As per ONS report on Youth
Justice Statistics 2017-18, based on England and Wales, it has been identified that number of
youth or children who received a sentence has fallen from 82% to 76% as compared to last year.
But the average length of custodial sentence related to indictable offences has also increased over
last decades from 5 months to 16.7 months (Youth Justice Statistics, 2017). Along with this, the
reoffending rate also decreased by 1.3% in last year.
3

As per this figure, it has been evaluated that over 11000 youth cautions in England and Wales in
March 2018, are given to children, which is a the much greater reduce with 91% as compared to
data of last 10 years (Youth Justice Statistics, 2017-2018).
4

From this figure, it has been interpreted that number of arrest of youth offenders has
fallen continuously at constant rate in UK. Here, with continue long term downward tend,
number of arresting since March 2008 to 2018 has fallen by 78% (Youth Justice Statistics 2017-
2018).
In order to reduce crime and violence as well as give a second chance to offenders to stay
away from crime, Ministry Government of UK has launched various laws. It includes My
Brother's Keeper Initiative, that has been a focus of policies related to community based work
taking place, where efforts included a wide array of policy guidance, including national forums,
grand programs and tasks forces, with main aim is to bring awareness among public about
solutions to incarceration and violence (FACT SHEET: Enhancing the Fairness and
Effectiveness of the Criminal Justice System, 2015). As part of this initiative, several
communities i.e. near about 200 have committed for implementing strategies, to ensure that all
youth generation remain safe and secure from violence (Sarker and et. al., 2017). It includes- the
local partners in Washington DC, has created a partnership with police department for providing
training of youth before they leave academy. They also focus on how to engage young people in
5

community. Similarly, In Boston, with support and contribution of The Boston Foundation, MA
Mayor Martin J. Walsh has announced to launch a strategic as well as comprehensive city-wide
public safety plan. They also pledge to give investment of near about $3.1 million to implement
this plan within three years. This will allowed to integration the Street-Safe program into
societies, including a citywide expansion of on-the-ground for outreaching to youth who are at
risk of violent crime (Edmiston and Nicholls, 2018). In this regard, coordination and with
support of Boston Police Department (BPD), including Mayor’s Public Safety Initiative,
organisations within Criminal Justice System has succeeded to reduce criminal offences and
prevent public from criminality.
6

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Rees, J. and Mullins, D. eds., 2016. The third sector delivering public services: developments,
innovations and challenges. Policy Press.
Schön, D.A., 2017. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.
Evans, T., 2016. Professional discretion in welfare services: Beyond street-level bureaucracy.
Routledge.
Sarker and et. al., 2017. Problems and challenges of public administration in Bangladesh:
pathway to sustainable development. International Journal of Public Administration and
Policy Research. 3(1). pp.16-25.
Edmiston, D. and Nicholls, A., 2018. Social Impact Bonds: the role of private capital in outcome-
based commissioning. Journal of Social Policy. 47(1). pp.57-76.
Buck, T., Kirkham, R. and Thompson, B., 2016. The ombudsman enterprise and administrative
justice. Routledge.
Newbury-Birch, D. and et. al., 2016. A rapid systematic review of what we know about alcohol
use disorders and brief interventions in the criminal justice system. International Journal
of Prisoner Health. 12(1). pp.57-70.
Kirkham, R., 2016. The ombudsman, tribunals and administrative justice section: a 2020 vision
for the ombudsman sector. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 38(1). pp.103-
114.
Online
Youth Justice Statistics. 2017- 2018. [Online] Available
Through:<https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/774866/youth_justice_statistics_bulletin_2017_2018.pdf>.
FACT SHEET: Enhancing the Fairness and Effectiveness of the Criminal Justice System. 2015.
[Online] Available Through:
<https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/07/14/fact-sheet-
enhancing-fairness-and-effectiveness-criminal-justice-system>.
7

8