Procedural Justice Theory to Law Enforcement's Response to Persons with Mental Illness

Procedural Justice Theory to Law Enforcement's Response to Persons with Mental Illness
Student's Name
College/University
Course
Professor's Name
Due Date
Violent crime is a pertinent issue worldwide since it poses significant threats to communities causing economic disruption, social instability, and insecurities. Although violent crime has significantly reduced in the United States, the rates of gun homicide remain 25 times higher than in other countries, regardless of nonlethal crimes recording similar rates. Also, study shows that countries like the United States are more likely to die from violent crimes due to increased shooting (Shepley et al., 2019). In this context, public confidence and trust in law enforcement agencies are crucial for anticipating public collaboration with police in a democracy. Public collaboration and cooperation with law enforcers are vital to the effective control of violent crime, mainly because law enforcement agencies depend on community members to report these crimes or suspicious activities, as well as help in offender identification. Citizens' expressions of confidence in law enforcement agencies are influenced by their perspectives concerning police commitment to helping and caring for their communities, thus prioritizing communities' best interests. However, minority societal groups, including people with mental illness, are likely to mistrust law enforcement agencies, as they fear that police will discredit their reports as victims of violent crime (Morgan & Higginson, 2023). The purpose of this paper is to apply procedural justice theory in violent crime, specifically focusing on discussing the factors leading to violent crime and examining how the theory can help in policy formulation and practice in mitigating such crimes. Through investigating procedural justice application to violent crime, this paper aims to offer valuable insights into the drivers of violent crime, the decision-making of the perpetrators, and its prevention and intervention.
Description of Procedural Justice Theory
Procedural justice implies the primary significance that individuals attach to interactions with authority. The procedural justice theory refers to the criminological aspect, which focuses on the vitality of fair and equal interaction processes in the criminal justice system. The theory presents that the interaction course with authority significantly affects the subjective assessment of the involved persons and the interaction results. There is a just and fair perception decision-making process during interaction with the authority, even when the outcome is unfavorable. According to the procedural justice theory, interpersonal traits like fairness, voice, validation, respect, motivation, and information influence the perception of the interactions (Wittouck & Beken, 2019). The theory posits that people's perception of fairness in their interaction with authority, consistent application of laws and rules, and transparency in decision-making significantly affect their behaviors, attitudes, and compliance with the law. People accept decisions, show rule-abiding behavior, and adore legal authority if they believe the criminal justice system is procedurally fair and just (Morgan & Higginson, 2023).
According to Morgan and Higginson (2023), the procedural justice perspective stipulates guidelines for evaluating the experience of persons with mental illness concerning the interaction with authority and how the behavior of the authority model the persons' resistance and cooperation. The interaction processes may hinder the success of violent crime intervention. The procedural justice stipulations focus on the subjective experience of the offender during the interaction process with authority as opposed to outcome satisfaction. The fundamental procedural justice framework antecedents involve engagement, dignity, and politeness. Procedural justice theory encompasses the group-value model, which presents the need for fair treatment among people despite the interaction's outcome. Fair treatment by the authority directly determines the procedural justice judgments and shows the person's valuation as a group member. Therefore, this fairness enhances the person's cooperation in the social order. Essentially, disrespect by the authorities reduces the chances of the violent offender cooperating (Watson & Angell, 2007).
Procedural justice theory has several significant components, like fair treatment, voice and participation, transparency and information, and impartiality and consistency. According to the theory, people value fair treatment and respectful interactions with authority regardless of mental state. Fair treatment entails offering an opportunity for people to express their views while depicting dignified and respectful behavior in the communication process. The perception of fair treatment by people enhances their belief and trust in the justice system's legitimacy and promotes coordination with authorities. Procedural justice theory stresses the significance of offering people a voice during decision-making. The theory proponents believe that ensuring active participation in the interaction process through restorative justice or community engagement improves people's trust in the justice system and enhances positive results (Koster et al., 2018).
The procedural justice theory points out the significance of transparency and information in the criminal justice system. Clear, understandable, and transparent communications concerning procedures, laws and rules, and justice outcomes enhance a person's understanding of the decision-making process and view it as just and fair. Accurate and accessible information promotes the comprehension of factors contributing to certain violent crime decisions and actions, thus decreasing arbitrariness perceptions and improving trust in the justice system. Also, procedural justice theory stresses impartial and consistent treatment of people. Authorities should consistently apply sanctions and rules across various settings and people to promote fairness promotions and mitigate the probability of biased decisions. The impartial treatment enhances the trust and belief of a person that discrimination and personal biases are not determinant factors to their fate; rather, evidence and objective criteria determine the outcome (Wittouck & Beken, 2019). The principles of procedural justice theory mentioned above can be used in cases of mentally ill violent crime offenders to reconcile control and care tensions during interactions.
In applying procedural justice theory to violent crime, it is critical to consider how the abovementioned principles affect people's engagement, especially those with mental illnesses, in violent criminal activities. Also, evaluation of their view of the criminal justice system and the probability of reoffending is vital. Individuals are likely to adhere to the set rules, comply with laws, and demonstrate prosocial behavior if they perceive the criminal justice system to be procedurally fair and just. The public will consider the authority's functioning legitimate and favorable if that authority shows procedurally just behavior and attitudes (Wittouck & Beken, 2019). However, it is essential to note that procedural injustice perceptions can promote adverse attitudes and behavior toward the criminal justice system and thus lead to mistrust, alienation, and resentment (Weisburd et al., 2022).
In the context of mental illness offenders, procedural justice offers guidelines for evaluating how persons with mental illness interact with law enforcement officers and how the officers' behavior contributes to resistance and cooperation modeling. The procedural justice theory suggests that fair treatment during a person's interaction with authority is fundamental since it impacts their resistance and cooperation with the authority (Weisburd et al., 2022). When applying the procedural justice perspectives to violent crimes for persons with mental illnesses, there are vital factors that should not be overlooked: participation, dignity, and trust. Participation entails allowing the mental illness offenders to narrate their side of the story and have a fair hearing. Dignity involves the authority acknowledging a person's rights and treating the offenders with politeness and respect, while trust implies the feeling that the authority values the person's welfare. The effect of procedural justice lies in the first encounter and, thus, the importance of how a law enforcement officer approaches a person. Persons with mental illnesses pay significant attention to their treatment by the officers (Watson & Angell, 2007).
Overview of Violent Crime
The United States Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation department refers to violent crimes as offenses that entail aggravated assault, murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, robbery, and forcible rape. In essence, these offenses involve a threat of force or force. The scope of this kind of crime is broad and impacts societies and people across divergent socio-economic backgrounds, geographical regions, and age groups. The definition of violent crime in the legal context may differ across jurisdictions but generally implies crimes that involve intentionally using aggressive or threatening to use force against other people (Shepley et al., 2019). In such crimes, there must be an aggressor who forcefully harms or injures the victim, thus causing significant psychological and physical impacts.
Violent crime affects people and communities immensely, with its impact lasting for a period. The effects of violent crimes stretch beyond physical harm and pain since it causes emotional and psychological health issues, leading to the loss of trust, a sense of insecurity, and vulnerability. People may adjust their daily schedules for fear of another instance of violence or retribution, thus hampering their freedom and sense of life. Substantially, victims of violent crime suffer from physical injuries, which contributes to extended disabilities, impaired functioning, or chronic pains (Koster et al., 2018).
Communities also suffer the impacts of violent crime. The perception of insecurity and the dangers of violent crimes may be pertinent in neighborhoods, thus leading to a loss of trust and social cohesion. People in such communities may fear participating in public activities or spaces by isolating themselves due to fear. Consequently, violent crimes may lead to economic consequences, with businesses suffering due to decreasing foot traffic. Therefore, enterprises relocate to safer areas with a flow of customers. This relocation causes a decrease in property valuation loss of livelihoods, and jobs. Such crimes force the criminal justice system to divert its resources from areas of development from those of burden. The violent crime burden may sometimes perpetuate, considering that communities affected by such crime may encounter increased retaliation rates and continuing criminal activities (Haleem et al., 2020).
Law enforcement officers and policymakers encounter diverse challenges in violent crime cases, particularly concerning persons with mental illnesses. Most persons with mental illnesses are victims as opposed to the perception that they have violent behavior. The interconnection of violence and mental illness thus presents significant challenges. When responding to crime, law enforcement officers encounter individuals with mental conditions with a high probability of violently harming themselves or others. Response to such scenarios calls for intense training, mental health resources, and effective communication skills, considering changes in crime and service patterns (Jennings et al., 2020). On the other hand, policymakers are torn between offering suitable care and support to persons with mental illnesses and ensuring public safety.
It is possible to address the above challenges to facilitate the seamless working of law enforcement and policymakers. It is critical to formulate extensive approaches which enhance early intervention, crime response services, and management of mental conditions. Law enforcement officers should collaborate with community organizations and mental health specialists to facilitate a smooth and effective response. Also, stakeholders in the criminal justice system should develop Crisis Intervention Teams (CITs) with mental health specialists and specially trained law enforcers involved. Such CIT initiatives seek to enhance the interaction outcomes with individuals involved in such situations by not taking them through the criminal justice system but instead enrolling them in suitable mental health services (Rogers et al., 2019). Furthermore, there is a need to enhance mental health awareness and eradicate the associative stigma to mental conditions.
Application of the Procedural Just...