Open Access Publisher and Free Library
CRIMINAL JUSTICE.jpeg

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE-CRIMINAL LAW-PROCDEDURE-SENTENCING-COURTS

Posts tagged policy reform
The Hidden Web of Criminal Legal System Fines and Fees in Kentucky

By ASHLEY SPALDING, PAM THOMAS, PATIENCE MARTIN, SCOTT WEST and KAYLEE RAYMER

A new report from the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy reveals how this convoluted and opaque system extracts millions from the communities least able to bear the burden — including nearly $60 million collected from a single standard court fee imposed on all cases between 2022 and 2024. The report also highlights $91.4 million in unpaid court debt as of 2019, underscoring the long-term impact of these obligations. Geography also plays a role, with counties often charging fees that vary widely across the state, meaning that the same offense and same court experience can have very different costs, depending on where a person is arrested.

The authors offer a set of urgent policy recommendations, including eliminating jail as a consequence for unpaid fines and fees, implementing ability-to–pay assessments, and increasing data transparency and accountability across the system.

Berea: Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, 2025. 27p

download
A New International Approach to Beating Serious and Organised Crime

By Crest Advisory and The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change

It almost feels like a cliché to say that serious and organised crime (SOC) is evolving rapidly and continuously in scale, shape and sophistication. However, after five years leading INTERPOL’s global operational responses to crime and terrorism, I’ve seen first-hand how far these escalating threats are outstripping our well-intentioned but linear, dated and fragmented response mechanisms.

In any losing battle, it is necessary to draw back and reconsider one’s approach. That is why it is time for us to recognise that SOC is no longer simply a criminal-justice matter alone – it has become a societal threat, and it is time it was treated with the seriousness, focus and renewal of tactics this demands.

My time as Executive Director of Police Services at INTERPOL fundamentally changed not just the way I see crime but the way I see the business models behind that crime. I came into this role from specialist commands at New Scotland Yard and geographic leadership as Chief Constable of Essex. But when I began looking at crime through its actual drivers and enablers – technology, transport, communication and broader logistical systems – it became impossible to ignore just how far our current models were falling short.

The implications are profound. This unique role offered a rare perspective and it was an immense privilege. Whether it was the fallout of the Afghan government’s collapse on drug flows and human trafficking, or the levels of sophistication, reach and ruthlessness of West African organised crime groups, the conclusion was the same: the criminal threats have moved on, and we haven’t.

Working internationally, it is clear how SOC embeds itself in our economies, institutions and in some cases governance and political systems. These subtle, malign networks are built to avoid law-enforcement attention, to adapt on the fly, to exploit our media and political distractions, and our global obsession with “perimeter” mindsets. The reality is that not only is law enforcement often too busy and too consumed by existing threats to notice the emergence of new, more sinister ones, but its global architecture is fractured, duplicative and falling behind.

Nowhere is this as evident as in the use of technology, which has become the ultimate enabler for SOC. From AI and deepfakes to encrypted comms and crypto flows, organised crime groups are exploiting every tool at their disposal. They’re using entrepreneurial models to recruit, move money, manage their supply chains and to attack at speeds and volumes that overwhelm traditional policing models.

This paper makes the case plainly: in the face of such technically enabled criminal business models, if we don’t treat our data and computing power as strategic assets, we are choosing to lose.

Law enforcement is still chasing symptoms, not systems. Exceptional individuals working in law enforcement are constrained by legacy tools, bureaucratic structures and performance frameworks that were created for a bygone age. Prosecutions take years. Trials are complex and juries are expected to seize complex legal and evidential issues. Meanwhile, the criminal networks regenerate.

This paper highlights the urgent need for a bolder, more strategic and proactive set of tools that sit beyond law enforcement – including sanctions, online disruption and new global mechanisms that match the transnational nature of the threat. It is refreshing because it challenges the orthodoxy and questions the institutional inertia that prevents us from taking a fundamentally different tack: one that focuses on enablers, is rooted in disruption and built on bold, trusted partnerships.

Arrests alone will never dismantle criminal economies. Organised crime functions as an economy, and must be considered and tackled accordingly. This will require disrupting logistics, targeting financial facilitators, and redirecting seized assets to strengthen the very systems needed to fight back.

This situation also means the private sector must at long last be integrated into the frontline response. Finance, tech, logistics and data systems are being exploited daily, yet their operators remain on the sidelines, or are brought in through fragmented, ad hoc efforts. These sectors can see the damage, and wish to help, yet we just haven’t made it easy for them. This paper rightly calls for their operational integration, as part of a strategic design, as essential and included partners, not as an afterthought.

No matter how imperfect or distasteful, we must be willing to put a value on serious and organised criminal harms, exactly in the way we do with other global security threats. Too often politicians avoid attaching a price to abuse and exploitation as it highlights the scale of what is happening to the public and the media. But if we’re serious about resourcing a meaningful and sustainable response, we can no longer afford to look away. Influence, funding and political attention follow data. A serious response must follow the same logic.

In the same vein, we cannot afford to ignore the geopolitics of SOC. Today on the global stage and even at a domestic level, consensus is hard-won in a world defined by distrust, instability and polarised politics. But that’s no excuse to retreat. Democracies cannot afford to treat SOC as an abstract or future concern. We must learn the lessons from across the world – just because it is difficult to see, does not mean it is not already here, not already shaping global systems, and it demands a response as strategic, coordinated and relentless as the threat itself.

The path forward will not be easy, but the case for change is clear. Conventional structures and risk-averse strategies will not meet the moment. It is time for a new mindset: one that treats data and computing power as strategic assets, accepts disruption as vital tools, and one that is willing to experiment with new institutional models that break with convention.

The ideas set out here reflect that new mindset. They propose not incremental reform, but a fundamental rethink of how the international community responds to SOC. The goal is not simply to cope with today’s threat landscape, but to get ahead of it.

This moment demands strategic ambition and operational realism, and, above all, urgency. Criminals relish our adherence to old models. SOC has already shaped the world around us.

Our response must now do the same

London: Crest Advisory and The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, 2025. 48p.

download
Redefining Reinvestment: An opportunity for Aboriginal communities and government to co-design justice reinvestment in NSW

By Fiona Allison

Over the last decade, Aboriginal communities in New South Wales have been implementing justice reinvestment (JR) to address Aboriginal over-representation in the justice system. They have returned to its early conceptualization in the US as a place-based approach that addresses drivers of offending, whilst also emphasizing self-determination. They define reinvestment, a key element of JR, as a redirection of funds away from more punitive justice responses into localized prevention approaches, but also as a much broader shift in resources and decision-making.

This report presents an urgent call to action for the NSW Government to invest in JR, framed by Aboriginal definitions of reinvestment. Aboriginal over-representation in NSW continues to rise, alongside increases in NSW Government expenditure on incarceration. Aboriginal communities have been leading JR in NSW for close to a decade now. And while in some areas NSW Government policy aligns with and/or is facilitating reinvestment in NSW, including through the Closing the Gap strategy, additional action is required of government.

Just Reinvest NSW, 2022, 28p.

download
Domestic Violence: A Need for Policies that Address the Justice Gap

By Kimberly Ann Puhala

The problems associated with the civil legal system for women who have experienced domestic violence have been persistent over time and still exist today. The current sociopolitical context in this state frames access to civil legal services either through a means-tested (and underfunded) program (Civil Legal Assistance) or as a privately purchased market service. This leaves a limited amount of low- or no-cost alternatives, which creates a gap in services for those women whose income is too high to qualify for Civil Legal Assistance programs, yet too low to afford to hire a private attorney. This study examines this two-tiered system, and reveals that the alternative to full Civil Legal Assistance or individually purchased full-scale legal representation for iv women who fall into the services gap is a system that is confusing, faces a lack of coordination, and may lead to less than optimal outcomes in civil legal cases related to domestic violence. This study explores the workings of this system from the perspective of the women using it and the service providers within it. Through surveys of 18 women seeking civil legal assistance and 11 interviews with legal services advocates and providers, this research identifies the areas that remain problematic for women who experience domestic violence and turn to the civil legal services for help.

Puhala, Kimberly Ann, "Legal Experiences of Women Survivors of Domestic Violence: A Need for Policies that Address the Justice Gap" (2011). Graduate Doctoral Dissertations. Paper 37.

download
Working with Young Adults in Contact with the Criminal Justice System: A Review of the Evidence

By Gemma Buckland

In recent decades, policymakers have become increasingly aware that our legal definition, which treats all people aged 18 years or older as adults, does not reflect the neurological process of maturation. Policymakers across all parts of the criminal justice system have recognised this although changes in practice are variable at best. There is now a considerable body of evidence on the maturation process and best practice in working with young adults (typically defined as those aged between 18 and 25 years old) in contact with the criminal justice system. This review looks at: What we understand about the development of the brain in young adulthood The implications for young adults involved in criminal behaviour The impact of trauma and Adverse Childhood Experiences on the maturation process The “age-crime curve” and the evidence about growing out of crime Implications for best practice working with young adults

London: CLINKS, 2025. 16p.

Download
The Mental Health Needs of Justice-Involved Persons A Rapid Scoping Review of the Literature

By Andrew Galley,  Frank Sirotich, and Sara Rodrigues  

This report is based on a scoping review by a team of researchers at the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA), who analyzed existing research and policy documents on the mental health care needs of justice-involved persons in Canada’s criminal justice system and in peer jurisdictions. It aims to guide future research and policy development by highlighting what is currently known about this topic and what knowledge gaps may exist in the literature on mental health in the criminal justice system. While it highlights research on the prevalence of mental health problems and mental illness in the criminal justice system, experiences of justice-involved persons with mental health problems and mental illness, and promising practices and principles for mental health care, it is not intended to be a comprehensive review of the literature.   

Ottawa: Mental Health Commission of Canada , 2020. 124p.

download
Reforming New York’s Bail Reform: A Public Safety-Minded Proposal

By Rafael A. Mangual 

After enacting a sweeping bail reform, New York lawmakers have drawn the ire of constituents who are troubled by the many stories of repeat and serious offenders—some with violent criminal histories—being returned to the street following their arrests. In the state’s biggest city, the public’s growing concerns are buttressed by brow-raising, if preliminary, crime data, amplifying calls for amending or repealing the bail reform. The operative provisions of New York’s bail reform severely limit judicial discretion in pretrial release decisions, increasing the number of pretrial defendants who are being released, often without conditions and without allowing judges to consider the risk that a defendant poses to the public. New York is now the only state that does not allow judges to consider public safety in any pretrial release decisions. This brief begins with an overview of New York’s pre-2020 bail law and the reforms that took effect on January 1. It then highlights the reform’s shortfalls and ends by proposing three changes intended to address the public’s legitimate safety concerns while preserving the spirit of the reform effort and addressing some of the inequities and inefficiencies inherent in a system that is heavily reliant on the use of monetary pretrial release conditions. The proposed changes include: • Empowering judges to assess the public safety risk posed by pretrial defendants, and setting out a process that allows them to detain dangerous or chronic offenders; • Allowing judges to revoke or amend release decisions in response to a pretrial defendant’s rearrest; and • In the intermediate term, setting aside additional funds or diverting existing funds to reduce the time a defendant stands to spend in jail if remanded to pretrial detention.  

New York: Manhattan Institute, 2020. 14p.

download