Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:54:07.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Business as Usual? Bail Decision Making and “Micro Politics” in an Australian Magistrates Court

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Max Travers
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Between the 1970s and 1990s, political scientists in the United States pursued a distinctive research program that employed ethnographic methods to study micro politics in criminal courts. This article considers the relevance of this concept for court researchers today through a case study about bail decision making in a lower criminal court in Australia. It describes business as usual in how decisions are made and the provision of pretrial services. It also looks at how traditionalists and reformers understood business as usual, and uses this as a critical concept to make visible micro politics in this court. The case study raises issues about organizational change in criminal courts since the 1990s, since there are fewer studies about plea bargaining and more about specialist or problem-solving courts. It is suggested that we need a new international agenda that can address change and continuity in criminal courts.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , Spring 2017 , pp. 325 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Ball, Stephen. 1987. The Micro‐Politics of the School: Towards a Theory of School Organization. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bartkowiak‐Theron, Isabelle, and Asquith, Nicole, eds. 2012. Policing Vulnerability. Sydney: Federation Press.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence. 2006. Judges and Their Audiences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bibby, Paul. 2015. Lindt Café Siege: Prosecutor Did Deal with Monis' Lawyer for Bail, Inquest Hears. Sydney Morning Herald, August 28. http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/lindt-cafe-siege-prosecutor-did-deal-with-monis-lawyer-for-bail-inquest-hears-20150828-gj9z13.html (accessed August 2015).Google Scholar
Blumberg, Abraham. 1967. Criminal Justice. Chicago, IL: Quadrangle Books.Google Scholar
Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Brown, David. 2013. Looking Behind the Increase in Custodial Remand Populations. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 2 (2): 80–99.Google Scholar
Bucher, Rue, and Strauss, Anselm. 1961. Professions in Process. American Journal of Sociology 66:325–34.Google Scholar
Burns, Stacy, and Peyrot, Mark. 2003. “Tough Love”: Nurturing and Coercing Responsibility and Recovery in California Drug Courts. Social Problems 50 (3): 416–38.Google Scholar
Carlen, Pat. 1976. Magistrates' Justice. Oxford: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
Castellano, Ursula. 2011 Outsourcing Justice: The Role of Nonprofit Caseworkers in Pretrial Release Programs. Boulder, CO: FirstForumPress.Google Scholar
Church, Thomas. 1978. Justice Delayed: The Pace of Litigation in Urban Trial Courts. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron. 1968. The Social Organization of Juvenile Justice. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, John, and Henry, D. Alan. 2003. Pretrial Services Programming at the Start of the 21st Century. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Conley, John, and O'Barr, William. 2005. Just Words: Law, Language and Power, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cunneen, Chris, Baldry, Eileen, Brown, David, Schwartz, Melanie, and Steel, Alex. 2013. Penal Culture and Hyperincarceration: The Revival of the Prison. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Darbyshire, Penny. 2011. Sitting in Judgement: The Working Lives of Judges. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Department of Human Services. 2005. The CREDIT Bail Support Program. Melbourne: Victorian Government. http://docs.health.vic.gov.au/docs/doc/A69711BC8E6A78DFCA25789600025ADF/$FILE/credit-bail-support.pdf (accessed April 2015).Google Scholar
Dupret, Baudouin. 2011. Adjudication in Action: An Ethnomethodology of Law, Morality and Justice. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, James, Flemming, Roy, and Nardulli, Peter. 1988. The Contours of Justice: Communities and Their Courts. Boston, MA: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Fay‐Ramirez, Suzanna. 2015. Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Practice: Changes in Family Treatment Court Norms Over Time. Law & Social Inquiry 40 (1): 205–36.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 1979. The Process Is the Punishment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm, and Simon, Jonathon. 1994. The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and Its Implications. Criminology 30:449–74.Google Scholar
Feigenson, Neal, and Dunn, Peter. 2003. New Visual Technologies in Courts: Directions for Research. Law and Human Behavior 27 (1): 109–26.Google Scholar
Fielding, Nigel. 2006. Courting Violence: Offences Against the Person. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy. 1982. Punishment Before Trial: An Organizational Perspective of Felony Bail Processes. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy, Nardulli, Peter, and Eisenstein, James. 1992. The Craft of Justice: Politics and Work in Court Communities. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Freiberg, Arie, and Morgan, Neil. 2004. Between Bail and Sentence: The Conflation of Dispositional Options. Current Issues in Criminal Justice 15:16–30.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1982. The Interaction Order. American Sociological Review 48 (1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Grewal, J. 2015. Tim Carmody Quits as Queensland Chief Justice. Australian, July 1. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/tim-carmody-quits-as-queensland-chief-justice/story-e6frg97x-1227423761181 (accessed August 2015).Google Scholar
Hannah‐Moffat, Kelly, and Maurutto, Paul. 2013. Shifting and Targeted Forms of Penal Governance: Bail, Punishment and Specialized Courts. Theoretical Criminology 16 (2): 201–19.Google Scholar
Harris, Alexes. 2009 Attributions and Institutional Processing: How Focal Concerns Guide Decision‐Making in the Juvenile Court. Race and Social Problems 1 (4): 243–56.Google Scholar
Heumann, Milton. 1977. Plea Bargaining: The Experiences of Prosecutors, Judges and Defense Attorneys. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Heydebrand, Wolfgang, and Seron, Carol. 1990. Rationalizing Justice: The Political Economy of US Federal Courts. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Hogarth, John. 1971. Sentencing as a Human Process. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Holstein, James. 1993. Court‐Ordered Insanity: Interpretive Practice and Involuntary Commitment. Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
Killick, David. 2015. Tasmania Is the Crime Dropper State. Mercury, January 17. http://www.themercury.com.au/news/scales-of-justice/tasmania-is-the-crime-dropper-state/story-fnj8cre7-1227187695083 (accessed April 2015).Google Scholar
King, Susan, Bamford, David, and Sarre, Rick. 2005. Factors That Influence Remand in Custody: Report to the Criminology Research Council. Canberra: Criminology Research Council.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert. 2007. Toward a Theorization of Craft. Social and Legal Studies 16 (3): 321–40.Google Scholar
Kupchik, Aaron. 2003. Prosecuting Adolescents in Criminal Courts: Criminal or Juvenile Justice? Social Problems 50 (3): 439–60.Google Scholar
Licoppe, Christian. 2015. Categorisation Work in the Courtroom: The “Foundational” Character of Membership Categorisation Analysis. In Advances in Membership Categorisation Analysis, ed. Fitzgerald, Richarc and Housley, William, 71–98. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 1980. Street‐Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Lynch, Michael, Dupret, Baudouin, and Berard, Tim, eds. 2015. Law at Work. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn. 1979 Plea Bargaining or Trial: The Process of Criminal‐Case Disposition. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Miller, JoAnn, and Johnson, Donald. 2009. Problem Solving Courts: A Measure of Justice. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Mirchandani, Rekha. 2005. What's So Special About Specialialized Courts? The State and Social Change in Salt Lake City's Domestic Violence Court. Law & Society Review 39 (2): 379–417.Google Scholar
Nardulli, Peter, ed. 1979. The Study of Criminal Courts: Political Perspectives. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Nolan, James. 2001. Reinventing Justice: The American Drug Court Movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nolan, James. 2011. Legal Accents, Legal Borrowing: The International Problem‐Solving Court Movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Packer, Herbert. 1968. The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Paine, Michelle. 2013. Dream for Freedom at Prison Farm. Mercury, October 18. http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/dream-for-freedom-at-prison-farm/story-fnj4f7k1-1226741985235 (accessed April 2015).Google Scholar
Paterson, Alan. 2013. Final Judgement: The Last Law Lords and the Supreme Court. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1985. On Doing Being Ordinary. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. Atkinson, J. Maxwell and Drew, Paul, 413–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smart, Carol. 1989. Feminism and the Power of Law. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Strauss, Anselm. 1978. Social Worlds. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 4:171–90.Google Scholar
Sturz, Herbert. 1963. The Manhattan Bail Project: An Interim Report on the Use of Pre‐Trial Parole. New York University Law Review 38:67–95.Google Scholar
Sudnow, David. 1965 Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code. Social Problems 12 (4): 255–64.Google Scholar
Tait, David. 2011. Glass Cages in the Dock?: Presenting the Defendant to the Jury. Chicago‐Kent Law Review 86 (2): 467–95.Google Scholar
Tasmanian Department of Justice. 2008. Tasmania's Court Mandated Drug Program: Evaluation Report. Hobart: Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Tata, Cyrus. 2007. Sentencing as Craftwork and the Binary Epistemologies of the Discretionary Decision Process. Social and Legal Studies 16:425–47.Google Scholar
Tata, Cyrus, and Halliday, Simon, eds. 2002. Sentencing and Society: International Perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Travers, Max. 2006. Understanding Talk in Legal Settings: What Law and Society Studies Can Learn from a Conversation Analyst. Law & Social Inquiry 31 (2): 447–65.Google Scholar
Travers, Max. 2012. The Sentencing of Children: Professional Work and Perspectives. Washington, DC: New Academia Publishing.Google Scholar
Travers, Max, White, Rob, and McKinnon, M. 2013. The Children's Court in Tasmania. In Australia's Children's Courts: Today and Tomorrow, ed. Sheehan, Rosemary and Borowski, Allan, 150–71. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Ulmer, Jeffery. 1997. Social Worlds of Sentencing: Court Communities Under Sentencing Guidelines. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
VanNostrand, Marie, and Rose, Kenneth. 2009. The Virginia Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument. Richmond, VA: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services.Google Scholar
Family Violence Act 2004 (Tas).Google Scholar
Youth Justice Act 1997 (Tas).Google Scholar
Family Violence Act 2004 (Tas).Google Scholar
Youth Justice Act 1997 (Tas).Google Scholar