HU Credits: 4

Degree/Cycle: 2nd degree (Master)

Responsible Department: Criminology

Semester: 1st Semester

Teaching Languages: Hebrew

Campus: Mt. Scopus

Course/Module Coordinator: Prof. Tali Gal

Coordinator Email: tali.gal@mail.huji.ac.il

Coordinator Office Hours: Wednesday 10:00-12:00

Teaching Staff:
Prof Tali Gal

Course/Module description:
When someone commits a crime, they typically face a criminal procedure that is carried out in court, in which guilt is proven and the appropriate punishment is determined. But this is not always the case. In recent decades, alternatives to the classic criminal process have been increasing, both in Israel and abroad, a phenomenon some call “multi-door criminal justice.” During the seminar, we will become familiar with the criticisms against the mainstream criminal process, and will become aware of the doors that open for certain offenses or against certain populations: settlements; community courts, problem-solving courts; drug courts; and arraignment hearings. We will learn about the studies that have evaluated these doors, including the newest studies in Israel, and discuss the pros and cons of each door.

Course/Module aims:
Get to know the critical discourse about the existing criminal justice system, and against this background the wide range of alternatives and additions to the criminal process and the existing research knowledge about them.

Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
At the end of the seminar, the students will:
* Acquire a critical perspective on the criminal process and its consequences
* Be familiar with the existing alternatives, in Israel and abroad, to the adversarial criminal process
* Be familiar with studies about these alternatives and will be able to understand, analyze and critically review this research knowledge

Attendance requirements(%):
According to circumstances

Teaching arrangement and method of instruction: Seminar

Course/Module Content:
1. The mainstream criminal process and critiques against it: Discrimination and inefficiency; Victims of crime; community; personal well-being
2. Multiple-door criminal justice: Pluralism in criminal law in the 21st century
3. Therapeutic jurisprudence as a theoretical framework
4. Problem-solving courts, drug courts, sexual offense courts, prostitution courts
5. Community courts
6. Restorative justice
7. Deferred prosecution, Plea agreements, and arraignment hearings
8. Student presentations (three classes)

Required Reading:
1. Clear & Frost, The Punishment Imperative: The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America (NYU Press, 2014): Chapter 2: The Contours of Mass incarceration.
2. Dancig-Rosenberg, H. & Gal, T. Guest Editors’ Introduction: Multi-Door Criminal Justice, 22(4) New Criminal Law Review 347-358.
3. וקסלר, דיויד, תורת המשפט הטיפולי – סקירה, מחקרי משפט כו, התש"ע – 2010, עמ' 367-378.
4.ארנה רבינוביץ-עיני, "בתי משפט פותרי בעיות ובעיית האחריותיות: לקחים ממיסוד הליך הגישור", מחקרי משפט כו2 517, (תש"ע)
5.גל, ט., דנציג-רוזנברג, ה., ומנטוביץ', א. דו"ח מסכם: מחקר הערכה לבתי המשפט הקהילתיים (2023).
6.גל, טלי, "הפיתוח התאורטי של גישת הצדק המאחה – הקיים והחסר", בתוך א. ינאי וט. גל, מפגיעה לאיחוי: צדק מאחה ושיח מאחה בישראל. ירושלים, מאגנס 2016, עמ' 3-27.
7.דנציג-רוזנברג וגל, 'מהיר ועצבני': מחקר אמפירי על הליכי מוקד בבתי-משפט השלום בישראל (עומד להתפרסם במחקרי משפט, 2020).

Additional Reading Material:
1. Kent Roach, Four Models of the Criminal Process, 89(2) J. Crim. L. & Criminology, 671, (1999), 699-713
2. Parsons, Jim, and Bergin, Tiffany, “The Impact of Criminal Justice Involvement on Victims' Mental Health”, 23 Journal of Traumatic Stress (2) 182–188 (2010).
3. Bibas, S., & Bierschbach, R. A., Integrating remorse and apology into criminal procedure. Yale Law Journal, 114, 85-148 (2004).
4. Christie, Neils, "Conflicts as Property", British Journal of Criminology 17, 1 - 15 (1977).

4. Gal, T. & Dancig-Rosenberg, H. Characterizing Multi-door Criminal Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Three Criminal Justice Mechanisms, 23 New Criminal Law Review (forthcoming, Jan. 2020).
5. Dancig-Rosenberg, H. & Gal, T. “Criminal Law Multitasking”, 18 LEWIS & CLARK LAW REVIEW 893-933 (2015).
6. Wexler, D. B. (2014). New wine in new bottles: The need to sketch a therapeutic jurisprudence code of proposed criminal processes and practices. Arizona Summit Law Review, 7, 463-479.
7. Bruce J. Winick, "The Jurisprudence of Therapeutic Jurisprudence", 3(1) Psychology, Public Policy and the Law 184, 186 (1997).
8. Michael D. Jones, Mainstreaming Therapeutic Jurisprudence into the Traditional Courts: Suggestions for Judges and Practitioners, Phoenix Law Review 5, 753 – 776 (2012).
9. Bruce J. Winick, "Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Problem Solving Courts", 30 Fordham Urban Law Journal 1055 (2002).
10. Casey, Pamela M., and David B. Rottman. "Problem-solving courts: Models and trends." Justice System Journal 26(1) 35-56 (2005).
11. Hora, Peggy, Schma, William & Rosenthal, John, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Drug Treatment Court Movement: Revolutionizing the Criminal Justice System' s Response to Drug Abuse and Crime in America, 74 Notre Dame L. Rev. 439 (1999).
12. Cooper, Caroline S. "Drug courts: current issues and future perspectives." Substance use & misuse 38, no. 11-13 (2003): 1671-1711.
13. גלעד נתן, בתי דין מיוחדים לענייני סמים – מסמך רקע, מרכז המחקר והמידע, הכנסת, 17 מאי 2006
14. Frazer, M. Somjen. "The impact of the community court model on defendant perceptions of fairness." New York: Center for Court Innovation. Retrieved on October 12 (2006): 2009.
15. Gal, T. & Dancig-Rosenberg, H. Characterizing Community Courts, Behavioral Sciences & the Law 35(5-6), 523-539 (2017).
16. Gal, T., & Dancig-Rosenberg, H. (2020). “I Am Starting to Believe in the Word ‘Justice’”: Lessons from an Ethnographic Study on Community Courts. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 68(2), 376-411.
17. חוק סדר הדין הפלילי (בתי משפט קהילתיים) תשפ"א-2020
18. טלי גל והדר דנציג-רוזנברג, "צדק מאחה וצדק עונשי: שני פנים למשפט הפלילי", משפטים מג תשע"ג.
19. Shannon M. Sliva, Elizabeth H. Porter-Merrill, & Pete Lee, Fulfilling the Aspirations of Restorative Justice in the criminal system? The Case of Colorado, 28 KAN. J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 456.
20. Sherman, Lawrence W., Heather Strang, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Daniel J. Woods, and Barak Ariel. "Are restorative justice conferences effective in reducing repeat offending? Findings from a Campbell systematic review." Journal of Quantitative Criminology 31, no. 1 (2015): 1-24.
21. Sasson, Erika (n.d.) Red Hook Peacemaking Program: Program Guide for Court Referrals.
22. "הפעלת תיקון 66 לחוק סדר הדין הפלילי [נוסח משולב], התשמ"ב - "הסדר מותנה"", הנחית היועץ המשפטי לממשלה, 4.3042
23. McGrath, Andrew. "The effect of diversion from court: a review of the evidence." Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 15(2) 317-339 (2008).
24. Friday, Paul C., et al. "Referral and Selection Criteria in Deferred Prosecution - The Impact on the Criminal Justice System." British Journal of Criminology, vol. 21, no. 2, April 1981, p. 166-172.
25. Wexler, D. B., & Jones, M. D. (2012). Employing the Last Best Offer Approach in Criminal Settlement Conferences: The Therapeutic Application of an Arbitration Technique in Judicial Mediation. Phoenix L. Rev., 6, 843.
26. Susan R. Klein, "Monitoring the Plea Process," Duquesne Law Review 51, no. 3 (Summer 2013): 559-594
27. King, Nancy J., and Ronald F. Wright. "The Invisible Revolution in Plea Bargaining: Managerial Judging and Judicial Participation in Negotiations." Texas Law Review, vol. 95, no. 2, December 2016, p. 325-398.
28. Judy Cashmore and Rita Shackel, Evaluation of the Child Sexual Offence Evidence Pilot: Final Outcome Evaluation Report (2018).
29. New Zealand Evaluation of the Sexual Violence Court Pilot (2019)
30. Leon, Chrysanthi S., and Corey S. Shdaimah. "JUSTifying scrutiny: State power in prostitution diversion programs." Journal of Poverty 16, no. 3 (2012): 250-273.
31. Kendis, B. (2018). Human Trafficking and Prostitution Courts: Problem Solving or Problematic. Case W. Res. L. Rev., 69, 805.
32. Teresa C. Kulig & Leah C. Butler (2019) From “Whores” to “Victims”: The Rise and Status of Sex Trafficking Courts, Victims & Offenders, 14:3, 299-321.
33. הוועדה הציבורית לבחינת מדיניות הענישה והטיפול בעבריינים, דין וחשבון (נובמבר 2015).
34.טלי גל, שי צפריר ולליב אגוזי: מניעת תיוג או תפיסה ברשת? מחקר מלווה לשלב הפיילוט של 'הסדר מותנה'. בתוך שיקום עוברי חוק: תיאוריה ויישום (אתי אלישע, ענת זליג, אורי תימור עורכים), עמ' 143-170, רסלינג 2022.
35.דו"ח הוועדה הבינמשרדית לבחינת הטיפול בנפגעי עבירות מין בהליך הפלילי, 2019.

Grading Scheme :
Essay / Project / Final Assignment / Home Exam / Referat 80 %
Presentation / Poster Presentation / Lecture/ Seminar / Pro-seminar / Research proposal 20 %

Additional information: