Teaching Sequence

Work through this resource material in the following sequence:

70 minutes

Part A: Flipped activity - podcast

15 minutes

Part B: Restorative and retributive justice

25 minutes

Part C: Understanding recidivism and sentencing

30 minutes

Part D: Advocating for justice

10 minutes

Reflection

Part A: Flipped activity - podcast

Step 1

Prior to this lesson or for homework, have students listen to the following podcast episode:

The Coward Punch That Could Have Killed Me - Young Blood - Men's Mental Health (open.spotify.com/episode/1oLSDZAXHES5W4WrF5Bvs6?si=MS9ISRSmSQScG7ZYnxsQjA)

Episode description:

Ben O'Toole was the victim of a coward punch attack that left him minutes away from permanent brain damage and death. He's one of many young men whose lives have been changed forever by the split-second decision of another to use extreme violence - turning a night on the town into a tragedy. To the amazement of his surgeon, Ben eventually recovered from his shocking head injuries and was so deeply affected by the trauma, he decided to dedicate his time to helping other men avoid experiencing such pain.

If students don't have access to Spotify, they can search for this podcast episode on any podcast app.

Step 2

After listening, students can respond to these reflection questions:

What stood out to you about Ben's story?
What would justice look like to you in this situation?
What solutions can you imagine to prevent coward punches in the future?

Part B: Restorative and retributive justice

Step 1

Distribute the Student Worksheet and read this along with students:

Restorative vs. Retributive Justice

For thousands of years, the justice system has evolved - informed by different cultural, moral and philosophical understandings of what it means to maintain a ‘just society’ and to punish those who transgress against the norms this system establishes.

Though there are many different schools of thought that inform justice systems around the world, ‘restorative’ and ‘retributive’ justice are two core philosophical theories of justice.

‘Restorative justice’ is concerned with how crimes cause harm to individuals/communities as a whole. Indeed, in order to ‘restore’ justice once harm has been inflicted, proponents of restorative justice believe that rectifying, insofar as it is possible, the harm that has been inflicted should be the foundation of a criminal justice system. As a result, it is the school of thought that underpins most initiatives that have a significant impact on reducing recidivism (that is, the rate that criminals reoffend). Restorative justice allows opportunities for the offender and affected parties to work together to set things right. Relationships are at the core of restorative justice.

‘Retributive justice’, on the other hand, is concerned with punishing the wrongdoing to a degree that is proportionate to the crime they have committed. Proponents of retributive justice often support such ideologies as the death penalty for certain crimes under certain circumstances (i.e. if someone kills another person deliberately, they should, in turn, lose their right to life).

Step 2

Engage the class in a discussion about justice using these questions as prompts:

What philosophy or philosophies do you think underpin Australia’s criminal justice system? What gives you that impression?
Which philosophy (if either) aligns with your own sense of morality? Are there any exceptions you can think of?

Part C: Understanding recidivism and sentencing

Step 1

Explain (or read) the following to students:

‘Recidivism’ refers to the rate at which criminals reoffend (i.e. if the recidivism rate in Australia was 45% overall, that means 45% of people who commit a crime, will commit another crime). There are several different rates by which recidivism is measured - by country, by crime, by age group, gender, ethnicity, etc. Recidivism helps us to understand what factors contribute to criminality and what factors can be used to help reform criminals and mitigate reoffending.

Step 2

Have students use their devices to read the information on the following website and answer the below questions on the Student Worksheet: sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sentencing-statistics/released-prisoners-returning-to-prison

What is the average rate of recidivism for all of Australia?
Suggested answer: 42.5%
Which state/territory has the highest rate of recidivism? What is it?
Suggested answer: Northern Territory - 58.2%
Which state/territory has the lowest? What is it?
Suggested answer: South Australia - 29%
What is the recidivism rate in your state/territory?
What are your thoughts on the rates of recidivism in these Australian states/territories?
Why is recidivism an important factor in determining how to deal with coward punch attacks?

Step 3

Explain that recidivism helps us to understand the reasons for sentencing - that is, why offenders are sentenced to a certain type of punishment and for how long or under what conditions they are sentenced.

Invite students to read this information on the Student Worksheet and complete the questions below:

There are five core reasons for sentencing in Australia:

Rehabilitation: Provide the offender with the opportunity to address the underlying causes of their criminality and provide them with resources to help them become law-abiding citizens.
Punishment: Deprive the offender of certain liberties proportionate to the harm their criminality has caused to society.
Protection: Shield the community from the offender’s criminality and/or influence to prevent them from causing additional harm.
Deterrence: Discourage the offender from reoffending/the community as a whole from adopting the offender’s behaviour.
Denunciation: Condemn the offender’s behaviour so as to dissuade others from committing that same crime.

Which of these reasons do you feel is the most important factor in sentencing perpetrators of a coward punch, and why?
Which of these reasons do you feel should be given the most weight when sentencing perpetrators of a coward punch, and why? If you have given a different response here than in the previous question, explain why.

Part D: Advocating for justice

Step 1

In light of the podcast episode the class listened to prior to the lesson (Part A), divide the class into roughly equal-sized 'advocacy groups' as follows:

Group 1: representing the interests of victims
Group 2: representing the interests of the perpetrators/prisoners
Group 3: representing the wider community's (voters') interests
Group 4: representing the interests of the prison system/law enforcement
Group 5: representing the interests of legislators/politicians.

Step 2

Explain that each group will work collaboratively to prepare a statement, detailing how they would best advocate for advancing the interests of those they are representing. The topic they should respond to is:

"The principles of retributive justice should guide how coward punch offenders are dealt with."

Their statement should outline a clear view on the topic (for or against) and recommendations for how to deal with coward punch offenders along with reasons and an evidence base.

Step 3

Provide some time for groups to research and write their statements. Move around to each group to provide support and answer any questions. You might like to use these guiding questions to help students formulate their statements:

Whose interests should be paramount when considering sentencing and why?
Which of the reasons for sentencing would be most important in a case like Ben O’Toole’s (rehabilitation/punishment/community protection/deterrence/denunciation)?
What cultural issues did the podcast reveal that are relevant to coward punch incidents and that might be worth a mention?
What changes could be implemented to advance the interests of my group?
Research into the relevance of recidivism in relation to coward punch offences. Are the perpetrators of coward punches likely to reoffend? Why is this an important consideration when considering sentencing?

Step 4

Allow each group to present their statements to the class in a format of their choice.

Reflection

Invite students to complete these questions on the Student Worksheet, or discuss them in pairs:

In regard to justice and sentencing, I used to think...
This lesson challenged my thinking in the following ways:
I would like to see the justice system...

Differentiated Learning

Extension

You could turn Part D into a debate by drawing group numbers out of a hat to decide which teams face the others. There will be uneven group numbers, so you may wish to only assign students to four groups or think of an additional group (you could have two groups representing the same advocacy groups). Teams will then have an opportunity for rebuttal.

Provisions for learning support

It may be challenging for some students to prepare a statement collaboratively for Part D. They might prefer to work in pairs or individually to write a persuasive essay or opinion article or record a podcast outlining their views for a chosen advocacy group. We recommend they consider advocating for the perpetrator, victim or wider community.

Coward Punch - Philosophies of Criminal Justice

Go to

Summary

Lesson guides and printables

In this lesson