Crime and Punishment revision guideHow to answer exam questionsSource questionsThe source questions on crime and punishment are worth 7 and 8 marks. They will always ask you to use the source and your own knowledge. The source is designed to act as a prompt so that you can bring in your own knowledge to your answer. HOWEVER, if you are unsure about the question you can always get 2 marks by describing or quoting the source.

Source questionsThere will be two source questions on Crime and Punishment7 marks This will ask you the reasons for something like a punishment. You need to write 2 PEE paragraphs with 2 reasons. Dont forget to use the source as your example!

8 marks This will give you a statement, you will need to argue both sides with a PEE paragraph on each. Dont forget to use the sources but also evaluate them are they giving you the whole truth?

5/7/8 mark questions5 mark questions 5 facts about the question7 mark questions two PEE paragraphs use because!8 marks questions one PEE supporting the statement in the question and one PEE against the question. You will need a conclusion here to reach a judgement and say how far you agree with the statement.

Spelling and grammarThe only question where this counts is in the 8 marks questions you answer on crime and punishment e.g 2c / 3c / 4c. Make sure you read your answer through and check it carefully. Check capital letters have been used for places and names!

Roman Empire 500BC -400ADLawsLaws were made by the Emperor and reflected Romes priorities. These were - protection of the Emperor, order on the streets, protection of property like slaves and maintaining the hierarchy of society.

Policing1. Vigiles put out fires, chase runaway slaves, stop crime.2. Urban Cohorts soldiers whose job it was to stop riots3. Praetorian Guard only used in emergencies. Main job to guard the Emperor

PunishmentsRoman punishments were harsh and unfair they were meant to act as a deterrent. Nobles could escape execution with a fine or by going into exile. Ordinary citizens were executed for serious crimes e.g. murder or arson. For less serious crimes they could be whipped or made to pay back goods they had stolen. Slaves received the harshest punishment. All slaves in a household were crucified if one tried to murder their master. Prisons were only used for debtors.

TrialsMinor crime e.g burglary find evidence yourself. Summon accused to court. A Magistrate was chosen to hear the case and then made a decision.Major crime anyone could bring a case to court. Defendant innocent until proven guilty. Jury decide whether the person was guilty. Magistrate decide on the sentence.

Effects of law and order on Roman EmpireSome people were made slaves. You could apply to become a Roman citizen and have more protection from the law. Rebellions were dealt with very harshly e.g Boudicca rebellion in Britain. Romans used local kings to help them rule. In Roman Britain a Centurion played the role of the Magistrate.

Impact of the fall of the Roman EmpireRoman system of law and order lost although many of their ideas were still used like physical, harsh punishments to deter crime. Tribes, e.g Anglo-Saxons, that took over had their own systems of law and order.

Roman exam questions2a) Briefly describe how the Romans tried to prevent crime. 5 marks2a) Briefly describe the effects of Roman law and order on the people in countries they conquered. 5 marks2b) Explain why the fall of the Roman Empire had an effect on law and order. 7 marksMiddle Ages 400-1500

a) Early Middle Ages - Anglo Saxons 400-1066Crimes most crime was theft of money, food and belongings. Violent crime rare.

Policing adult men (over 12 years old) were organised into groups of 10 called tithings. If one member of it broke the law then the others had to bring him to court or all had to pay a fine. Hue and Cry victims of crime called out to fellow villagers to chase the criminal. If anyone failed to respond to the Hue and Cry they were fined.

PunishmentsInitially the blood feud was used. The victim or their family was legally allowed to take violent revenge on the person who had committed the crime. The problem was this led to more violence.

This was replaced by the wergild when the Christian Church arrived in England. Instead of taking revenge the victim was paid money in the form of a fine by the criminal. If the criminal failed to pay they became a slave.

Serious crimes were punished by death and frequent reoffenders were mutilated or executed. Anyone who refused to attend court was outlawed. This meant that they were beyond the protection of the law and could be killed on sight.

TrialsUp until around 1100 heads of household might decide in a dispute. Or a jury of local villagers would decide if the accused was guilty or not. If they could not decide then the accused underwent the trial by ordeal. These took place in or near a church, as God was deciding the case. There were 4 types of trials, hot iron, hot water, cold water and consecrated bread.

CourtsSaxon kings developed a system of courts:a) Royal courts the king (or a royal judge) decided cases involving his lords and other serious crimesb) Shire courts held twice a year to deal with serious cases like murder. Lords acted as judgesc) Hundred courts dealt with less serious crimes. It was also where people joined tithings and swore to keep the peace.

b, Normans and Later Middle Ages 1066-1500William wanted to be seen as the true king of England and so kept some laws but also brought new ones in. For example he:1. Brought in the hated Forest Laws.2. Dealt with those who rebelled very harshly3. Kept the system of trial by ordeal and added trial by combat.4. Made fines payable to the king not the victim Kings peace

Policing Hue and Cry continued to be used. This was now led by the Constable. This was an ordinary person who tried to keep the peace in their spare time. If the Hue and Cry did not work then the Sheriff and Posse had to track the criminal down. Any male over 15 could be summoned by the sheriff to be part of his posse. The coroner investigated unnatural deaths.Sanctuary this was a safe area in a church. Once inside a suspected criminal could stay there for 40 days before deciding whether to stand trial or go into exile. If a criminal chose exile they had to carry a white cross with them all the way to the coast.

Trials - 1215 trial by ordeal abolished. This was because the Church no longer wanted to use it. By now trial by jury was used more often to decide if the accused was innocent or guilty.

Punishments The death penalty was used more often for petty crimes like breaking the Forest Laws. This has led to Historians saying that the Later Middle Ages were harsher. However you could avoid the death penalty if you claimed benefit of clergy this meant reading a passage from the bible, became a kings approver this meant telling tales on your fellow criminals, or if you joined the army or were pregnant.

Women and the law they were not allowed to own their own property, this belonged to their husbands. Women could not divorce their husbands. They were punished differently to men with ducking stools and scold bridles and as witches. Women could not sit on a jury or be a witness in a royal or shire court. They did play a role in the local village or manor courts though. Women were treated differently because the Church taught that they were inferior to men. Treatment got worse after the Norman invasion as the Christian Church got stronger.

Outlaws these were people who avoided attending court and were then deemed to be outside of the law. This meant that they could be killed by people, who would not face trial, as the outlaw was not protected by laws. The story of Robin Hood tells us outlaws could be seen as popular / romantic figures. It tells us that people did not like unfair officials and high taxes. But there is no proof he existed or that outlaws were actually like this. In reality outlaws were feared. They roamed around in large gangs and used violence. They would take money from rich and poor and not give it to the poor. They would commit arson and also target churches. How harsh was the system of law and order by the end of the Middle Ages?

The system of law and order WAS harshThe system of law and order WAS NOT harsh

Kings peace replaced the wergild no more compensation for the victimBlood feud used under the Anglo-Saxons was stopped as it created violence

More public executions even for petty crimesTrial by ordeal dropped and Trial by jury became the standard

Forest Laws created a lot of hardship for ordinary peoplePeople could avoid death penalty by claiming benefit of clergy or becoming kings approvers

Law and order was not effectively enforced in the Middle Ages?WAS effectiveWAS NOT effective

William I dealt with rebellions harshly e.g harrying of the northNo proper policing system little support for victims

System of courts, hundred, shire and royalOutlaws like Robin Hood

Tithings and Hue and cry effectively policed villages and so were kept throughout period.Local lords sometimes ignored the Kings laws and ran parts of the country themselves.

Constable, coroner and Sheriff and Posse all introduced in the Later Middle AgesTrial by Ordeal used until 1215

Middle Ages exam questions2a) Briefly describe the different ways people were tried in Anglo-Saxon times. (5 marks)2 a) Briefly describe how women were treated by the law in the Middle Ages. (5 marks)

2b) Explain why Anglo-Saxon laws and Norman laws existed side by side during much of the Middle Ages. (7 marks)2b) Explain why William I decided to make changes to the Anglo-Saxon system of law and order. (7 marks) 2b) Explain how medieval men and women were treated differently by the law. (7 marks)

2c) How far was the system of law and order LESS harsh by the end of the Middle Ages? Explain your answer. (8 marks)2c) Law and order was not enforced effectively in the Middle Ages. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)2c) The story of Robin Hood does not teach us much about medieval crime and punishment. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)2c) Between 1066 and the end of the Middle Ages, the system of law and order in England changed greatly. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

Source practise on the Middle Ages

5b) Study Sources A and B. The systems of law and order mostly stayed the same in the Middle Ages How far do you agree? (8 marks)

Protests and rebellions 1300-1700In the Early Modern period anybody protesting against the government or the monarch was treated as if they were rebelling or committing treason. This led to very harsh punishments.

Economic protestsThe Great Revolt of 1381Ordinary peasants marched to London from Kent and Essex demanding fairer taxes and the freedom to move around the country without asking their Lords permission. The 14 year old King Richard executed hundreds as a warning to other rebels.

Ketts rebellion of 1549A group of around 16,000 marched to Norwich led by a local landowner named Kett. They were protesting against landowners enclosing their land to become sheep-farmers, this was a problem because they would employ less people and turn tenants off their land. They hoped the King would give the ordinary people some protection against the rich landowners. Instead the King Edward VI sent an army against them and executed the leaders.

Religious protestsPilgrimage of Grace of 153630,000 protesters led by a lawyer, Robert Aske wanted England to return to the Catholic services people were used to, reopen monasteries which had provided for the poor and cut taxes. The leaders were arrested and executed brutally. Although they were peaceful and swore they were loyal to King Henry VIII he still punished them harshly why? It was partly because they were questioning the Kings decision over changing the Church services and partly because Henry was worried about a Catholic invasion

Gunpowder Plot of 1605Catholic plot to blow up Protestant King James I of England in Parliament and replace him with a Catholic monarch. England had only become a Protestant country within the last 100 years and there was a genuine fear of Catholics. That is why the plotters were harshly treated. They had also tried to kill the King and this was treason that carried the death penalty.

Early Modern period 1500-1750

New crimes:Vagrants and vagabondsWho? People who walked from place to place with no job or home. How were they punished? They were punished by being whipped and returned to their place of birth. Later the law was changed to slavery for first offence, slavery or execution for second offence. Later still persistent vagrants might be placed in a House of Correction or executed. Why did punishments change? Punishments changed over the period because the number of vagrants increased or decreased depending on harvests. Also people became more worried about them committing crimes in difficult times.

HereticsWho? People who disagreed with their government over religion. How were they punished? Heretics were burntWhy were they punished so harshly? Kings and Queens claim they were appointed by God. If people had different religious ideas they might not accept the king had a claim to the throne and start a rebellion. Also the church was also a good way of controlling people as there was one in nearly every village. Heretics threatened this control as they held different religious beliefs. Many saw them as committing a crime against God.

Exam question (8 marks) Who seen as the bigger threat, vagrants or heretics?Vagrants were the bigger threatHeretics were the bigger threat.

Roamed the countryside in large groupsBelieved different religious ideas to the King / Queen

Often arrived at a village and stole many thingsCould divide the country and lead / join rebellions

Threat to law and orderWere prepared to die for their beliefs

Witches Who? Were most likely (but not always) to be old women, living alone, poor and in need of help. They might be resented because they were a drain on village resources. How were they punished? Witches were detected by people like Matthew Hopkins the Witchfinder General. He was paid for every witch he found so he found a lot through marks of familiar on their bodies, the swimming test, the running Test. Once they were proved to be a witch they were usually hanged. Why were they punished? Belief in witchcraft peaked just after the Civil War helped along by King James book about witches and the development of printing so everyone now heard about trials in other villages. Protestant preachers taught that the devil was trying to turn people away from God, all this led to mass hysteria. They were sometimes blamed for natural disasters like bad harvests or floods as well as deaths in the village; there was also no scientific explanation for things.

SmugglersWho? People who brought goods like tea and brandy in to the country secretly by boat along the English coast, without paying import taxes to the government. This made them cheaper and so more people could afford them. Whole communities/gangs were involved and used violence against custom officials or informers. There was also a lot of smuggling because: hard to police; long coastline to patrol; many people did not see it as a crime.How were they punished? When caught they would be tried and executedWhy were they punished? The government took this crime VERY seriously as it meant a loss of income for them. Smugglers were often seen as not real criminals because they were only cheating the government so many ordinary people turned a blind eye. The government hoped by harsh punishments to deter people from getting involved.

Highway robbersWho? Travellers would be held up by thieves usually armed with knives or guns and have their money / possessions stolen. There was so much highway robbery because in the 1700s more people began travelling in coaches with lots of cash (few banks to put it in) so there were more targets on the roads for highway robbers. Local constables could do little to stop it. There were plenty of lonely places to hold up coaches with little chance of anyone witnessing the crime and so it was easier to get away with it. How were they punished? When caught they were tried and executed, pubs suspected of being their bases lost their licenses. How did this crime stop? As more and more people travelled there was more traffic on the roads and less chance of getting away. As banking developed people were less likely to carry cash around

PoachersWho? Poachers were often poor people who need to kill animals like deer and rabbits to survive. They thought the landowners were being selfish and did not see anything wrong with what they were doing. They had taken animals from the land for generations. How were they punished? Punishment was very severe through the Black Act of 1723 e.g the death penalty, even if you werent caught actually poaching but were in a hunting area. The gamekeepers were allowed to use violence to stop poachers.Why were they punished so harshly? A bit like the old Forest Laws in the Middle Ages these laws protected landowners property so they could hunt on it. The government were landowners so they passed very harsh laws.

Which was the MOST SERIOUS crime? (In the Governments view?)PoachingHighway robberySmuggling

Many people not see it as a crime.Disrupted tradeGovt loses money less taxes!! This makes the Govt VERY concerned

Landowners thought all game on their land belonged to them.Made areas around London very dangerousToo few customs officials to police it plus huge coastline to cover

The Black Acts that made the act of poaching a capital offence shows the govt were concerned.Hard to stop no police force; couldnt be tracked across countiesCarried out by large armed gangs e.g Hawkhurst gang.

BUT not much threat to govt incomeRich people were targeted which worried the government enough to tell JPs to stop licenses for pubs sheltering highwaymenSmugglers protected by local communities and juries were reluctant to convict them if they were caught

The Bloody CodeThis was when punishments became harsher to deter people from committing crimes. The death penalty was used for minor crimes. It was brought in to protect private property. Crime like poaching became a capital offence.The Bloody Code was brought in because: Laws were made by big landowners who wanted to protect their property. They didnt want people hunting on their land or stealing their animals and so made poaching a capital crime. People thought crime was increasing (it wasnt) and it would act as a deterrent People believed there was a criminal class and this would get rid of them so society could be better.

The Bloody Code ended because: It did not act as a deterrent. In fact public executions became a popular form of entertainment and the people who were executed were treated as heroes. Juries did not want to convict people because of the harsh punishments they felt were unfair so many criminals got no punishment at all. New ideas about punishments began to be discussed, like a criminal could be reformed for example.

Was the Bloody Code a success?

In some ways it was a success becauseNo the Bloody Code was a failure because

The harsh punishments reassured people that crime was taken seriously Crime rate went up might as well commit a serious crime as punishments were the same

Laws were passed to protect private property which benefited the richJuries did not want to convict people as the punishments were so harsh

Decline of highway robbery (although other factors played a part here too) Public executions did not act as a deterrent, in fact were sometimes seen as an excuse for more crime.

Abolished in the 19th century when ideas about reforming criminals began to be discussed.

3a) Briefly describe how vagrants were punished in the sixteenth century. (5 marks)3a) Briefly describe how witches were detected in the 16th and 17th centuries. (5 marks)3a) Briefly describe the activities of smugglers. (5 marks)2a) Briefly describe what kind of people was usually accused of being a witch in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. (5 marks)3a) Briefly describe the main features of the Bloody Code. (5 marks)

3b) Explain why eighteenth century laws against poaching were so unpopular. (7 marks)3b) Explain why heretics were punished so harshly in the 16th and 17th centuries. (7 marks)3b) Explain why there was an increase in highway robbery in the 18th century. (7 marks)2b) Explain why there was so much smuggling in the eighteenth century. (7 marks)3b) Explain why the Bloody Code was introduced. (7 marks)2b) Explain why the Gunpowder Plotters were punished so harshly. (7 marks)2b) Explain why there were witch-hunts in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. (7 marks)3b) Explain why highway robbery was a serious problem for the authorities in the eighteenth century. (7 marks)

3c) Highway robbery was a more serious problem than smuggling for the authorities in the 18th century. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)3c) The Bloody Code was a success. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)3c) The authorities were more worried about poaching than smuggling. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)2c) Who were the sixteenth and seventeenth century governments more worried about, vagrants or religious heretics? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

Source practise on the Early Modern period

Source B

5b) Study Source B The Bloody Code came to an end because the juries refused to find people guilty. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

Industrial period 1750-1900Policing Policing in 1800 each village appointed a constable and watchmen. Horse patrols set up to deal with highwaymen. Bow Street Runners set up which were a team of thief-takers who patrolled London in the evenings. Newspapers like the Hue and Cry pass on info on criminals but all of this was still not effective.In 1829 Robert Peel set up a new police force it was for Central London. 3000 men. Blue uniforms to stop them looking like the army. They were poorly paid so open to corruption. New recruits initially poor quality. Mostly dealt with drunks, vagrants and traffic problems. Peel was able to set up the police force because: London was growing very quickly and the old system of watchmen didnt work. There were 1000s of people and conditions were over crowded. A new police force was needed for a new situation. There was a fear of popular protest after the French Revolution Governments were increasingly involved in improving society and could raise taxes to pay for a police force Crime increased sharply after the French wars finished

Were the Police a success?In some ways the police were a success because..No the police were not a success because

Over the first years they gradually became respected and were given affectionate nicknames like Bobbies.

At first poor quality of recruits / high staff turnover due to the poor pay, they were mocked for being ineffective at catching criminals or being drunkards

Crime fell 1850-1900 as they got better at catching criminalsNot a police force all over the country so it only at affected London at first

Police force eventually set up all over the country and we still have one todayPeople were really worried that it would be an extension of the army and be a threat to their personal freedom

PrisonsPrisons were reformed because peoples attitude to prisons were changing. As they got used much more people like John Howard thought that people should be sent to prison to reform prisoners so that when they left prison they would not return. Conditions in them were awful and Howard thought they should be clean and have running water. He also wanted all prisoners to have the same food and be made to work hard. Elizabeth Fry wanted to improve conditions for women in prisons. She wanted: female warders to look after women in prisons; clothing and furniture provided; schools for women and children in prisons; regular work for women in prisons. The separate system was brought in because many people thought that prisons had become schools of crime where prisoners learnt how to commit crime and then committed more when they got out. So prisoners were kept separate so they couldnt pass on their experience. By the 1850s over 50 prisons were using the separate system but it was hugely expensive as special buildings were needed and there were high suicide and insanity rates. The silent system critics of the separate system said it was too harsh and did not reform criminals, just sent them mad. Their solution was to let prisoners work together but in silence. This was also cheaper.

Did prisons become harsher in the 19th century?In some ways prisons DID become harsherIn other ways prisons DID NOT become harsher

Use of solitary confinement, hard labour, separate system. These methods made it hard for prisoners to cope and suicides increasedAttempts made at reform, this meant better conditions: cleaner; running water; access to doctors etc

Use of pointless work and corporal punishmentSentences reduced for good behaviour so there was a reward in sight if you reformed

Use of whipping and electric shocks were cruelGaolers no longer charged fees to prisoners so prisoners were treated more equally

ProtestsRebecca Riots the rioters dressed up as women and attacked and destroyed tollgates. Barns and hayricks belonging to landowners burnt. Police sent form London. Leaders arrested. Some transported.Why did the Rebecca riots happen? Farmers had to pay taxes to use roads to transport lime to fertilize their soil. The taxes on the roads (tollgates) kept going up. The farmers were poor and couldnt afford to pay the taxes but still needed to use the roads so they rioted. They also rioted because of the New Poor Law; tithes and different turnpikes. Peterloo massacre 1819 was when 60,000 people turned up to St Peters field to Manchester to demand the right to vote. Henry Hunt was the main speaker and the local authorities were nervous about what might happen. They feared a rebellion. As he started to speak, local soldiers rode forward to arrest him. 11 people were killed and 400 wounded.How successfully did the government deal with Peterloo? Protests were dispersed; Hunt and other leaders were arrested; 6 acts passed public meetings of over 50 people were banned, magistrates could search houses for weapons, seize and destroy newspapers, trials speeded up. But over reaction by local soldiers caused more opposition; Soldiers turned a peaceful meeting violent; soldiers over-reacted. Peterloo was important because men, women and children were killed. It was a peaceful protest until the local soldiers attacked. The protestors used it as propaganda. The government were criticised. The government reacted by bringing in the 6 acts.

Did the Government deal with Rebecca riots or the Peterloo Massacre better?Peterloo dealt with betterRebecca riots dealt with better

Demonstrators kept under controlLeaders caught and punished

Leaders punishedReforms introduced making Wales peaceful

Passing of the 6 acts

TransportationExperience of prisoners transported to Australia waited in prison hulks (ships) before being transported. Conditions on journey harsh but few died. Assigned to settlers on arrival. Some flogged. Some treated no better than slaves. Some sent to harsh prison settlements like Tasmania. If they did well they could get Tickets of leave which meant they were released early. Some did well after release. Most stayed after release.

Was transportation a success or a failure?In some ways transportation was a success.Transportation was a failure

Courts willing to use it unlike the Bloody CodeIt was expensive and prison was cheaper

People feared it because families were split up and conditions were harsh so it did deter them from crimeIt was seen as a soft punishment

It did reform convicts some got tickets of leave and went on to lead successful lives in AustraliaIn 1851 gold was discovered. This meant criminals were being rewarded by being sent somewhere they might get rich.

It strengthened Britains control over Australia

Which was most effective?PrisonsTransportationPolice

Took criminals out of societyUseful while there were very few prisons aroundPolice became accepted and respected

Chance for reformBetter alternative to hangingQuality of recruits improved

Silent and separate systems stopped criminals mixingCould reform prisonersCrime fell 1850-1900

Australia unknown so it was a terrifying punishment

BUTBUTBUT

Failed to reform prisonersTickets of leave made it a soft punishmentSeen as an extension of the army

Silent system led to high suicide ratesDid not lead to a fall in the crime rate.Seen as a threat to personal freedom

Harsh punishments whipping electric shocks

Impact of industrialisation / growth of cities on crime terrible conditions in cities led to more crime; created greater wealth so more chance to steal; more people meant it was easier to escape; old system of constables inadequate; unemployment / high food prices led to strikes and protests; community feeling not as great in cities.Impact of popular protests on crime: Peterloo led to the passing of the 6 acts public meetings were banned and newspapers were made more expensive. They also led to the use of transportation.

Industrial exam questions

4a) Briefly describe the type of policing that took place around the 1800. (5 marks)4a) Briefly describe the police force set up by Peel in the 1830s. (5 marks)4a) Briefly describe what happened during the Rebecca riots. (5 marks)3a) Briefly describe the experiences of prisoners who were transported to Australia. (5 marks)4a) Briefly describe the impact of popular protests on crime and punishment in the 19th century. (5 marks)

4b) Explain why the separate and silent systems were introduced into nineteenth century prisons. (7 marks)4b) Explain why industrialisation in the 19th century led to an increase in crime. (7 marks)4b) Explain why Peterloo was important at the time. (7 marks)3b) Explain why the separate system was introduced to prisons in the nineteenth century. (7 marks)3b) Explain why prisons were reformed in the nineteenth century. (7 marks)3b) Explain why Robert Peel was able to set up a police force in 1829. (7 marks)4b) Explain the causes of the Rebecca riots. (7 marks)

4c) Which was the more effective form of punishment, transportation or prison? Explain your answer. (8 marks)3c) Prisons became much more harsh during the nineteenth century. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)3c) Transportation was a success. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)4c) The authorities dealt with Peterloo more successfully than they dealt with the Rebecca riots. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer (8 marks)3c) Which had been the more successful development by the end of the nineteenth century, prison reform or the development police force. Explain your answer. (8 marks)3c) Between 1830 and 1900 the police were a success. How far do you agree with this statement? (8 marks)

Source practise on the Industrial Period

1b) Study source B. Why were prisons reformed? Use the source and your own knowledge to explain your answer. (7 marks)

5c) Study Source D

When a professional police force was established and developed in the nineteenth century, it was not welcomed by the public.

Use the source and your own knowledge to explain your answer (8 marks)

Twentieth century 1900-2000The Suffragettes were a group of women who were campaigning for the vote from 1903-1918. They held public meetings and organised demonstrations to get their message across, as well as publishing their own newspapers and posters. They chained themselves to railings outside 10 Downing Street. They set post boxes on fire and committed acts of arson. In prison they went on hunger strike.

Did the Suffragette campaign help them to get the vote?YESNO

Gained publicity for their causePeople thought women were irresponsible

Brought the issue to peoples attention people hadnt paid a lot of attention beforeGovernment determined not to give in to violence

Made the government think about the issueViolence frightened people

Treatment of Suffragettes i.e. force feeding gained public sympathy They only received the vote after womens contribution to WWI

Conscientious Objectors During WWI 16,000 refused to join the army. Some believed that war itself was wrong and should not be supported in any way, others simply did not want to kill people. Many had religious reasons for these beliefs. Some agreed to do other war work such as driving ambulances which was extremely dangerous. About 1500 refused to take any part and after an interview with a tribunal they were imprisoned and their right to vote taken away until 1923.

Policing The main changes in the way the police worked in the twentieth century was: riot gear; CS gas; use cars; use of DNA samples; two way radio; specialist crime squads e.g Anti-Terrorist Squad; use of computer records.

Juvenile crime there was so much juvenile crime in the twentieth century because: there were a lot of drug addicts. They needed money to buy their drugs and so they would mug people and steal items from shops. Other reasons were: lack of good parenting; unemployment; punishments were too soft/ too slow; poverty and inequality.

Did wars or recessions have a greater impact on law and order in the 20th Century?Wars Recessions

Created conscientious objectors as criminals who were imprisonedPoverty people became poor and so turned to crime as a means to have a better life.

Shortages led to black markets where people bought rationed goodsUnemployment number of jobless increased.

Looting after property had been damaged

Twentieth century exam questions4a) Briefly describe the activities of the Suffragettes. (5 marks)4a) Briefly describe the main changes in the way the police force worked in the twentieth century. (5 marks)

4b) Explain why there was so much juvenile crime during the twentieth century. (7 marks)

4c) Which had the greater impact on law and order in the twentieth century, war or recessions? Explain your answer. (8 marks)4c) The Suffragettes did more harm than good to the campaign for the vote. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

Source practise on the 20th Century

Study Source C5c) The Suffragettes did more harm than good to the campaign for the vote. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

General questionsReligion from the Middle Ages to the nineteenth century religion has led to: trials by ordeal; heresy being a crime people who disagreed with their government over religion; witchcraft; attitudes towards prisons in the nineteenth century.

Some periods have seen rapid change in crime and punishment because: fear that crime was increasing led to the Bloody Code in the 17th and 18th centuries. Industrialisation led to the development of large cities and the old ways had to change e.g system of watchmen didnt work and so a police force was developed.

Individuals had more impact on crime and punishment than governments:IndividualsGovernments

William I Kings peace changed the ideas about the victims of crime Romans strong system of laws and courts, use of jury we still use today

Elizabeth Fry and John Howard with the improvement in prisons. 18th century introduction of the Bloody Code to protect the property of the rich

Robert Peel setting up the police force in 182919th century introduction of police force and prison reforms through taxation, accepting the idea that the government must protect its people from crime

Religion more important than the government in the history of crime and punishment:ReligionGovernment

Middle Ages set up trial by ordealWilliam I Kings peace this idea still lives on in the idea of public order

Attitudes towards poverty, poor people have been placed there by God18th century introduction of the Bloody Code to protect the property of the rich

Elizabeth Frys religious motivation to reform prisons19th century introduction of police force and prison reforms through taxation, accepting the idea that the government must protect its people from crime

Some Conscientious Objectors refused to join the Army on religious grounds

General exam questions4a) Briefly describe the impact of religion on crime and punishment. (5 marks)

4b) Explain why some periods have seen rapid changes in crime and punishment (7 marks)

4c) Individuals have had more impact than governments on developments in crime and punishment. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)4c) Religion has been more important than government in the history or crime and punishment. How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. (8 marks)

1