Evaluating the case of Joseph McCann using the rehabilitation and retribution philosophies of punishment.

Abstract

Joseph McCann can be described as a ruthless and heartless serial rapist who was imprisoned after committing countless acts of sexual assault and abduction. However, had the probation service not been mismanaged leading to false recordings of McCann’s risk, this outcome could have been different. McCann’s case highlights probation officers’ responsibilities and suggests that rehabilitation does not always work. From its continuing developments in criminology, rehabilitation has been effective in some cases for low-risk individuals who have drug and alcohol problems. Though it begs the question – why is it being used for the most dangerous offenders? This is where retribution would enact proportionality, believing the offender should receive their just deserts. Being more abundantly accepted by society for removing criminals from the streets, this approach would punish the offender instead of helping them. These two contrasting paradigms are often reflected by social and political changes over time. With rehabilitation emerging after World War 2, the medical model was formed to treat offenders, though with critiques of its failures and being a soft approach, retribution gained popularity following Kantian ideals. Overall, Joseph McCann’s case could have been handled better if a retributivist approach was taken though it is also evident that not one punishment philosophy is perfect. This article will examine the case of Joseph McCann and assess to what extent rehabilitation was an appropriate punishment philosophy and whether retribution would be more appropriate.