The Most Appropriate Approach to Julio Blanco Garcia’s Case

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Introduction
Overview of the three models of justice
Method
Results
Conclusion
Reference List

Abstract

The present paper aims at identifying the most appropriate justice model in the case of Julio Blanco Garcia. The murderer of a teenage girl was sentenced to 49 years in prison. This case shows that such serious crimes as 1^st degree murder has to be addressed with the help of the retributive justice model, as the soft-core models (such as restorative or parallel) were ineffective. At the same time, it is suggested that a blend of retributive and parallel justice can be more effective as it could help reach two goals: to prevent others from committing serious crimes and to help the victim’s family to re-enter the society after their loss.

Introduction

Martin Luther King once said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Therefore, when a citizen does not obey a crime the law must serve justice in order to put stop to an occurring injustice. The modern judicial system is comprised of retributive, restorative and parallel justice but when it comes to homicide the former seems to be the most appropriate.

For example, in cases of murder, retributive justice is more appropriate than restorative and parallel justice. One of such cases is the case of Julio Blanco Garcia, 27-year-old guilty killer, who was charged for 1^st degree murder. Blanco was sentenced with 49 years in prison, 30 for his brutal act, and 19 for the young age of the victim.

The consideration of the three major types of justice to develop a framework for cases similar to the one in question is necessary. Hence, restorative justice is based on the principle of reconciliation and satisfaction of the stakeholders. According to this paradigm, the offender can try to repay the harm he has done through discussions, conferences and so on (Wenzel, Okimoto, Feather & Platow, 2008). These measures are aimed at developing a dialogue between the victim and the offender.

The parallel justice is based on the principle of punishing the offender in a proportionate manner but enabling the offender to start a new life when he/she is done with the punishment. Finally, retributive justice focuses on proportionate punishment for the offender as this is seen as a just and appropriate response to a crime.

To understand which form of justice is most appropriate in the case of Julio Blanco Garcia, it is necessary to analyze peculiarities of the three forms of justice and apply them to the case. This paper will argue that such soft-core forms of justice as restorative and parallel are inappropriate in Garcia’s case as this 1^st degree murder was especially brutal and the convict tried to conceal his crime.

Although he shows certain remorse, adherence to retributive justice in this case will ensure the criminal’s isolation and will lead to safer neighborhood and satisfaction of the victim’s family (as well as community) who want the killer had a proportionate punishment for the horrible crime.

Overview of the three models of justice

Retributive Justice

The first form of justice to be discussed is retributive justice. This form of justice is based on a notion that an offender “having violated rules or laws… has to be punished in proportion to the severity of the wrongdoing” (Wenzel et al., 2008, p. 375). Thus, the paradigm is based on the principle of punishment, which is central to the concept.

In the present case, this principle is punishing the man for killing a young woman. More so, he has to be isolated from the society in order to prevent him from committing similar crimes. The fact the offender-abused drugs also suggests he has to be isolated from the community until he overcomes the addiction. It is noteworthy that public opinion is rather clear on cases associated with drug addiction and criminals who committed the crime under the influence often receive harsher punishments (Spohn, Kim, Belenko & Brennan, 2014). While, in prison Garcia can receive certain treatment and overcome his addiction.

Nonetheless, there are a number of limitations to the use of this form of justice. For instance, Roebuck and Wood (2011) stated that it is impossible to justify any punishment as well as find a proportionate punitive measure. Moral concerns also arise, as the moral dilemma of people’s right to punish other people has not been resolved yet.

Apart from that, there are particular economic disadvantages. Detention of inmates is a large budget, which could be allocated in a more efficient way like schools, hospitals and so on. Thus, detention of a criminal does not contribute to the community but leads to additional expenditure. Finally, it has not been proved that victim’s family as well as community can be satisfied by the offender’s imprisonment and the use of retributive justice.

However, these limitations are hardly applicable in the case of Garcia as the benefits of retributive justice outweigh them. The drug addict will not be in the street anymore and will not be able to harm anyone. The offender will also be able to understand the horror of his wrongdoing. The fact that he stole something suggests that even though he had committed a horrible homicide he never stopped breaking laws and could carry out another serious crime.

Restorative Justice

It is possible to define restorative justice as “a process whereby all the parties with a stake in a particular offense come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offense and its implication for the future” (Walgrave, 2013, p. 18). Wenzel et al. (2008) note that the core values of this approach are forgiveness, collaboration, volunteering, inclusion, repayment. Major tools are conferences, discussions, workshops and so on. The offender can try to repay his debt to the society by listening to their victims (and their relatives), sharing ideas and experiences, involvement in certain activities.

It is possible to note that the approach has numerous benefits and researchers state that this system of justice positively affects development of the community. In the course of various sessions involving the victims, the offender and representatives of the community, the offender understands why his/her behavior was inappropriate, how he/she could avoid certain actions, why it was impossible to commit such offences in the future (Walgrave, 2013).

People also have a chance to understand why the offense was committed and can also see that the offender is really trying to become a better person and is actually becoming one. As a result, the community gets an effective member who is ready to contribute and is accepted by the rest of people.

Parallel model justice

Some researchers argue that although restorative justice helps victims cope with their issues, it is not as comprehensive as victims may need it. Parallel justice is seen as the most appropriate approach that helps victims return to the community as “healthy, productive members” (“The parallel model of justice”, PowerPoint, p. 6).

In this model, victims obtain the necessary psychological support and guidance to equip them with efficient tools to cope with their issues. It is noteworthy that the model is usually applied in non-violent and in some violent crimes. The core values of this approach are compassion, support, guidance.

The benefits of the present approach are vivid in the terrain of the victim’s integration in the social life. This model of justice is complex and it enables the victim effectively integrate into the community. Apart from psychological support, the system involves measures aimed at increasing safety of the victims (health, financial and so on). Clearly, the community benefits from this approach as it helps victims recover more effectively and become effective members once again.

Method

Data collection

The present research will be based on the literature review analysis. The data will be collected from newspaper articles, TV newsreels, academic journals and books. Materials from the court (video) will be analyzed.

Procedure

It is necessary to note that in the present case, retributive justice was applied. The outcome is imprisonment of the offender. The outcomes of the case are neutral as the stakeholders involved have mixed feelings. The victim’s relative were devastated as no sentence could give them their daughter back (Weiner & Jouvenal, 2013).

At the same time, they knew that the murder of their young, beautiful and active daughter would live and would be freed and could reunite with his family one day while their daughter would never get older and have a family. Julio Blanco Garcia also understood that he would spend the major part of his life imprisoned. The community lost a bright young woman who could make a difference. At the same time, the taxpayers’ money would be spent on a new inmate.

As has been mentioned above, the two soft-core models of justice are hardly applicable in this case as this is a violent crime that led to devastating outcomes. The case is aggravated by the fact that drugs were also involved and researchers have found that people tend to use harsher approaches when dealing with drug abuse (Spohn et al., 2014).

Results

In the first place, it is necessary to consider most meaningful details of the case. In 2010, the Fairfax County was shocked at the news that a 19-year-old student, Vanessa Pham, was brutally killed by a man who asked her to give him a lift to a local hospital (Carey, 2013). It was known that the man was carrying a baby. The murderer had not been caught until 2012 when he was arrested for stealing a bottle of champagne.

When he saw results of forensic analysis, Julio Blanco Garcia confessed that he killed the girl. However, he also claimed (through tears) that he was very sorry and he was high under the influence of PCP (Carey, 2013). He stressed that he asked the girl for a drive as his daughter needed to see a doctor but he thought that the girl went the wrong way and he stabbed her with his knife. He also added that he barely remembered the day.

However, the prosecutors were sure that Julio Blanco Garcia asked the girl for a drive and planned to rape her and, when Vanessa understood what was going to happen, she decided to go another way and she also tried to defend herself though the blows were lethal. Major evidence against the defendant was his fingerprints on the knife in the car of Vanessa Pham (Vanessa Pham murder trial day 3, 2014). She was stabbed with this knife several times.

His confession was also a substantial proof of his guilt. Furthermore, there was a video tape from the supermarket. Importantly, although the offender stressed he was sorry and he was ready to be punished, it is clear that he understood that he committed a very serious crime but did not confess until he was caught.

The forensic specialists (after analysis of the convict’s PC) noted that he had been interested in the investigation of the Pham’s murder for more than 2 years as the defendant keyed in Pham and Vanessa in the search engine (Carey, 2013). This is a very important fact and it can be crucial when choosing the most appropriate justice model.

Since the major details of the crime are clear, it is possible to apply the three models of justice to understand which is the most appropriate. It is possible to start with the restorative justice. This approach is said to be the most complex as it manages to cover all the stakeholders involved. Provided, the restorative justice is applied, In this case, there should be discussions and conferences between the convict and the victim’s family.

Vanessa Pham’s family was reluctant to speak during the court and the lawyer read the victim’s mother statement (Weiner & Jouvenal, 2013). The discussion will be extremely hard for the victim’s family. At the same time, the fact that the convict stressed he was sorry and was ready to be punished can be doubtful as Blanco Garcia confessed only when he understood that he could not escape the justice. After committing such a crime, he followed the news and never revealed his wrongdoing, though there were some programs providing details of the crime and details of the victim’s life (The Pham murder: An inside look, 2012).

More so, he committed another crime (theft). His remorse can be only a tool to get a milder punishment. It is unlikely that the discussions will be voluntary and their effectiveness is also very doubtful. The return of such person as Blanco Garcia to the community is likely to have negative outcomes, as there are high chances that he can commit other crimes.

When it comes to the parallel model of justice, it is possible to note that it is hardly applicable. The major focus of the approach is victim. In this case, the major focus can be made on the victim’s relatives. It is possible to help them cope with the tragedy. However, the system is still poorly established and needs significant funds to train personnel, provide certain services and so on (Failinger, 2014). Provided, the parallel justice is applied, the Phams would get counselling services.

It is also necessary to note that confession and the words of the convict that he hoped that the sentence would “help them in the grieving process”, are unlikely to help the family find reconciliation (Weiner & Jouvenal, 2013). Therefore, the parallel justice model could be applicable if it was well-established.

It is clear that retributive justice could be the most effective in this case. This model focuses on the offender but in the case of brutal murder, it is important to concentrate on the offender to prevent similar crimes in the future. The most important point in retributive justice model is to prevent other from committing crimes. However, it is possible to consider development of a blend approach.

Conclusion

On balance, it is possible to note that although the offender shows certain remorse, adherence to retributive justice in this case will ensure the criminal’s isolation and will lead to safer neighborhood and satisfaction of the victim’s family (as well as community) who want the killer had a proportionate punishment for the horrible crime.

The major goal of retributive justice model is to prevent other people from committing crimes and in the case of such a horrible murder, this goal seems to be central. It is necessary to add that the present research has certain limitations. First, it is necessary to revisit the case in five and ten years to assess the life (satisfaction, expectations) of the victim’s family and the offender. It is also necessary to evaluate the rate of serious crimes in the county and whether it decreased.

In this way, it will be possible to evaluate effectiveness of the chosen model. It is also possible to consider development of a blended model to treat similar cases. Retributive model should be accompanied by a well-thought parallel model, as this combination will positively affect the community as the rate of serious crimes will decrease and the victim’s relatives will obtain the necessary assistance and will be able to re-enter the society and become effective members contributing to development of the society.

Reference List

Carey, J. (2013). Blanco Garcia sentenced to 49 years in Pham murder. NBC Washington. Web.

Failinger, M.A (2014). Parallel justice: Creating causes of action for mandatory mediation. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 47(2), 359-417.

Roebuck, G., & Wood, D. (2011). A retributive argument against punishment. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 5(1), 73-86.

Spohn, C.C., Kim, B., Belenko, S., & Brennan, P.K. (2014). The direct and indirect effects of offender drug use on federal sentencing outcomes. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(3), 549-576.

The parallel model of justice. PowerPoint.

The Pham murder: An inside look. (2012). Web.

Vanessa Pham murder trial day 3. (2014). Web.

Walgrave, L. (2013). Restorative justice, self-interest responsible citizenship. New York, NY: Routledge.

Weiner, R., & Jouvenal, J. (2013). Man convicted of killing 19-year-old Vanessa Pham sentenced to 49 years in prison. The Washington Post. Web.

Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T.G., Feather, N.T., & Platow, M.J. (2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32(5), 375-89.

Click Here To Order Now!