In his research paper, ‘Mechanic Assemblages’, Peta Malins argues about the wrong use of semantics when it comes to drugs and the drug using body. She repeatedly emphasizes that the body “cannot be fully addicted” at all times or most of the times, lieu it is a process of addiction. Given this state of the drug using body, it is essentially wrong to categorise people into binary categories for two primary reasons: firstly, because addiction pertains to being an adjective that is relevant for a specific period of time and cannot be used as a descriptive noun (Malins, 2004). Secondly, since as per to the assemblage theory bodies are multifunctioning especially when they interact with external beings and elements and cannot be limited to binary codes.
These considerations as pointed out by Malins can be linked to other articles pertaining to the subject matter of ‘drug-dog assemblages’. These articles explore the effects of the use of drug dog operations on the people and the possible ‘suspects’, the authors not only delve deeper into the experiences of people searched by drug dogs but also present their finding on how these operations shape and influence the behaviours and attitudes of people. Instead of acting as a deterrent through the emotions of shame and fear, drug dog operations have so far succeeded in humiliating people while also encouraging discriminatory behaviour (through the help of dog handlers) towards certain classes and ethnicities not to mention the increasing quantity of false positives (Batty, 2015). As mentioned in the articles, the benefits reaped from the low success of these operations are far outnumbered by the serious harm it causes (and not just in terms of emotional turmoil). Malins further undermines the significance of drug dog assemblages by pointing out the number of ways people already expect and the ways they have devised to manipulate the whole process and the system itself. Besides, even the 20-40% (Malins, 2004) actual users that are caught usually carry harmless amounts.
As it has already been noted that the use of negative emotions such as shame, fear, and anxiety cannot possibly be used to deter people from using drugs, then the purpose of drug dog assemblages and the message it sends to people defeats the purpose (Condry, 2007). So far it has mainly succeeded in the users overdosing, being hospitalised (even some deaths), and use of other means to carry the drugs without being detected. Malins (2006) highlights the importance of changing the attitude and mind set of people towards the drug users, the permanent categorisation of the users only adds to further discouragement and non-motivation. Despite the fact that it is claimed that it is not necessary that the use of drugs have a ‘deteriorating effect’ on the user, the evidence suggests that the positivity of people and positive frame of mind surrounding the stigma of drug using body can have an overwhelming influence over the rehabilitation of the user.
With the proliferation of resources, technology, and legitimate institutions in this day and age, one would think that miscarriage of justice would be mitigated or at least lessened to a significant degree. However, as it turns out, there are underlying issues that have not been identified and acknowledged until recently when there is so much less resolved that continues to barricade the progress.
In the article ‘Truth or lies: overturning wrongful convictions’, Hamer and Edmond assert the misuse of resources and institutions that are dedicated for the exoneration of the wrongfully convicted (Hamer and Edmond, 2013). They note how inadequate and useless the human and financial resources are; since they are potentially out of reach of the convicted people. The quantity of the hurdles put in the path of people if they wish to appeal to higher authorities not only is discouraging and defeats the purpose, but also makes it virtually impossible to maintain justice. The John Mallard case (where he was wrongfully convicted for 12 years in prison and later rewarded $3.25 million as compensation) denotes the findings of Hamer and Edmond, as his case and appeal was repeatedly dismissed despite the presence of “new and fresh evidence”.
Rachel Dioso-Villa underlines the causal contributing factors for the wrongful convictions in her thesis including Eyewitness errors, Erroneous Informant Testimony, False confession, Prosecutorial misconduct, and Police Misconduct. All of the above mentioned factors were predominant in the Mallard case: the misinformation (confusing description of the attacker) by an eyewitness was the insufficient evidence incorporating both eyewitness errors and erroneous informant testimony. The evidence of recording of the last 20 minutes of John Mallard’s’ confession out of 11 hours in which he describes what could possibly have happened in third person reeks of not just false and unorthodox confession but also of police misconduct. Apart from the manipulation of evidence, the director of public prosecutions withheld information that was pertinent to the defence of the alleged attacker – which could have potentially exonerated him – counts as prosecutorial misconduct.
The underlying theme of all the articles and dissertations is the ‘powerlessness of the convicted people’, the inability of the accused to defend themselves as per their due rights. MacFarlane and Stratton take one step further in their article ‘Marginalisation, Managerialism and Wrongful Conviction in Australia’, in which they highlight the influence of ethnicity and class on the convictions of accused people (MacFarlane and Stratton, n.d.). They connote how “Indigenous Australians” are even more vulnerable and prone to wrongful convictions and bias from the jury/investigators as compared to Caucasian Australians (Dioso-Villa, Rachel, 2015). It explicitly notes that the causal contributory factors – more specifically, police and prosecutor misconduct – are more likely to occur when it comes to Indigenous people.
It was clearly implied in the article by Hamer and Edmond (2013) that the fundamental problem behind this issue is the acknowledgement that it exists. Hence nothing can be done to resolve it unless the judiciary and appellate courts nod and accept that the system is indeed fallacious. With the use of technology and web 2.0, many of the misconduct issues can be resolved as it lessens the ability to manipulate evidence.
All the articles – in one way or another – highlight incidents that accentuated the following key subject matters: Insensitivity in general to child abuse and relevant material, most or all of the offenders were males yet their female partners or relatives suffered more long lasting effects, and the lack of seriousness regarding the subject by the bystanders, relatives, or even police officers.
Since this topic revolves around the ‘invisible collateral damage’ the focus of the research is not the sex offenders but the people related to them who have been ostracised, marginalised and even criticised for being related to the offender. Ironically, the stigma that is attached to the topic of child abuse or pornography causes more criticisms and problems than the act of sexual offence itself (Liddell and Taylor, 2015). The actual sex offenders are given a few years in jail and are registered as sex offenders. However, it is the female partners or relatives who live in perpetual second hand shame and are marginalised. It is important to note that in the research report by PartnerSpeak, most of the offenders “expressed relief” after being discovered and the partners were the ones who fell into the emotional turmoil. One of the participants (female partner of sex offender) also mentions that the stigma of the divorce was considered worse than the child abuse stigma. Both the partners and the relatives of the placed blame on the partners themselves either for not stopping them, encouraging them, or causing them to commit the act; whereas surprisingly the acts of the sexual offenders were justified.
In her account of her trial, Rosie Batty also repeatedly notes the lack of seriousness and the air of casualness regarding the sex offensive acts of her husband; including, the police and law officers (Liddell and Taylor, 2015). Batty herself is either considered hysterical or someone who is overreacting or even acting out of an ulterior motive (which was also the case of one of the participants in PartnerSpeak).
The fact that all of the offenders were male and the target of marginalisation and the secondary shame and stigma were the female relatives or partner is no coincidence with the given response and behaviours of all the actors involved. Rachel Condry mentions in her article the essence of the ‘web of shame’; how the kin of the offender are the ones to suffer continuously especially the mothers. She points out that mother-blaming has a long history and they are blamed from child autism to schizophrenia to sex offensive acts.
There are three underlying factors that are common and prevalent in the above mentioned incidents: patriarchy in the society, the violence and the wide spread and accessible adult pornography that led to the insensitivity towards child abuse, and the shame of stigma that is greater than the shame of the act itself. This aim and purpose of this research is to create awareness that is essentially the first step in the right direction. People should be made aware of their ignorance towards the subject and how it affects others, they should be encouraged to take action whether they are kin to the offender or just a bystander.
Batty, R. (2015). A mother’s story. Australia: Harper Collins, pp.206-221.
Condry, R. (2007). Family shamed: The consequences of crimes for the relatives of serious offenders. Devon: Willan Publishers, pp.61-93.
Dioso-Villa, Rachel. (2015). A Repository of Wrongful Convictions in Australia: First Steps toward Estimating Prevalence and Causal Contributing Factors, 17 Flinders L.J. 163 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2018].
Hamer, D. and Edmond, G. (2013). Truth or lies: overturning wrongful convictions. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/truth-or-lies-overturning-wrongful-convictions-20430 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2018].
Liddell, D. and Taylor, P. (2015). Women’s experience of learning about the involvement of a partner possessing child abuse material in Australia. PartnerSpeak.
Malins, P. (2004). Machinic Assemblages: Deleuze, Guattari and an Ethico-Aesthetics of Drug Use. [Accessed 31 Aug. 2018].
Malins, P. (2016). Why drug-detection dogs are sniffing up the wrong tree. [online] The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/why-drug-detection-dogs-are-sniffing-up-the-wrong-tree-57343 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2018].
MacFarlane, J. and Stratton, G. (n.d.). Marginalisation, Managerialism and Wrongful Conviction in Australia [Accessed 31 Aug. 2018].
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download