The U.S. Criminal Justice System - Essay Example

 The U.S Criminal Justice System Introduction The United State criminal justice system is one of the most complicated owing to its wide scope of operation. The complicated nature of the U.S criminal justice system is largely due to the large fragmentation in the structures and processes that exist within the federal, states and county jurisdictions. Each of the jurisdictions has its unique system of law enforcers, court systems and correctional systems among other components. Though there has been an evolution in the U.S criminal justice system to a more unified system in a few jurisdictions, fragmentation has persistently remained as the dominant model. The move towards the unified system which is considered to be more efficient and cost effective has been met with challenges due to conflicting interests of various stakeholders. This paper focuses on the evolution of the U.S criminal justice system and the variations across the states in an effort to understand why the U.S has been reluctant in adopting the unified justice system. Evolution of the U.S criminal justice system and why the U.S doesn’t have a unified system The U.S criminal justice system has evolved as an assortment of various structures and components which operate independently. Like the systems in other countries, the U.S criminal justice is an interaction of three major components; the law enforcement agencies, the court systems and the correctional system (Carlson and Garrett, 2006). Each of the systems operates as an independent entity with little association among the various agencies. The American system majorly owes its roots from the England during the colonization era. During the colonial era, issues of crime were majorly handled by vigilante groups and private citizens. In absence of a governing system with regard to administration of justice, the British colonialists introduced several English legal traditions in America without replacing the private system and the customs adapted from other parts of the world (Matthews, May, Minor and Ruddell, 2007). However, this informal system became obsolete due to the increasing population and urban growth paving way for elites under the premise of enlightenment to challenge the existing criminal justice system which was primarily based on capital punishment and torture among other inhumane acts (Matthews et al, 2007). In the wake of the enlightenment era, there was a move towards a more defined system with written rules and punishment. The central dogma for the justice system advocated by the enlightenment group was the need to have a system which would make people more aware of illegal actions and their respective consequences. There was also need for equality and uniformity to be applied in the administration of justice. The American Revolution set the stage for the U.S to establish its own criminal justice system free from interference by the British. A rapid transformation of the criminal justice system was witnessed in the nineteenth century marked by increase in urban law enforcers and correctional system. However, the increased level of crime despite the transformations paved way for professionalism in the criminal justice system in an effort to understand the root causes of crime and effective control measures (Matthews et al, 2007). The increased professionalism led to implementation of more effective policies and processes in the justice system. This led to heightened efforts in empowering the various law enforcement agencies, courts and correctional systems at federal, state and county levels. As a result, the U.S system has remained as a complex assortment of highly fragmented organizations which interact with each other indifferent ways. Though there have been calls for transformation of the U.S criminal justice towards a unified system, such efforts have been met with opposition from various stakeholders like politicians and other beneficiaries hence majority of the states have retained the fragmented system. Role of politics and public in discouraging unification of the U.S justice system Politics and public play a major discouraging the move towards unification of the U.S criminal justice system. Different jurisdictions tend to pursue divergent goals and missions within the justice system. This causes disparities in the funding which exerts a direct effect on staff, services offered and the facilities within the criminal justice system. Divergent political interests at the local and state levels have made it more difficult for the U.S to have a unified criminal system. Political players often prefer independence in the justice system in order to influence the funding and to manipulate crime rates and other vital statistics within their jurisdictions (Lurigio, Rodriguez and Wexler, 2011).The public plays a role in hindering unification due to differences in opinions by advocacy groups and a more increased freedom of expression over various issues relating to the criminal justice system. As a result, state and local jurisdictions tend to be largely influenced by the public views in implementing policies relating to justice which differ from one jurisdiction to another (Lurigio, Rodriguez and Wexler, 2011). Examples of issue differences in criminal justice across states The fragmentation of the U.S criminal justice system has resulted to differences in various issues pertinent to corrections and law enforcement as well as court systems. One of the issues where states remain divided is the issue of death penalty. Following its reinstatement in 1973 after being temporarily outlawed about a year earlier by the Supreme Court, the dearth penalty has been applied selectively across different states (Gelman, Lieban, Kiss and West, 2004). Despite the invalidation of capital punishment by the Supreme Court, some U.S states reinstated this form of punishment through adoption of new laws designed to be more consistent with the provisions outlined by the Supreme Court’s verdict (Gelman et al, 2004). Another difference observed across various states is the issue of fairness to trial in the criminal justice. .Robinson and Williams (2009) observe that due to influence on the justice system by various factors including poverty rates, political influence and racial differences, the principle of fairness by the court systems is impaired. For this reason, the principle of fairness within the judicial system only exists in theory (Robinson and Williams, 2009). These differences can be addressed by putting appropriate measures to eliminate biases and prejudices by the law enforcers, courts and correctional processes. Another way of eliminating such biases is through a shift in the media portrayal of the criminal justice system instead of promoting fear and punitive justice. Conclusion The U.S criminal justice system has evolved in a fragmented system consisting of interdependent components with different processes and structures in different jurisdictions. The fragmented nature of the U.S criminal justice system is largely due to the complexity of the structures and processes that exist within the federal, states and county jurisdictions. Despite the recent calls for transformation towards a unified system, there has been opposition from various stakeholders like politicians, the public and other beneficiaries hence fragmentation remains the dominant system. As a result of the fragmentation, different states exercise different policies on issues relating to judicial processes like fair trial and capital punishment. References Carlson, P. M. & Garrett, J. M. (2006). Prison and jail administration: practice and theory (2nd Ed.). New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Gelman, A., Lieban, J., Kiss, A. & West, V. (2004). A broken system: the persistent patterns of reversals of death sentences in the United States. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Vol. 1(2), 209-261. Retrieved January 29, 2012 from www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/jels.pdf Lurigio, A., Rodriguez, P. & Wexler, H. (2011). Reforming the criminal justice system in the United States: issues and recommendations. The Prison Journal, vol. 91(3 Supplement). Matthews, B., May, D., Minor, K. & Ruddell, R. (2007). Corrections and the criminal justice system. New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Robinson, M. & Williams, M. (2009). The myth of a fair criminal justice system. Justice Policy Journal, Vol. 6, no. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2012 from www.cjcj.org/files/the_myth.pdf Read More