Criminal Justice Authority Evaluation - Essay Example

Criminal Justice Authority Evaluation Abstract Evaluation of criminal justice authority or discretion is of considerable significance; it ensures that no personnel in the criminal justice systems misuse or abuse power. Discretionary authority is widely practiced in the various fields of criminal law justice. For instance, police officers use discretion in settling for the best methods to use in approaching a suspect. An offender also practices discretion when he or she applies for a bill, during court proceedings. Other criminal justice fields that exercise discretion include hearing and appeals occasions. A civilian oversight committee monitors the practices of police; this ensures that police officers act in accordance with their profession ethics and law (Perrez, 1992). The committee also ensures a balance between the public and the police. However, some people argue that such committee is expensive, and most civilians in the committee lack the full knowledge about police’ work. The discretion of criminal justice personnel towards the public may be hindered by several factors, like public lack of trust in such personnel. Based on the above evidence it is worth evaluating criminal justice authority. Criminal Justice Authority Education Discretionary authority exercised by personnel in the various fields of the criminal justice system. Discretionary authority refers to the power to act in accordance with one judgment or discretion. Before a judge or any other person in power in the criminal justice, he or she ought to apply values and principles to facts. Exercise of discretion occurs in different ways, depending on each criminal justice system (Perrez, 1992). Discretionary authority is practiced and exercised in various fields of criminal justice. For instance, discretion occurs when reporting crimes. Some criminal justice systems do not respond to little crimes, like the theft of an item that is of little or no value. The victim of such a minor crime has the discretion to report or not report such a crime to the authority. If there was no witness, when such a crime was committed, then, it would be futile reporting such a crime; hence, most of such crimes go unreported. Police use discretion, in response to reported crimes or cases. Police officers have some discretion, even though they are required to act according to the law and professional ethics. For instance, in youth justice such police officers have the authority to hold a youth justice conference, proceed by administering a caution, or proceed by charge in the Children’s Court. Discretion is again practiced in investigation, arrest and charge; police officers may either investigate or fail to investigate an officially reported crime. For example, some criminal justice systems do not require investigation of fraud (below $10, 000) allegations, unless such frauds are immensely high (Raines, 2011). However, not all people, in such criminal justice systems, agree to the lack of investigation of such fraud, even though police officers have the discretion to act in such a manner. This is a clear indication of controversial exercise of discretion by some criminal justice systems. When an investigation is carried out, police officers have the power to decide where such an investigation should be carried out, and the people to be contacted. Police officers have the obligation to make the right decision in approaching a suspect. They may decide to arrest or issue a Court Attendance Notice to such a suspect. Such decision affects both the offender and the community at large; the community may be exposed to further offending, and the offender’s liberty may be put at a risk. Discretionary considerations are exercised when police officers seek advice from prosecutor to establish criminal charges. The community exercise its discretion since some people, in the community, act as witness during a court proceeding. The offender exercise judgment at some stages, during the case proceeding; for instance, he or she may apply for bail. Besides, bail decisions may require discretions by offenders, prosecutors, the court, and police. For instance, at the early stages of the process senior police officers have the power to release suspect, from the police station, on bail (Finn, 2001). Discretionary authority is sometimes misused in most fields of criminal justice systems; such fields include sentencing, justice, and policing. Decision-making discretion is practiced in youth justice. Other criminal justice system’s fields that incorporate discretionary authority include plea and hearing and retrials. Role of a civilian oversight committee in ensuring authoritative powers are not abused as it applies to acts of discretion? An oversight committee has the role of monitoring all police activities. Such monitoring helps in ensuring that all police services are accountable for the services that they provide the conduct of their members, and the policies that guide them, in their daily activities (Merton, 1998). An effective civilian oversight ensures that all police services respect the law and people’s rights, in their use of power and authority. Civilian oversight committee also ensures that police conduct investigations and maintain order, without unnecessary political influences. However, such police conduct ought to respect all people in a community (Walker, 2001). The civilian oversight committee is composed of solicitor general, public security, police disciplines, and legislated authority in the Police Act. Local municipal councils appoint police commissions to provide governance and oversight, in the Police Act. Indeed, such a committee helps provide a link, between the public and the police. It balances the public’s requirements and the independence of police. Critique of the values and ramifications of such an oversight committee Most of the civilians involved in the oversight committee do not have full knowledge of legal limitations and law enforcement procedures; hence, such civilians may alter the review process. Why should civilians be involved in the oversight committee, and yet there exist various avenue of police review, like mass media, civil litigation, and law enforcement administrators. Civilians oversight committee is expensive; it only add more expenses to the existing system of internal investigations. However, we cannot out rule the role of civilians committee wholly (Corrado & Ronald, 1984). This is because such a committee helps the public gain trust in the police and other authority; since it act as a link between the public and the police. The civilians, in such committee, ought to be fully conversant with both internal and outside practices of such authorities. Various factors effecting attitudes of criminal justice personnel towards the public that would affect use of discretion Some personnel in the criminal justice indulge in various misconduct that may makes the public fail to follow what they dedicate (Goldsmith, 1991). For instance, police officers who indulge in the violation if law for money, sell protection, and buy promotions and positions cannot be trusted by the public. This is because such a public cannot entrust their lives and property to such police officers. Personnel in the criminal justice ought to protect the citizens, and not to exploit them. Personnel that use excessive power in the excise of authority may face several challenges from the public. Sometimes the public demonstrate in order for such people to be laid out; hence, it become hard for them to use discretion in their work. Excessive force involves coercion beyond what is necessary to control participants in a conflict. It led to decrease in public confidence in the police and lawsuits (Corrado et al., 1984). In the police department, police job stress may make them fail to exercise discretion, in an effective manner. It occurs when such police officers lack the capability to meet the requirement of such a job. Some people do not have any trust in such personnel since they have been exposed to racial profiling. Consequently, they do not report any crime to the criminal justice since they believe that such authority will discriminate the on the basis of race. Following this, such personnel do not have any discretion over such unreported crimes. References Corrado, R & Ronald, R. (1984). Evaluation & Criminal justice policy. New York: Barons Press. Finn, P. (2001). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. Goldsmith, A. (1991). Complaints against the Police: The Trend to External Review. New York: Oxford University Press. Merton, R. (1998). Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press. Perrez, D. (1992). International City/County Management Association, Police Review Systems. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. Raines, E. (2011). Ethics in Policing: misconduct& Integrity. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Walker, S. (2001). Police Accountability: The Role of Citizen Oversight. Belmont: Wadsworth Thompson Learning. Read More