Four Models of Criminal Justice Development - Essay Example

Criminal Justice: I: In an ordinary language, the word crime refers to unlawful action that is punishable by the various laws of a state. There is no universal definition of crime, even though various statutory definitions exist. However, the most popular and common perception of crime is that it is created and recognized by law. A common knowledge of the term crime is that it is an offence or an action that is harmful to another person, the state, or the community. Such kinds of actions are punishable, and forbidden by law (Burke, 278). The conception that rape, theft, and murder are prohibited all over the world exists. These are common examples of crime. However, a precise meaning of criminal offence is defined by various laws of each country. Some of these countries have a catalogue of crime, and it is referred to as the criminal code. Some countries have a comprehensive statute, which outlines the various crimes that are against the state. There are three major classification of crime, namely, misdemeanor, felony, and treason. The major difference that exists between a felony and a misdemeanor is on the penalty an individual receives for the offence (Burke, 279). A misdemeanor refers to a crime whose punishment is identified by the law. However, this punishment should not be death or imprisonment. The state or the government has the authority and power to restrict the liberty of an individual who is involved in committing a crime. To limit this liability, the state must follow a criminal procedure that culminates into an investigation, to a trial. It is only after the guilt of an individual is ascertained, that an offender may receive a punishment. This punishment can be imprisonment, community service, or even death, depending on the nature of crime. The natural law and the labeling theory effectively explain this concept of crime. According to the labeling theory, crime is an activity that causes injury to the society. The people, who apply this concept of labeling, normally assert the hegemony of a population that is dominant (Burke, 279). Furthermore, labeling a particular activity as a crime is a reflection of a general consensus that condemns the behavior. Natural law theory recognizes the power of the state to enforce laws, and prevent a crime. The state normally uses the police for purposes of enforcing law and order. The police have an important role in promoting justice (Justice and T, 160). Through the power vested upon them in the constitution, the police have the authority of arresting any suspected individual. This is after carrying out an investigation on the alleged crime. This aspect normally gives the police a sense of power over criminals, or a suspected criminal. In fact, various common law principles have been established for purposes of protecting the citizens against the abuse of power by police officers (Justice and T, 159). An example of a common law doctrine initiated to protect citizens against an abuse by police, is a doctrine referred to as the fruit of a poisonous tree. Under this doctrine, any evidence that is provided to the court and it is obtained from unreasonable search, illegal arrest, or coercive interrogation cannot be used in a court of law (Justice and T, 159). This doctrine was established for purposes of protecting the citizens of the state, from illegal use of the police power, or authority. II The prosecutor is a powerful person in the process of criminal justice. They have the capability and powers of making decisions that control the criminal justice system. Prosecutors exercise discretionary powers while making such decisions. Some people argue that police officers, in their role and duty as arresting agents are the most important officers in the criminal; justice system (Burke, 280). However, the power of police officers is restricted to bringing these people to the courts. It is the decisions and actions of prosecutors that will determine whether these people remain in courts, or not. One of the most important decisions by the prosecutors is plea bargaining (Justice and T, 158). Prosecutors have the power and capability of controlling and pre-determining the outcome of a criminal case through plea bargaining. Plea bargaining refers to an agreement or arrangement between a prosecutor, and a suspect. Under this agreement, the defendant would agree to plead guilty for a particular crime, and the prosecutor will give some concessions (Burke, 281). Plea bargaining can also involve a situation whereby the defendant might plead guilty to a crime, in exchange for a light sentence. The prosecutor has the powers or capability of entering into a plea bargaining because it is their responsibility to determine the kind of charges, to charge an individual with. They enjoy a lot of discretionary powers in this aspect. For example, when law enforcement officers arrest an individual with a large quantity of marijuana, they may recommend that the individual should be charged with a possession of a prohibited drug, with the intention of distribution. This is a felony that has a minimum sentence. The prosecutor can decide to charge the same individual with simply possession of a prohibited drug, a misdemeanor (Burke, 282). It is this discretionary power of deciding the offence to charge a prosecutor with that allows a prosecutor to effectively apply the plea bargaining powers they have. Because of the existence of many offences that have a mandatory minimum punishment, this concept of plea bargaining is very useful and important. Going to trial, will always carry a risk of conviction. The best way of ensuring that a defendant will not be convicted is through entering a plea bargaining, for a lesser offence. Plea bargaining assists the state in reducing the case workload. This is because a defendant would plead guilty, allowing the state to concentrate on other serious cases (Burke, 283). It also helps in avoiding a lengthy, expensive and time consuming trial. This is by allowing the defendant to plead to a lesser charge, and voluntarily bringing themselves to trial. Plea bargaining also helps in removing the uncertainties of a defendant (Justice and T, 155). This is because by pleading guilty to an offence, the defendant would know his or her fate. This is as opposed to going to a lengthy trial, where chances of conviction are high. Plea bargaining does not help in promoting justice. This is mainly because the prosecutor and the defendant aim at achieving a more desirable goal. Chances are high that an individual would plead guilty for a crime that they did not commit. This is because of pressure from the prosecutor. This is because chances are high that the plea process may be coerced, hence an innocent person may enter into a plea bargain. III I. (a ) An affirmative defense refers to a set of facts other than the ones which a plaintiff or a prosecutor provides, can lead to the acquittal of the defendant, or lessen the punishment that the defendant would receive (Justice and T, 156). In a civil proceeding, an affirmative defense would include the statute of frauds and limitations, waiver, and other defenses listed in Rule 8 (c) of the Federal Rules that guides the Civil Procedure. Under a criminal case, affirmative defenses include insanity, self-defense, and statute of limitations. I. ( b ) Under the stand your ground concept, a person should use deadly force in self defense, regardless whether the jury comes to a conclusion that the force under consideration was too lethal for the situation (Justice and T, 157). This involves in cases where an individual has a legal right to be. The duty to retreat denotes that an individual should not use lethal force, in situations where he could avoid using such kind of a force by retreating. These laws are beneficial in promoting justice to an individual. II. The judge would sit behind a raised desk, and it is called a bench. Behind the judge, there is a seal of the jurisdiction of the court, and the flag of the Federal and the appropriate state government. The judge wears a plain black robe. There is a witness stand, and a desk that contains the court reporter, and the clerk. They are adjacent to the bench. The court has a table that the defendant and their lawyers will sit at. The courtroom also has a separate space that contains seats for the jury. The presence of jury manages to reflect the contemporary notion of justice. This is because the jury will determine whether the suspect is guilty or not. The presence of lawyers is an indication that a suspect has some representation. This would amount to justice, because the lawyer has a duty to defend the suspect in court. Works Cited: Burke, R. H.. "Theorizing the Criminal Justice System: Four Models of Criminal Justice Development." Criminal Justice Review 38.3 (2013): 277-290. Print. Justice, B., and T. L. Meares. "How the Criminal Justice System Educates Citizens." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 651.1 (2013): 159-177. Print. Read More