What Criminal Justice in the USA Mean - Essay Example

 Introduction Criminal justice is a system of institutions and practices of governments aimed at encouraging social control, mitigating, and deterring crime, or punishing individuals who break laws with criminal rehabilitation attempts and penalties. Individuals who are accused of engaging in criminal activities have protection against abuse of prosecution and investigatory powers. The criminal justice system is made up of three central segments: the law enforcement officials; courts; and corrections. In a criminal justice system, these three separate outfits work together both as the primary means of maintaining the rule of law in society and under the rule of law. America is recognized for having one of the most advanced judicial systems in the entire universe. Every day a large number of people, including police officers, accused criminals, judges, lawyers, and government officials, play a part in this system, attempting to work for justice and settle disputes. What makes the American justice system more incredible is that it has the capacity to function successfully in a country which is diverse and large. Police officers, judges, lawyers, and government officials play a significant part in the legal system, a role that is frequently unknown, disregarded, or misunderstood by most members of the public. The interview with the police officer was conducted over a period of three days. The interview had to go on for three days because the meeting could only take place in the evening after work and the police officer had to go to his evening part time occupation. The police officer has been in the profession for almost fifteen years. The police officer is medium build and almost six feet tall. He is also married and has two children. In contrast to his build and tall physique, he is soft-spoken, and never responded to my questions without a bit of a pause. Nevertheless, he courteously refused his identity to be revealed (Fuller, 2005). This paper will be in form of a narrative based on the police officer’s interview regarding his views on the criminal justice system. The paper will look at whether the criminal justice system works, in what ways it does not work, and the future of the criminal justice system. The paper will also compare and contrast what the police officer says with relevant sections of the text. The conclusion of the paper will address lessons derived from speaking with the police officer. In the view of the police officer, the United State’s criminal justice system largely works, but there are ways in which it does not work. The police officer also gave me his views on the future of the criminal justice system. According to the police officer, one of the things that make the criminal justice system work is a carefully ordered and balanced hierarchy. A number of different federal courts deal with issues that are related to federal law and every state has its specific set of courts which adapt to the desires of the people. In addition, all through the different stages of the process, there is constitutional protection to make sure that the liberties of the convicted and accused are respected. These protections balance the fundamental liberties of the accused and the need of the criminal justice system to probe and take legal actions against criminals (Fuller, 2005). Moreover, the police officer argued that there are a number of rights obtained from the constitution which safeguards the accused from cruelty and overreaching from law enforcement officers. The most significant of these rights are arguably the Fourth Amendment which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and the Miranda advisement. The Fourth Amendment which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures prevents law enforcement officers from searching a criminal suspect or his premises without a search warrant. Nevertheless, the officers asserted that there are exemptions for explanatory situations, for example, when a police officer is in hot chase of a suspected criminal or where there is a probability of evidence being damaged, such as when a suspected carjacker goes into a restroom. On the other hand, the Miranda advisement is meant to inform or remind the arrestees of their liberties prior to their arrest and consequent questioning. The police officer also stated that in a similar way as the law enforcement phase of a case, there are a number of restrictions on the ability of the court to prosecute a case, including the right to counsel, the right to confront one’s accusers, the right against incriminating one’s self, and the right to a jury trial. He argued that the foremost purpose of all these defenses is to make sure that the accused persons have a fair trial. In addition, the courts ensure that the accused individuals have a right to be represented by either a lawyer of their liking or if they cannot afford one, the court appoints one for them. Moreover, in most cases the jury is a fair cross-section of the society, which in most instances is not a jury made up of a single gender or race. Also, the police officer alleged that the corrections work. If the accused is convicted and the allegations warrant jail time, they are sent to the correction system for reprimand. According to him, this includes incarceration, probation, or both. Incarceration is mostly a widespread result of criminal trials, particularly in more grave cases. The offender is housed either in prison or jail. Jails are also situated in every county and are for less solemn crimes. In addition, jail periods normally do not go beyond a year. In contrast, prison terms are normally for more than one year and almost always involve grim felony crimes. On the other hand, probation is either unsupervised or supervised. Unsupervised probation sees offenders only face jail time or different punishment if they continue breaking the law. Supervised probation necessitates the lawbreaker to regularly check in with an officer to guarantee observance with the terms of probation (Fuller, 2005). The police officer also explained ways in which the criminal justice system does not work. He explained that the criminal justice system receives complains of numerous appeals and delays which take place in the courts, putting trials, and sentencing off for prolonged periods. In addition, the police officer highlighted that with the ever-evolving realm of technology, there is the complaint of possible wrongful sentence, with a large number of cases being reversed in light of proof made possible by advanced technology. The police officer also asserted that the criminal justice program budgeting does not place more emphasis on prevention, instead, it largely focuses on punishment causing extensive congestion in many urban correction facilities. In addition, he claimed that there are instances where the criminal justice system does not treat all races in an identical manner. He explained that the most significant crime in the United States criminal justice system is that it is found on the basis of race where African-Americans and other minority groups are precisely targeted and penalized in a much more assertive manner than white people. For instance, he claimed that a large number of police officers are more likely to stop African-Americans and other minority groups at much higher rates than whites, for example, In New York City, where the minority groups constitute almost half of the population, 80% of the New York Police Department stops were of Latinos and African-Americans (Fuller, 2005). The police officer also gave his views regarding the future of the criminal justice system. He asserted that for the justice system to be effective it should encourage extensive use of alternatives to incarceration. The police officer also proposed a revoke of all statutory mandatory minimum sentences. He argued that mandatory sentences are not the most cost-adequate strategy to enhance security. He also stated that legislations should be enacted to ascertain and deal with racial inequalities in the criminal justice system. This is because a fair justice system is the foundation of the legal system and ensured by the constitution. Conclusion I learned several weighty things regarding the criminal justice system as a result of speaking with the police officer. One, Police officers are the first to react to the scene of crime and the first to have an encounter with victims. Also, the preliminary information the victim gives to police officers is the most essential in tackling crime. Two, the generally accepted purpose of the criminal justice system is to safeguard the rights of those who have been accused of crime, uphold social control, punish and rehabilitate those people who break the laws, and deter and tone down criminal activity. Three, there are ways in which the criminal justice system does not work. It receives complaints of numerous appeals and delays which take place in the courts, putting trials, and sentencing off for prolonged periods. There is the complaint of possible wrongful sentence due to advancement of technology. The criminal justice program budgeting does not place more emphasis on prevention. Also, it is argued that all races are not treated in an identical manner. Finally, it is essential for all agencies to work together and communicate so as to establish an effective and efficient criminal justice system (Fuller, 2005). Reference Fuller, J. R. (2005). Criminal justice: Mainstream and crosscurrents. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Read More