Practical Reasons for Reduction of Crime by the Justice Department - Assignment Example

Number Subject Name Lecturer’s Name Economics Due date Date Submitted Question 1 In criminal law, one can only be held accountable for the actions of which he or she is responsible. This therefore means that where one did not have control of their actions, they are not to be held responsible.1 For criminal liability to be imposed on an individual, two elements must be proved, that is, actus Reus and Mens Rea. The element of Actus reus has been describe to mean physical aspect of the crime. It has been described to include a voluntary act that causes social harm.2 There is therefore need for a physical act to have taken place, which must have been voluntary. Furthermore, it must have caused some harm to the society. This has been used as one of the elements for which criminal responsibility may be affixed upon a person. The act in this case is not to include the thinking process. It only entails the aspect of “doing” rather than the mind process.3 As stated before, the act done must be voluntary. That means that the movement involved was volitional. It must be shown that the accused acted in a manner contrary to what he or she ought to have acted.4 The burden of proving that the act was indeed voluntary vests with the prosecution5. Until such a time when the prosecution establishes its case does the burden to negate this shift to the accused. Sometimes a person may be held accountable for omissions although the general rule of criminal law is that one does not have an obligation to prevent harm from occurring to a person. Unless the duty is fixed under common law or by statute, omission does not constitute a crime. The other element of a crime is mens rea. Mens rea has been defined to mean a state of mind,6 to be more concise, a guilty mind. Mens rea consists of intention, recklessness, dishonesty, negligence or belief.7 One must have knowingly occasioned some harm to the society. Knowingly in this case means that a person is aware of the action and its outcome or has a belief of its existence.8 Negligence in mens rea should indicate a “gross deviation from reasonable standard of care”9 recklessness on the other hand should indicate that the accused “disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk of which he was aware.”10 Practical reasons for reduction of crime by the justice department The first reason for targeting a reduction in crime is for the safety of the society. Crimes are generally acts against the society. A reduction in the number of crimes would therefore result to an improvement of the security of the general public. An example is a reduction in the number of robberies; it will mean a safe place for everyone to live without fear of being robbed.11 Reduction of the expenses incurred by the government is also another practical reason as to why the rate of crime should be reduced. The government spends a lot of money in establishing more courts to deal with the ballooning rate of crime in the society. The expenses would in this case be put to other avenues that may help in the growth of the society at large. The inmates maintenance cost in prisons is also high. The government needs to establish facilities, provide the necessities required in the prisons including food and stationing wardens in the prisons. The government would therefore incur a huge expense which might be avoided by the department of justice Another reason for aiming at crime reduction is to ease the burden of the justice department in dealing with loads of cases day in day out. One less crime would mean one less case. This is therefore a very practical reason as to why the justice department would aim at crime reduction. The issue of the criminal justice process also involves an issue of looking for evidence and establishing facts. With huge burden of criminal cases, the justice department may not be able to allocate sufficient time on a case; this may mean that the quality of the evidence presented may result to be an issue. It is therefore important that the rate of crime is reduced to ensure that facts can be collected with each case being allocated adequate time to ensure quality. Such information as collected is vital since it is used as a determinant as to whether on is guilty of an offence or not. Role of the jury The jury in many systems where such is used has a reserve of looking into the issues of fact in cases before the court. The issue of law is a reserve of the judge. It is however a practice that the jury will give a verdict based on both legal and factual issues.12 However, the jury is expected to seek directions on matters of law. The jury will therefore be required to go through evidence as presented and determine what is credible and what is not. Their role is very powerful since even appealing such decisions especially where there is an acquittal. There should therefore be a close scrutiny of the evidence presented. This might be hindered by complex issues that may surround the case making it hard for the judges to come up with a proper decision. The jury is made of members of the public and is therefore expected to look at issues from an ordinary man’s perspective or what would generally be referred to as a reasonable man’s perspective. This is meant to ensure fairness in the trial and avoid miscarriage of justice. The role of the jury is therefore very important especially in criminal cases. Another very important role of the jury is to ensure impartiality. The fact that the jury is comprised of members of the public who are not to have any link with the parties of the case is aimed at ensuring that the decision arrived at if free from any form of interest, personal or otherwise. Question 2 Disadvantages of a jury R v smith The case focuses on an issue of a jury which is purely white. The disadvantage that appears from the existence a jury system is the aspect of balancing the jury so as to represent various races, origins, gender and other divisions that may exist among human race. A jury that may not take into consideration the person appearing before the jury might later be challenged as being incapable of arriving at a fair decision as was the issue in this case. R v Mushtaq (2002) In this case the issue of direction to the jury by the judge is challenged. Although it was held that there was no breach of human rights, it is clear that there may be over reliance of the jury on the direction of the judge especially since they are lay in issues of law which may lead to miscarriage of justice. This may easily go unnoticed if no appeal on the same is launched. R v Mirza( 2004) In this case the accused had two cases; he used an interpreter in his case, English not being his first language. The jury was suspicious of this and requested for direction from the judge. The jury however, through a letter written by one of the jurors seemed to show that the directions of the judge had been disregarded. This shows two disadvantages of the use of jury in the trial process. One is the fact that the jury is hardly under any controls and may exercise arbitrary powers. This is bases on the fact that they disregarded a valid direction by the judge of which it is a right of the accused to use an interpreter especially where he or she is of the opinion or of the belief that the facts will be well narrated to the court if he or she uses the language which is more familiar. Another disadvantage that appears in the case is on the secrecy of the jury. It appears in the case that the jury may be prone to diverging information to the accused person. If this may take place during the preceding of the trial, it may have a negative effect on the case and it might be hard for a fair outcome to be achieved. This may also result to safety issues of the members of the jury dealing with the case. Advantages R v smith In this case, one advantage appears. The jury is selected randomly. This ensures that the persons deciding on issues of fact in the case are from different backgrounds and beliefs. This increases the chances of a fair verdict being arrived at. It reduces the chances of any one of them having known the person standing trail or having prior information about the case in question. R v Mushtaq (2002) The advantage in this case is that the jury has the liberty to seek direction from the judge on issues pertaining to law. This prevents instances where the jury might make mistakes by doing what they might ordinarily presume to be right. Since the law is sometimes complex, informed decisions may be made by requested to be directed according by the judge who has vast knowledge on the issues of law. R v Mirza (2014) This is an important case that brings out various issues relating to jury trials. The first advantage is on the protection of the members of the jury. The Court refuses to rule their action as being in contempt of the court. This decision was very important in ensuring that the jury is protected and that they would, in the future, be able to render judgments without fear of repercussions. It also protects the internal dealing of the jury while arriving at a decision. The refusal of the court to use the information as evidence brings out an aspect of protection of the integrity of the jury and also, the decision as rendered by them. The jury is therefore protected from any form of interference and also protected under law in the actions they engage in during the trail process. This serves to ensure that the decision is not influenced by any other reason such as fear, but only by their analysis of the facts of the case. Bibliography Herring J, Criminal law; Material Text, Cases, and Materials (6th ed,Oxford University Press 2014) G Slapper and D Kelly, The English Legal System (Cavendish Publishing Limited, 6 ed , 2003) LexisNexis, LexisNexis Capsule Summary; criminal law (2014) Nuttall C Handbook on Planning and action for Crime Prevention in Southern Africa and the Caribbean, Criminal handbook series,( United Nations, 2008) Read More