Business and Law: The Criminal Justice System - Essay Example

Law PART A a The criminal justice system: The Criminal justice system is one of the main community services in the U.K. The criminal justice system organizations in the U.K. basically encompass the police force, the Crown trial Services, the courts and Worldwide Criminal Administration services. These organizations work jointly to maintain the criminal justice system in the country. One of the main objectives of the home criminal justice panels is to significantly reduce crime rates in the country, thereby maintaining law & order in the home base. “The Criminal Justice Strategic Plan 2008-2011 sets out how the agencies of the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in England and Wales will work together to deliver a justice system which: Is effective in bringing offences to justice, especially serious offences; Engages the public and inspires confidence; Puts the needs of victims at its heart; and has Simple and efficient processes.” (Working together for justice: Aims and objectives, n.d.). Effectiveness of the criminal justice system: The Criminal justice system contributes tremendously towards maintaining justice in the country. It helps to identify illegal activities and abolish them, offers the sufferer and the witness sufficient assistance to prove the crime & awards punishment and rehabilitation to criminals. In any criminal justice system, it is important to recognize and fully understand the meaning of criminal behaviour, in the context of the constitutional or other general rule sources. A major bulk of the criminal suits in the English law system is dealt by Lay Magistrates. Most of the criminal suits begin in the Magistrates court itself. “The main advantage for using the Lay Magistrates are, Local Knowledge , Lack of Bias Gender Balance ,Saves Money , Saves Time.” (Lay magistrates, n.d.). An efficient criminal justice system always helps to increase the public confidence. The criminal justice system in the U.K. provides adequate support to sufferers and witnesses of the crime, mainly at the time of providing evidence and during the court procedures. Moreover, the Criminal justice system helps to save money at the time of expensive court trials. One of the major goals of the Criminal justice system in the U.K. is to considerably enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of all the concerned departments in the criminal justice system. “In Warwickshire an ongoing survey of victims and witnesses involved in the criminal justice system, and supported by VIP, indicates that 84% of victims and witnesses are satisfied/very satisfied with the criminal justice system and 94% are satisfied/very satisfied with the services offered by VIP.” (Benefits to the criminal justice system, n.d.). The legal structure provided by U.K. with regard to mentally ill persons is worth mentioning here. An excellent, psychological approach is made to treat criminals who are suffering from severe mental disorders. This kind of innovative approach helps to transform criminals into better individuals, who can successfully contribute to the well-being of the society and nation as a whole. Legal suggestions are given to persons who have been suspected of committing a crime. Complimentary independent lawful suggestion is provided to such criminals. There are laws which state that persons apprehended by the police force must be informed of their human rights and that they are also subject to open legal suggestions by the supervision officer. As a matter of fact, such laws could be formulated only by a well organized criminal justice system. The criminal justice system assists in maintaining social control, discourages and justifies criminal activities and subjects those who breach the legal laws with criminal punishment and rehabilitation efforts. The smooth and unhindered working of the criminal justice system in the U.K. could be attributed to the combined effort of different authorities. This co-operative effort among the different authorities could be regarded as the backbone of the efficient law making system in the country. The authorities work in accordance with the laws of the land, thus helping to maintain the rule of law within the country. The efficient criminal justice system helps to sustain and secure a co-operative relationship between the various authorities associated with the procedure. It also lends confidence to the public and helps to support and maintain public order. One of the prominent advantages of the criminal justice system in the U.K. is that it has given various officers the right to take appropriate discretion in matters related to law. The ineffectiveness of the Criminal Justice System: In the United Kingdom, a huge fraction of the criminal cases are dealt by the magistrate’s court. However, a major flipside of this system is that the magistrates are not required to be qualified in law. This could have serious implications on the criminal justice system and might further the possibility for miscarriage of justice. The legal structure, itself, is unpleasant in most of the courts. The prosecutor is endowed with the responsibility to reveal the necessary information to the defence but there exists no responsibility on the part of the defence to disclose the same to the prosecution. There are also numerous problems in the field of classification of drugs. Failure in maintaining elasticity in the present circumstances has caused serious troubles with regard to legal issues. Legal action in the U.K. is extremely expensive and has resulted in serious prejudice to the people who seek justice. The legal system in the country is not in a position to meet the public demands. The pressure between the current restrictions on access to justice and the expression of liberty has often caused disputes within the criminal justice system. The most common complaints are high cost and hold-up. A large number of criminal matters, especially summary cases, are settled through guilt confessions. The defendant appears in the court only to enter a plea and for the ruling. As a result, there may be lack of proper inquiry and responsibility. The failure of the criminal legal system has turned out to be a significant reason for the increase in the number of offences. From this, we can very well conclude that the criminal legal system has been a big failure in determining offences. The convictions made in the case of sexual assaults against women and child abuses are, relatively, very less and there aren’t any strong laws to protect underprivileged women and children from atrocities. Although domestic violence against women has become a burning issue, they are not being taken into serious consideration by the criminal justice system. It has also been argued by many legal experts that the resources available in this field are comparably insufficient, and this has inevitably resulted in the lack of developments in this field. The strict application of the contempt of court cases to punish the delinquent witnesses, has been causing severe delay and excess cost. It has been reported that setback and inadequacy have left their disastrous impact on the entire system and the cases are repeatedly going down, which allows criminals to escape trials. The number of postponements and terminations has tremendously increased over the last few years. “There is, above all, a worrying gap between what the decent majority expect of a criminal justice system and what they see it delivering. The public believe that the system shows more concern for protecting the rights of those who break or ignore the law than those who keep it.” (Rebalancing the criminal justice system in favour of the law-abiding majority: cutting crime, reducing reoffending and protecting the public, 2006, p.2). The police force has become very corrupt and ineffective in its functioning owing to political interference and unnecessary control exercised by the administration. This has created a lack of trust from the general public towards the legal system. The failure of the present legal system is quite apparent. The best solution to overcome this problem is to reform the existing system, without losing sight of all the various challenging touchstones of the legal system. The new system must focus on the police force, trials, the criminal courts and the punishment system. Part B: 1(b): This law case apparently deals with offer and acceptance. According to contract laws in the U.K., there should be a valid offer and the acceptance of the offer by the acceptor for the valid contract to crystallize. If an offer is made to a specific person or class of persons, it should be accepted by that person or the class of persons. Besides, there are also unilateral contracts which are not only intended for a specific person but also to the world at large. “The contract in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co was of a kind known as a unilateral contract, one in which the offeree accepts the offer by performing his or her side of the bargain.” (Offer & acceptance, n.d.). Perhaps, advertisements for reward of this kind, as indicated in this case, are unilateral contracts, not intended for any particular person, but to the world at large. Through performance of the demands of the contract, the contract is finally agreed upon and the considerations from both the offeror and offeree are established. To take a simple example, if A offers $ 100 to anyone who can find his lost dog, and B finds and delivers the said dog to A, he is entitled to claim the reward. But courts are divided on their opinion as to whether the motivation of reward is necessary for claiming it. Consider a situation where B found the dog by accident, and then hears bout the reward and tries to claim it. Some courts say that he is entitled to the reward, whether or not he was aware of the reward, while others say the main element of consideration, i.e. the reward, was not present at the time of finding the dog. In this case, it is quite evident that Andy had made the reward advertisement through public notice on Monday morning and he had also served the revocation of offer through advertisement notice on Thursday. Thus, from his perspective, the initiation and termination are perfectly in order. However, Stan captured the dog Wednesday itself, although he was not aware of the reward advertisement. However, upon gaining knowledge about the offer, he seeks Andy out to return the dog and claim the reward. The main argument for Stan not being able to claim the reward is that he was not motivated by it, and therefore at the time of capturing the dog, there was no consideration from his part regarding the offer. Under normal circumstances, he could have claimed the reward on the grounds that the contract was only concerned with returning the dog and claiming the reward and nothing else. In Re Selectmove, [1995] 2 All E.R. 531 (C.A.) the Courts held that, in the event the Company had made arrear tax payments in variation of the directives of the Crown, non-acceptance of the proposal by the Crown had rejected the payments made so far, and even if the Crown had accepted the proposals, there was no consideration flowing and thus it was well within the powers of the Crown to “demand the entire payment in arrears.” (Demeyere 2004). Therefore, it is quite possible that Stan could not avail himself of the reward money. However, this is a classic example of a unilateral contract - a "reward" advertisement, offering payment of money in exchange for information or the return of something of value.” (Schein & Cai 2009). Revocation of the offer: An offeror may call off an offer before it has been accepted, but the revocation must be communicated to the offeree, although not necessarily by the offeror himself. If the offer was made to a whole group of persons, such as in Cargill’s case, the revocation must take a form that is similar to the offer. In this case, it is quite apparent that the revocation of the offer by Andy was in the same manner as the offer i.e. through public advertisement. Besides, the revocation was made before the claimant brought Casey to its owner, and therefore, the revocation is in order from both sides. Thus, Stan has no claim for reward. According to law, unless there is an ancillary contract that assures that the main contract would not be revoked, revocation of contract may occur at any time. In the case of Mobil Oil Australia Ltd v. Welcome International Pty Ltd (1998) 81 FCR 475, the Courts felt it necessary to differentiate between the provision of subsidy to wool manufacturers in the event they sold their produce in local markets as different from the provision to provide subsidy as a consideration for making wool for the local markets. In the case of Mobil Oil Australia Ltd. V. Welcome International Pty Ltd, “The Court also concluded that there was no intention on the part of the government to create legal relations; it was instead a government scheme to promote industry. In this respect the Court noted that ‘It is of the essence of contract … that there is a voluntary assumption of a legally enforceable duty. … it is necessary that what is alleged to be an offer should have been intended to give rise, on the doing of the act, to an obligation. …’ (Australian woolen mills pty ltd y the commonwealth, 2010). Thus, it reemphasized the rejection of the claim by Stan for seeking reward for advertisement and claim schemes for the lost dog. 2(a) (a) The contract law does not distinguish between relations. Even if Stan were Andy’s younger brother, the non-sustenance of the claim still remains, mainly because the repudiation of contract was made even before the claim for the reward was announced. Moreover, due revocation of the offer was carried out in the same manner just as the notification of the contract was made. There is no fault on the part of Andy since he has not transgressed the law. He has followed the same procedure for revocation as he had done for announcement of the reward and its legal validity is sufficed. 1(a) (b) in the event Cassey dies, it could be seen that the subject of reward has been rendered impossible and therefore the question of a reward does not arise. Certain situations have arisen that has rendered the return of Cassey and the concomitant claim of reward, unsustainable, and thus the contract becomes void and unenforceable. One could hardly imagine a situation wherein Stan could show the carcass of Cassey and claim the reward which Andy had offered for it. This being a typical case of unilateral contract, the performance of both sides is very much important. In the case of unilateral contracts, one person makes a promise on the basis of the performance of another person, maybe a select person or to any member of a group at large. However, in the event Cassey died before being surrendered to the true owner, no consideration flows from the animal bounty hunter to Andy and thus, it is unenforceable. The true essence of unilateral contract lies in both parties performing their part of the bargain - in this case, Stan returning lost Cassey and Andy providing the promised reward to him. In this case, Andy’s part of the reward promise occurred when Stan returned the lost Cassey to him. In the event that such a situation does not materialize, the question of any release of reward, or enforcement of promise is completely ruled out. Legal rights does not emanate in the event of such a situation. Reference List Australian woolen mills pty ltd y the commonwealth, 2010.[Online] Australian contract law. Available at: http://www.australiancontractlaw.com/cases/awm.html [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Benefits to the criminal justice system, n.d. [Online] Warwickshire police Available at: http://www.warwickshire.police.uk/ineedhelporadvice/VIPFolder/BenefitsSystem [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Demeyere., 2004. Re selectmove ltd [1995] 2 all E.R 531(C.A.). [Online] Contract law 410 section section E (003). Available at: http://instruct.uwo.ca/law/410-003/selectmove.html [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Lay magistrates, n.d. [Online] Help with law exams. Available at: http://www.helpwithlawexams.co.uk/laymagistrates.html [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Offer & acceptance, n.d. [Online] 4Lawschool.com. Available at: http://www.4lawschool.com/contracts101/offer.htm [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Rebalancing the criminal justice system in favor of the law-abiding majority: cutting crime, reducing reoffending and protecting the public, 2006. [Online] Home office, p.2. Available at: http://www.cjsonline.gov.uk/downloads/application/pdf/CJS_Review.pdf [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Schein. & Cai, L L P., 2009. Contracts and the law. [Online] Findlaw. Available at: http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/business-forms-contracts/business-forms-contracts-overview/business-forms-contracts-overview-law.html [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Working together for justice: Aims and objectives, n.d. [Online] Criminal justice system. Available at: http://www.cjsonline.gov.uk/the_cjs/aims_and_objectives/ [Accessed 10 April 2010]. Read More