The Process of Arresting, Trying, and Convicting Someone Accused of a Violent Crime - Essay Example

Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Introduction In the criminal justice system, law enforcement ities are entrusted with the process of protecting citizens and keeping neighborhoods safe at all times. This means that they have the responsibility of arresting all suspects, and exposing them to trials. The first step when an individual is suspected of illegal activities is to report it to the police authorities. It is quite common for members of the public to go to police with claims about suspicious individuals. The next step has to do with the police formally apprehending the suspect after questioning him or her. The process of arresting, trying, and convicting someone accused of a violent crime Prior to the arrest, a magistrate who has no interest in the case has to have given permission for the warrant to be issued. This ensures that the arrest is supported on a legal foundation. The next step after the arrest is booking the suspect. In this process, the individual is fingerprinted, photographed, and expected to provide personal information. In cases where th charges include the abuse of alcoholic substances, the suspect can be allowed to enroll in a suitable diversionary program like that of alcohol rehabilitation (Spano, Freilich, & Bolland, 2008). In such cases, the suspect has to abide by the regulations of the program or continue to the following criminal justice system stage for the continuation of the process of booking. After booking, the suspected person will be given a definite date on which he or she I scheduled to appear before a judge in court. Usually, this will happen in a couple of hours after the arrest. During this process, the suspect is informed of his or her right to be released, prior to the trial date, on his or her individual recognizance. A suspect could also be released when he or she posts bail. It is up to the judge to determine the amount that will be requested in the bail. This decision is often based on the brutality of the crime as well as the suspect’s potential to escape. The judge also considers the criminal background of the suspect before deciding on the amount for bail. In cases where bail is posted, the suspect will be required to provide the court with his or her passport. In the next stage, there is an arraignment hearing in which a judge will determine if a crime was actually carried out and if the accused person could be responsible for it. If it is found that the accused could have committed the crime, there will be an indictment (Spano, Freilich, & Bolland, 2008). On his or her next arraignment in court, the suspect has to enter a no contest, guilty, or not guilty plea. In cases where the suspect actually committed a crime, he or she will agree to a plea bargain which stops the case from proceeding to trial. Moreover, accused persons have the right to ask for a trial by judge and jury if they so desire (Kaufman, 2010). During the trial, the suspect may challenge the testimony of the witnesses through his lawyer or himself. The prosecution is tasked with the responsibility of proving the guilt of the suspect. If the court finds that the suspect is not guilty, he or she is released immediately from the criminal justice system. If the suspect is found guilty, he or she may be released on bond or put in remand until the day when the sentencing trial officially starts. Which steps are more critical with regard to the miscarriage of justice (i.e., which steps are conducive to corruption) Corruption in the justice system refers to any unsuitable impact that will affect the impartiality of court proceedings. It could be indicative of the bribing of court judges so that they rule in favour of one of the opposing parties or even declare a mistrial. The pre-trial procedures which include the moment of arrest and the subsequent processing procedures are the most critical. According to Bernburg, Krohn, & Rivera (2006) it is in these processes that there is most likely to be corrupting practices by court officials. It is an established fact that corruption thrives in the pretrial stage of the criminal justice system because this phase has less scrutiny and does not require as much discretion as the later stages. Untroubled by accountability or the need for undue scrutiny, t becomes very easy for prosecutors, police, and even judges to be able to seize, detain, and set suspects free as a result of their bribes. In such cases, it is the larger society that stands to suffer from such non-constructive activities. The Strain and Labeling theories and their outlines The strain theory contends that delinquency is the outcome of the emotions that result from the criminal’s negative relationships with different individuals. According to Kaufman (2010) normal individuals respond to emotional strain in different ways. While some will try to fight for the relationship while others will retreat. There are others who choose to rebel as a form of venting. The labeling theory contends that people grow deviant when a negative character is used to describe them. Such people will then take on the label by portraying the behaviors, attitudes, and actions that are connected with the label. This essentially means that the labeling theory supports the notion that people will perpetrate deviant behaviors because others compel the to take on this identity. The labeling theory is the most effective in explaining the behaviors of delinquents as well as criminals. According to Bernburg, Krohn, & Rivera (2006) labeling theorists have stated that the majority of suspects will commit crimes at one time or another in the course of their lives, even though it is not all such people who will develop into hardened career criminals. Once a person has been labelled as a deviant, it becomes quite easy for this label to be adopted by the individual as a dominant label which is then esteemed above all the other more respectable qualities of the individual in question. This means that even though the individual may be a good husband or father, these qualities will be overlooked as the negative quality is extolled by the public. Every label has definite images and prejudices that could encourage other citizens to interpret the labeled person’s behavior in a specific way. Conclusion For example, an individual that works for the benefit of the community is usually perceived as being a hero who deserves to be perceived in other beneficial ways. His hardworking character will prompt people to ascribe additional positive behaviors to him even if they may not necessarily be true. On the other hand, an individual who is labeled as a thief will have additional negative characters ascribed to him even when there is no basis for this. When people who have negative labels are able to lose their negative labellings, their lives will usually take more positive routes. However, when they are unable to do away with the label even when they try to, they are more likely to resort to other negative behaviors in site of the fact that this may not have been their initial intention. References Bernburg, J. G., Krohn, M. D., & Rivera, C. J. (2006). Official labeling, criminal embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43 (1), 67–88. Kaufman, P. (2010). The long view of crime. NIJ Journal, 265, 26–28. Spano, R., Freilich, J., & Bolland, J. (2008). Gang membership, gun carrying, and employment: Applying routine activities theory to explain violent victimization among inner city, minority youth living in extreme poverty. Justice Quarterly: JQ, 25 (2), 381. Read More