Justice Essay Sample
- Word count: 1115
- Category: assignment
Get Full Essay
Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues.Get Access
Justice Essay Sample
When you look up synonyms for the word justice, or ask someone what they think the word means, they will spew out nouns such as: neutrality, fairness, impartialness, etc. I believe justice in terms of the criminal system is the collaboration of three different entities, police, court, and corrections. That have to work together to form an illusion of one single entity; and in doing this, they have to still maintain a check and balance system amongst themselves. So, no one system should be able to have full authority.
For only by this can it strive for the ability to bring about a system that can observe neutrally, judge fairly, and the ability to weigh each investigation and case with a sense of impartiality. The main components of the criminal system are the police, court, and correction unit. They have to interact with one another by a collective means. You have the law enforcement in the forefront; they are the ones that have to enter the “crime scene,” take into consideration all the evidence, collects the evidence, and they have to arrest the suspect.
Once they have apprehended the suspect perceived to be the doer of the crime. The suspect at this time is taken to the court; the evidence collected by the police is then presented at the court. Case is made by both prosecution and defense team. You have the unbiased jury and judge that view the case, evidence, and testimony; they deliberate and come back with a sentence. Once the suspect is sentenced, if found guilty, they are sent to a correctional institute. The correctional unit officers have to supervise the convicted felons.
They have to ensure that their facility is well situated and capable of holding the convicted felons, so that both the inmates and the public can co-exist in a safe environment. The two models of the criminal justice system are: The crime control model and the due process model. The two models differ from each other through which part of the justice system they put their emphasis on. The Crime control model put their importance on reducing crime and criminal activities in society through implication of the Law enforcement officers, i. e. olice/detective, taking control and in theory get to the solution and conviction as soon as possible.
The Crime control model judges the person for what they did, their role in the crime. It is more cut and dry. They believe the severity of the punishment should correlate with the crime. This theory allows for capital punishment, they don’t believe one can change, or give too much importance for mental status, ethnicity, age, race, etc. The Due process model is quite the contrary, it stress the importance of taking into consideration ones race, age, demographics, etc.
The Due process model put importance on respecting ones rights and following all the responsibilities of the law. While still protecting ones freedom. I think the fact that the main components of the justice system sometimes conflict with each other are the reason why some cases get thrown out. A case, that I remember, is the clear epitome of when the justice system failed; it took place in the 1993 “West Memphis Murders. ” Three boys were killed in a horrific manner. Why were the murders not solved?
Lack of poor evidence collected, rash decisions making, jumping to conclusion, media hype, and the police not following up on hints that were called in. They arrested three boys because they portrayed eccentric behaviors. They went on hearsay; they let the pressure of the media and public convict three innocent boys. The law enforcement officers didn’t collect proper evidence, they lacked proper detective tactics, and they pressured one of the suspects into admitting guilt. The jury wasn’t unbiased, everyone felt these boys were guilty and thus found them guilty.
Had the law enforcement officers done their jobs properly they would have followed up on the clue where there was a man completely bloody and delusional, in the bathroom of a fast food restaurant. The cops never showed up there to talk to him, they went the next day to the restaurant took samples a sample of DNA, blood smear from the wall, and they lost that only sample of evidence. That case went unsolved, a case of three eight or nine year old boys. That shouldn’t have happened.
The system will fail if the three different entities of the justice system don’t act as one. Technically, I believe the crime control model is more useful because you get a verdict, action is taken, a suspect guilty of a crime pays for that crime accordingly to the severity of the crime; without technicality changing the sentence, or race, demographics, age playing a rule in how severe or lack of severity of the punishment. More criminal activities would be accounted for; people would fear law enforcement officers more.
The due process model is more efficient and accurate. They enforce the rules and regulations of the law; they make sure any suspect is treated with the respect they deserve in accordance with the law. I believe both systems need to interact with one another for it to be fair and just. One system may come to a conclusion too quickly, while the other may allow someone guilty to get out of crime do solely to a technicality, so no one system is perfect on its own. However, I do believe the crime control model should be more prevalent in the justice system.
I think too much consideration is given to suspects, and why call someone suspect when their guilt is so evident, that really it’s a point one percent chance for them not to have committed the crime. I think the severity of the crime should matter; a pedophile serial killer should not be turned to life in prison where our tax money pays for their living. I don’t think capital punishment should be banned; there are some out there that honestly don’t deserve the “luxury” of a prison.
An example of this would be, the Jodi Arias case, she stabbed her ex-boyfriend twenty-nine times, shot him, slit his throat, and left him to rot. Is it fair to say that it was an act of passion, when she stole the gun, made sure she had enough gas so that she didn’t have to stop anywhere, and took pictures. She took the life of a son, a friend to many, he was a good guy who had his faults, but did he deserve to be killed. She killed him because she couldn’t have him. Now she gets to sit in prison and study and feed into her aspiration of teaching. Is this fair, no, I don’t believe so.