The Process of the Criminal Justice System There is an order to the process of criminal justice. According to the Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC) (2012), the criminal judicial system is composed of law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, defense attorneys, the court system, and corrections. Law enforcement officers investigate crimes. Once law enforcement officers have conducted their investigations and have arrested the person they believe is the person that committed the crime, the process moves to the prosecution. A prosecutor gets assigned to the case, and the prosecutor 's office has the task of presenting evidence proving the guilt of the person arrested.
There are three components that make up the criminal justice system – the police, courts, and correctional facilities – they all work together in order to protect individuals and their rights as a citizen of society to live without the fear of becoming the victim of a crime. Crime, simply put is when a person violates criminal law; the criminal justice system is society’s way of implementing social control. When all three components of the criminal justice work together, it functions almost perfectly.
The main parts of a criminal justice system can best be described as a discretionary model, because so many steps are taken from the stages of committing a crime to being prosecuted and possibly release from correctional institutions in the future. Each one of these steps have a serious deciding elements in them that play a role in the prosecution of a criminal. As stated in the text book “no two cases are alike, and no two defendants are alike,” (Barkan, 17). Because of the uniqueness of each case and the people involved in it a system must be put in place to insure that at every stage of the criminal justice system there is a set of questions and decisions that are being made effectively and properly.
The exclusionary rule was first established in the case of Weeks v. United States in 1914. During the trial, the Supreme Court ruled that the evidence obtained by the law enforcement officer was in violation of the Fourth Amendment and will be inadmissible in federal courts. This rule later became effective in the state courts in 1961 due to the unlawful search of Mrs. Mapp’s house in the case of Mapp v. Ohio. As a result of this case, Mrs. Mapp was convicted for possession of obscene materials but later argued that the law enforcement officer could not use the materials in the trial because they were obtained without a warrant. Although the exclusionary rule is not an independent constitutional right, it serves many purposes such as aiding in the deterrence of police misconduct and providing solutions to defendants whose
The justice system is constant work in progress as the system must change and evolve to meet the needs, demands and requirements of the times we live in. The justice system and its statutes sometimes struggle to keep up with the ever-changing world; thus making them lag behind. As stated, one of the core functions of the justice system is to provide intervention programs for those individuals who are deemed to be at risk. Intervention programs do exist but still the justice system is overburden with many criminal cases. The inability of justice programs to work as they are intended to is seen as one of the significant problems facing the justice system. Welsh and Harris (2013) seeks to explain the inability of the justice programs to not work in stating, “The problem is that many criminal justice interventions fall short of their goals because of poor planning, poor implementation, and poor evaluation. It is fair to say we have not yet discovered “what works” to reduce crime.” From this, it is clear that the development of interventions is not the issue and not the cause for them to not succeed in their mandates but the problem is within their planning.
When a crime scene investigator comes upon the scene, they must have a search warrant. Without a warrant, all of the information gathered in order to process the crime could be greatly compromised. Now a search warrant is defined as a legal document authorizing law enforcement official to enter and search a premises or person (legal-dictionary n.d.). Therefore, when a crime scene investigator come on a scene to process that scene they most have a search warrant in order to gather all of the information needed to process the crime.
Students in the criminal justice department are taught that our main objective in the justice system and our careers is to serve and also protect those involved in our community. For as long as I can remember, my goal in life has been to provide service by protecting and serving those who are close to me. My penchant for service is what eventually led me to the Criminal Justice program at Valdosta State University.
Is your first instinct to say one with a criminal conviction should never be a teacher? Why or Why Not? Discuss. I personally feel a person who holds a criminal background should be able to be a teacher under the following conditions: criminal conviction was due to a minor infraction, the quantity of convictions is minimal, and the conviction did not occur recently. Minor infractions can included the following: drug possession, petty theft, and driving under the influence (DUI). The quantity of convictions should be limited to no more than two incidents. Finally, the criminal conviction should not be a recent event, as this may indicate the individual is at higher risk for a repeat criminal offense. As mentioned in the book Legal Rights
A comparison between the Due process model and crime control model Within the criminal justice system, there are two competing models: the crime control model and the due process model. These two models were constructed by Robert Packer and each represents a particular school of thought. In managing crime, there is the individual i.e. the suspect and there is the society. The due process model is seen to focus on the suspect whereas the crime control model focuses on the society. This paper analyzes these two models and based on the rate of crime in the society, makes recommendations as to which is the best model in criminal justice.
Criminal investigation is the process of discovering, collecting, preparing, identifying, and presenting evidence to determine what happened and who is responsible The preliminary investigation includes all the activities that an officer performs when he/she responds to a crime. The officer is responsible for responding immediately and rendering aid to those that are injured. While the officer responds and renders aid, it is important for he/she to note important facts by either writing it down, contacting dispatch, or taking mental note. These facts include the position of the victim or injured, recording spontaneous statements, paying attention to unusual actions or activities, and an assessment of the crime scene. I know it is out of order, but I believe the second and most crucial step is to secure the crime scene.
Over the past three and a half years I have spent my life studying in school. I have studied for hours and hours about the field of criminal justice; the reason it exists, its history and development, theories that are used to explain topics in criminal justice, and cases that have been monumental in changing the way that criminal justice works. While all of these are great to learn about the field of criminal justice itself cannot be learned from reading textbooks and memorizing theories. This is why I am interested in an internship with the Griffin Police Department. I want to learn how the criminal justice system is in action, how things actually play out outside of the scholastic setting. It is easy to learn about a subject from a book, but it is an entirely different matter to learn about a subject through real life experience. I hope to learn how to serve and protect while implementing the law correctly, especially in today’s world when the level of support for police officers is very low and the level of misconduct cases concerning the police are very high. It is not easy to know what to do in every situation, especially when some reactions are needed with very little or no time to think about. It is one thing to hear about a crime happening and the response that would be best to give, and another thing to need
In the case, the Court did not see sufficient evidence to support the claim that the police violated the respondent’s Fourth Amendment right, prior to entering the resident. There is no evidence of threats or demands made by the police officers, that would insinuate the officer did anything wrong. Because the police in this case did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment prior to the exigency, the Court held that the exigency did in fact justify the warrantless search. The officers re-acted upon suspicion and training (Vile, n.d.).
Terry had filed to the District Court of Cleveland because he wanted the evidence that was found on him thrown out. Terry had felt that the evidence that was found on him violated his Fourth Amendment; which is the people’s right against search and seizures. In an eight to one decision, the court had decided that McFadden, the police officer, had enough probable cause to search him and that it did not violate the Fourth Amendment.