However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities. The differences The due process model is pegged on the belief that it would be better if a criminal found innocent goes free rather than have one innocent person in jail. On the other hand, the crime control model argues that it is better to have a innocent person detained, questioned, tried and found innocent then let free than have a society full of criminals roaming
“If a Law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it; he is obligated to do so”- Thomas Jefferson. Law is a system of the principles and regulations that are established in society that govern people’s behavior. Generally, law consists of two main legal systems; common law or criminal law. Civil law controls and determines disputes of individuals and corporations with their private rights and liabilities. On the other hand, Criminal law includes prosecution of criminal offenses and the punishment of crimes.
Fear is the seventh criminal error, when the criminal themselves have fear and refuses to admit the theme of the fear. While power thrust is when criminals are compelled to control the situation. Continuing types of criminal errors is uniqueness, this is when they believe they are better than others, that because they are who they are, they are entitled to things. Lastly, is when all things, both objects and even people are considered objects, things to possess, this is called the ownership error of criminal thinking. These are the general definitions of the thinking errors, which again are against the typical way of thinking, that is usually only unique to criminals, it is the way that they act, and thus justify their actions.
Critics of the insanity plea often contend that a crime is still a crime, and it does not matter who committed it, sane or insane. Opponents of this defense also question, “They are criminals, so who cares if they are sent away?” In truth, it is still a crime, however, this crime cannot be considered guilty, if the defendant had no criminal intent to do so. When dealing with a person who is mentally incapable to comprehend and do certain things, one must analyze their thought process. Some people are eminently schizophrenic, and believe they are doing the world a favor by “eliminating” another individual. They believe that their “target” is going to do wrong to the world, another person, or themselves.
Among the various levels of force used in modern law enforcement, for the sake of the research to follow, these various types can be simply broken down into two categories: non-deadly force and deadly force. The difference between the two is distinguished by the likelihood of its use to gain compliance or to cause great bodily harm or death. So, simply stated the use of deadly force refers to the application of force that is likely to result in lethal consequence. To understand the pervasiveness of Police use of deadly force, it is imperative to fully understand the scope of the functions of Police Officers and the burden of authority placed upon them by law to use coercive
Actus reus is the guilty deed or act and mens rea is the guilty state of mind. The notion of omissions in criminal law relates to the actus reus element of a crime. Definition Omissions is defined in the oxford law dictionary as “a failure to act”. This simply means when a person is bound to do something but omits to do so. Jonathan Herring defines omissions as the defendant is only guilty of a crime when failing to act, where he or she is under a duty to act.
In the TED talk: The Psychology of Evil, Philip Zimardo talks about an, " ... investigative report by General Fay, says the system is guilty ... (and the) environment created by Abu Gharib, by leadership failures that contributed to the occurrence of such abuse..." This quote by a General, states that the injustices, committed at the Abu Gharib prison, was created through the lack of leadership. In addition, if there was a superior officer present, these acts may not have been committed at all. Another example that shows the requirement for a stalwart code of law can be seen in Lord of the Flies. Ralph tries to uphold his law of speaking in turn but it is merely forgotten. "Jack stood up, scowling in the loom, and held out his hands.
Another factor is having to prove the motivation for the crime. A jury, lawyer, or a judge will not be able to know exactly what the person was thinking during the time the criminal committed the crime. Only the criminal will know his intent. This means a lawyer is unable to “prove” the intent of the criminal, which leads to no other form of punishment than a criminal with no intent. If a criminal was found of prejudicial motivation, it is “unconstitutional to punish him for it” because the reason of punishment violates the First Amendment
In addition, these individuals are not human and we as a nation should create an establishment to provide help for serial killers. In my opinion, they do not deserve to be free or have rights. Serial killers choose to kill individuals because they get rejected, want control and need
Falsification of evidence is usually used to convict a person who is assumed guilty, but cannot be convicted due to the lack of evidence. Those who believe they are doing society a favor by falsifying evidence, and that they are putting away a criminal who “deserves it” are justifying their actions without actually looking at the evidence and the facts. This tunnel vision is the cause of many convictions of innocent people, and can even be persuasive enough to fool a jury. Leading authors on justification Carol Tarvis and Elliot Aronson have even wrote, “Once a detective decides that he or she has found the killer, confirmation bias sees to it that the prime suspect becomes the only suspect. And once that happens, an innocent defendant is on the ropes” (137).