Evidence That Defendant Is Guilty

It weakens the faith the public has for the justice system as well as poses safety issues; when innocent people are put away, the real criminals are still out there. Luckily, it is known what causes wrongful convictions and how to fix them. Many wrongful convictions are due to mistaken eyewitnesses, jailhouse snitches, or false evidence. I think many of the wrongful convictions could be solved with harder evidence, more information. A case should not rely on a single eye witness but multiple.

The Crime Control Model believes that it is better to arrest and question a suspect who may be found innocent later as opposed to letting them remain free. This model allows the law to do what they can to find any evidence possible. The Crime Control Model is mainly concerned with protecting society first and preserving law and order. Suspects are basically considered to be guilty until they go to court and are proven innocent. The underpinning of this Crime Control Model is deterrence.

Shaw believes that a Utilitarian perspective supports the foundations of criminal law because laws help people have a sound mind and a good life. This is because laws protect personal belongings and self. Shaw suggests criminal law should be viewed from a Utilitarian perspective since it helps the overall well-being of society. Some things are breaking the law but are not to be punished as harshly as others. For example, a person speeding over the posted speed limit would not need to be sent to prison like a person who murders someone.

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. The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. 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.

The plea bargain is a major problem facing courts today because innocent people are ending up behind bars. It is the defendants right to be able to plea bargain, but it is not always in their best interest to do so. Many defendants feel forced to plea bargain because they either feel as though their case has no chance against a jury or the public defender has little time to spend on their case. The defendant 's plea bargain to receive a lesser sentence, even if they are innocent. The other aspect of plea bargaining that poses a problem is guilty defendants receive a lesser sentence for the crime they committed.

Racial profiling suspicious people of specific ethnicities will create a safer place because if the police were to arrest these people then the crime rates will drop, creating a safer place. "Modifying airport profiling procedures to include scrutiny of race, gender, and age has the potential to impact fundamental consultation rights" (MacDonald). If the police were to use racial profiling as a major part to justify if a person was guilty of a crime, that would create a safer environment. Racial profiling should be allowed for the police to use because it is easier for them to track down criminals. If a criminals was on the run and they were of a specific ethnicity then it would help the police to use racial profiling on all people of that ethnicity.

While we have a justice system that is based off laws and cases that come before, and there are also some cases that express the moral principles found in our societies for a case by case assesment. The idea that anyone who commits a crime, but is missing the ability to defer right from wrong shouldn’t be held to the same standards as someone who has a rational mind. For example, in “The Insanity Defense” the narrator talks about if a person is convicted of a crime, the prosecutor must prove two things; that the person engaged in a guilty act and that he or she had guilty intend. “But what about situations in which the person commits the act and intends to do so, but was suffering from a mental condition that impairs their ability to appreciate

I think sending a teen or adult to prison for life is not cruel or unusual for a punishment. I think that if they don 't go to jail, they will never learn. I think what 's cruel and unusual is them killing someone else. I think letting a killer walk free is like stabbing yourself in the back. This is why I disagree with Yee 's bill.

Lawyers are present during interrogations to convince the cops the person is innocent. If someone can 't afford an attorney one is appointed to the person. The court found it necessary to mandate notice to defendants about their constitutional rights. The complete meaning and reason of Miranda Rights. Miranda Rights are used during anything involving the police or court.

Criminal law covers the area of crimes and is there to maintain law and order. A crime refers to a breach of one or more rule of law. The society believes that individuals should be held responsible for their actions, especially when those actions constitutes a crime that would endanger the safety of today’s society. In the eye of the law, in order to paint an individual as guilty, the prosecution must prove that the defendant committed an actus reus had mens rea at the same time. Actus reus refers to a guilty act and mens rea means a guilty state of mind.