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 law is becoming more flexible with criminals in a way that there is not enough punishment against them, with the exact punishment a criminal could understand about his mistakes. The law should be applied strict according to the grade of the crime a criminal commit, if the law continues with flexibility of punishment, criminals will commit crime since the moment they get out of jail. Some of the changes created for a more flexible way to evade punishment are the incorporation of rehabilitation for criminals, the creation of parole, the creation of probation, the use of “parens patriae”, the
Punishment is an essential part of criminal justice system to impose sentences toward the offenders. Before the discussion, the definition of punishment should be mentioned. Cardozo (2000) stated H. L. A. Hart’s identification of punishment in his book as suggesting that the painful and unpleasant feeling of punishment must be involved and imposed to actual or supposed offenders who violated the law. Moreover, punishment must be governed and imposed by an authority constitution and intentionally administrated by human beings. Although society generally agrees that punishment should be imposed to the people who violated the law, the purpose of punishment is still diverse as different approaches have their own believes in the nature, rationale and justification of punishment.
Since house arrest allows the individual to reside in their residence with of course rules to follow, but they are in their comfort zone. While community service allows that person to really see how the world is functioning and how their actions cause a tear in people’s lives that they do not even know. 4 Should community service always fit the crime, or should these sentences be based on the needs of the community? Explain. Even though some judges have made community service fit the crime it did not sound like it was benefiting the community.
In the past, the response to cases involving criminal injustice has been to punish the offender. Restorative justice, however, suggests an alternative approach which attempts to shift the response from punitive to repairing of damage and fixing of the problem. It is a process whereby all the parties to a particular offence come together to respond collectively on how to deal with the consequences of the offence and its implications for the future. Restorative justice does not only help the victim and the offender but also involves the communities they live in, which includes the families of both victim and offender. Communities are also by crime and should be considered as secondary victims.
The criminal examination process is an intricate part of the legitimate framework that means to assemble prove legally, fairly and as per the privileges of casualties, suspects and society. The criminal examination process embodies the forces of police to confine suspects, grill and to look and seize property, through the suitable utilization of warrants and other lawful means. The criminal examination process likewise involves the privileges of suspects, for example, to safeguard and remand and the privilege to direct amid cross examination. Technology has made a further developed society and economy. We utilise innovation in each part of life today.
You have several parts of the criminal justice system like law enforcement, prosecution, defense attorneys, you have the court system there are restrictions on a case being prosecuted including the right to confront ones accusers. Nevertheless, the courts are run by judges, all of these are to ensure a fair trial for the accused. Finally the corrections, when there is a conviction and the charges given for jail time the defended will be sent to the corrections system for punishment. As it concerns the victim civil court proceedings as victims speak out more against wrong doers, the offender will know there are consequences. It allows the victim to feel empowered verse being afraid or feelings of hopelessness.
Once discharged from jail they are directed by agencies, for example, MAPPA whose assignment it is to screen their developments and so forth. On the off chance, that they are in safeguard lodging they will be housed with individuals who have conferred comparable offenses. As per different sociologists, individuals with fewer stakes in the public arena and their particular future commonly display less imperviousness to a few sorts of deviance. Labelling theory asks what happens to hoodlums after they have been marked and recommends that wrongdoing may be highlighted by criminal endorses hence sending one to jail may help to criminalize an individual further. Demonizing youthful guilty parties might lead them into a criminal vocation (Manders 1975).
That is to say that the judge hopes the severity of the sentence will deter Mr Austin from offending again and serve as an example of the possible punishments for a crime of this severity to the rest of the public. When deciding the sentence the judge took into account the guilty plea entered by the accused, the impact of the crime on the victim and his family, the circumstances under which the crime was committed and the criminal history of the
While the retributive justice system primarily focuses on the community response to offending, thereby totally ignoring the legitimate needs of the victims, the restorative justice system works on the idea of victim empowerment. Having said that, we also have to take into account the recent paradigm shift, which has been a result of the various movements against the deficiencies in the current criminal justice system. The Courts are slowly making certain changes in the sentencing policies by paying heed to the wailings of the victims, one major instance being that of the scope for victim compensation under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Supreme Court has taken a pro-active role and resorted to affirmative action to protect the rights of victims of sexual offences. Since restorative justice is an emerging concept in India, previous research on this area clearly points out that the main difference between restorative and retributive approaches is the former’s emphasis on reintegration, restitution and reparation.