Wrongful Conviction: Dookhan Case Study

Fred Zain was a forensic lab technician that worked for both the states of West Virginia and Texas. A man who did a job he was severely under qualified for, for ten years, and who was thought to be a start asset in his line of work.Fred Zain had testified in countless cases, presenting himself well and appeared to know his trade so well that no one in the courtroom questioned the lab results obtained by Zain. It is very well known that his actions in court are viewed as unethical by today’s standards. In his time of employment, Fred Zain acquired a lengthy rap sheet of tampering and falsifying evidence, false convictions. Fred Zain was a man who would do anything and everything to convict anyone he saw as guilty. A man who did so until his lies and deceit finally caught up with him.

These wrongful convictions occur because the criminal justice system had many flaws. It was not only the system that had flaws but also the people on the board. The prosecutors "opposed testing, arguing that it would make no difference" whether or not those being convicted got DNA tested (Garrett 1). Confessions was one of the causes that often led to the downfall of those innocently convicted. In the case of Jeffrey Deskovic, the police officer was supposed to conduct the polygraph examination. The detective for this case explained that he did not actually conduct the examination but only tested "Deskovic 's truthfulness" and to "get

With millions of criminal convictions a year, more than two million people may end up behind bars(Gross). According to Samuel Gross reporter for The Washington Post, writes that also “even one percent amounts to tens of thousands of tragic [wrongful conviction] errors”(Gross). Citizens who are wrongfully convicted are incarcerated for a crime he or she did not commit. Many police officers, prosecutors, and judges are responsible for the verdict that puts innocents into prison. To be able to get exonerated many wait over a decade just to get there case looked at, not many are able to have the opportunity of getting out. People plead guilty for crimes that are not committed by them to avoid trial, but by doing so the right decision wasn’t made.

Modern sentencing practices are outrageous and out of control. People go to prison for 162 years for stealing a car or 25 to life just for simply making a mistake of leaving their child in the car for no longer than 20 minutes without killing or harming the child. Even the innocent get sentenced major years for crimes they didn’t even commit. Lately sentencing has been crazy, so at this point in time sentence reforming is relevant in this case.

Famous American cereal killer, John Wayne Gacy, had murdered and raped 33 adolescents, many of whom were teenagers, the justice system made sure this man could never do this again. The public is turning a blind eye to the many contributions the justice system makes, we should look at not only how we can reform, but how it contributes to society The justice system creates many contributions to society, such as the safety it provides for children and their chances of exploitation, the many instances where they convict dangerous individuals therefore creating a safer environment for the present and future of society, and the fact it provides all citizens of the public and private sectors, to have the right to a fair, speedy, and public trial,

The reason O.J. was found not guilty of murder and acquitted in criminal court, but found guilty of the tort of harm and ordered to pay damages in the civil court lies in the structure of our legal system, in regards to criminal cases and civil cases. The distinct difference between criminal cases and civil cases provides further explanation regarding the O.J. Simpson case. Criminal cases deal with crimes against society. It is the government, not the victim, who brings action against the charged individual. In criminal cases, the penalties can include a number things including jail time. Since the stakes are so high in these cases, there is a high burden of proof on the prosecution. The prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt “beyond

The purpose of the United States Sentencing Commission is to “establish sentencing policies and practices for the federal criminal justice system that will assure the ends of justice by promulgating detailed guidelines prescribing the appropriate sentences for offenders convicted of federal crimes.” (Mustard 289) When it comes to the sentencing process, data is collected about the individual’s offense and criminal records to determine the offense level and criminal history score. Once they find those two scores that then indicate a range of sentence lengths. With certain circumstances, the judge can depart from the guidelines and issue a sentence that either exceeds the maximum or falls short of the minimum required by the guidelines. Once the sentencing range is determined, courts must adhere to the following constraints: “In determination of the sentence to impose within the guideline range, or whether a departure from the guidelines is warranted, the court may consider, without

Sentencing methods and rationales are continually highly contested in the Criminal Justice system. Monetary penalties are particularly pivotal in these debates. According to Walsh, research from all corners of the world continually demonstrates that the poorest in society are more likely to be subject to the Criminal Justice System. This evidence Walsh argues, ‘cannot be ignored’, when considering which sentencing options should be used. The fine is the most commonly used penal sanction in most Western Penal systems. Fines are a historic type of monetary penalty which have remained incredibly popular. Outside of the United States, fines make up about 70 % of all punishments in the lower courts. The fine can be seen as a modest penalty, and appropriate, in my opinion, only if the offence was minor. Bentham sees monetary penalties as ‘ideal’. This I argue is incorrect. Monetary penalties have so many disadvantages that they should not be used to a greater extent in the criminal justice system. Thus some have gone as far to argue that they should be completely abolished. However Burch has said that this would not be possible so reform should be favoured instead. I will argue that updating their current use is essential in order to make the current system of fines more effective and more restricted. I will continue to discuss why fines are not effective, from their rational, to their effect on the offender to the way that they are set in practice. I will conclude

Sentencing occurs after a defendant has been convicted of a crime. During the sentencing process, the court issues a punishment that involves a fine, imprisonment, capital punishment, or some other penalty. In some states, juries may be entitled to determine a sentence. However, sentencing in most states and federal courts are issued by a judge. To fully understand the sentencing phase of criminal court proceedings, it is important to examine how sentencing affects the state and federal prison systems, learn the meanings of determinate and indeterminate sentencing, and understand the impact Proposition 57 has had on sentencing in California.

General deterrence and Specific deterrence at first glance seems like it runs hand and hand. As you look closer and understand it better, you come to the realization that they are two different topics. General deterrence is focused on the legal punishment if you are caught committing a crime. Specific deterrence focuses on punishment of criminals that are apprehended. So many question still remain on how effective both deterrence really are. General and Specific deterrence have good and bad effects on citizens. It prevents crime and some cases and fuels the rage in some.

When a person commits a crime there are different levels of punishment and decision making if a person has committed a minor crime like speeding, littering, shoplifting, prostitution, vandalism being drunk, possession of drugs etc. They are either given tickets and left off with a warning or spend 1 night in jail some of the cases like vandalism will require them to do community service and others like drug possession can land them into jail for a few years. Then there are bigger crimes that are more serious like murder, manslaughter, rape, Assault with the intention of killing, Arson etc. These offences come with harsh punishment like life imprisonment, many years in prison sometimes if a person has murdered someone multiple times they are known as serial killers and will be taken into death penalty.

In the United States 1,625 cases has been wrongfully convicted, for crimes they haven’t done nor have any connections to it. Sedrick Courtney’s is a prime example of wrongfully convicted people. The Case of Sedrick Courtney is form to show how our criminal justice system is corrupt.

In the U.S. criminal justice system, there are two basic sentencing models that the courts use to apply their judgments. These are determinate sentencing and indeterminate sentencing. Determinate sentencing can be referred as a set sentence imposed to an offender this model is based on the famous phrase “Do the crime and will do the time”; however, this model has a unique quality and that is that a parole board can’t overturn the length of the sentence that was imposed. On the other hand indeterminate sentencing can be describe as the length of a sentences that has not being defined yet like the term “25 to life” on this term you can see that the sentencing was not set to an specific time frame, that means that the offenders release date is

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. For those in prison, those who snitch saying the defendant confessed, testifying can be a bargaining chip; the state will often reduce sentence time or

A freedom is the right to live your life without interruptions of the government unless actually committed or interfering with someone else’s rights. Legal guilt is mostly focused in the judicial system. It supports the rights guaranteed in sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The system’s main focus is ensuring that the accused is treated fairly by not infringing with their rights. Section one states that whoever the accused is being charged with has to be done with a reasonable limit. Although the accused could be factuality guilty, the charges have to be laid within a reasonable time period after the crime was committed. The factual guilty would not matter in that case by the case being denied, and they would half to