While it can be hard to understand why someone would falsely confess to a crime, psychological research has provided some answers and DNA exonerations have proven that the problem is more widespread than many people think. In approximately 25% of the wrongful convictions overturned with DNA evidence, defendants made false confessions, admissions or statements to law enforcement officials. In some false confession cases, details of the crime are inadvertently communicated to a suspect by police during questioning. Later, when a suspect knows these details, the police take the knowledge as evidence of guilt. Often, threats or promises are made to the suspect off camera and then the camera is turned on for a false confession.
It is difficult to hold prosecutors accountable for acts of misconduct. Since prosecutors are often viewed as the “good guys” by the public, many times unethical, as well as illegal acts will be tolerated by the courts and criminal justice system as a whole. Prosecutorial misconduct is considered any action taken by the prosecutor in a criminal case that is against the law and/or unethical. Prosecutorial evidence can be anything from harassing witnesses on the stand, pressing unfounded charges against defendants, tampering with evidence, withholding evidence, up to taking bribes. Prosecutors can sometimes get away with misconduct as it is extremely difficult to prove that misconduct had actually taken place.
Innocence Commission This innocence commission has been designed to recommend action with regard to wrongful convictions. Wrongful convictions are caused by many factors involving several court participants. The goal of this commission is to bring light to these causes and therefore recommend ways to reduce wrongful convictions. The information throughout this document is to be used as reference material for achieving the goal. Causes of Wrongful Convictions The many causes of wrongful conviction are eyewitness misidentification, improper forensic science, government misconduct, informants, bad attorneys, and false confessions or admissions.
Provide an analysis of the dilemmas faced by the criminal justice system in balancing the rights of victims with those of offenders. The continuing dilemma of balancing the rights of victims against those of offenders is vast. There are several considerations that reveal issues faced by the criminal justice system in this balancing act. Victim impact statements are an important document in the criminal justice system as they allow for victims of crime to tell their story within court (Commissioner for Victim’s Rights 2015). Erez, Roeger & Morgan (1994) discuss the importance of victim input inside the justice system.
The tutorial discussion this week was essentially discussing how the system operates and some of the flaws within the system such as false convictions which come about through human error or in extreme cases racial bias (Alberto F. Alesina, Eliana La Ferrara, 2011). There was also discussion about the members of the jury and if they are qualified or competent to decide he guilt or innocence of an individual based on their opinions and perceptions of the trial. My view on the criminal justice system is that overall the system is adequately effective in terms of providing a fair trial for the accused and well suited to punish individuals based on viable evidence and the judgment of experienced judges and magistrates. These issues reflect the interests of the JSB173 unit because the unit focuses on a fair trial through either the
Assignment: Exclusionary Rule Editorial ADJ/255 Contemporary Issues In Criminal Justice The exclusionary rule is an important factor, when it comes to the Fourth Amendment and law enforcement. It has been around for a long time and it serves as an important purpose to the justice system. The exclusionary rule works for the defendants being prosecuted and it one of the benefits they have. Even though it is a benefit there are times, when others try and find ways around it, which violates the defendant’s Fourth Amendment. I personally am in favor of the exclusionary rule and believe it should be enforced because it not right for defendant’s rights to be ignored and dismissed.
Eyewitness Testimony By: Victoria Negron PSY 101-01 Eye witness testimonies form the bedrock of most judicial processes around the world. They make a solid impression on a jury, which has the exclusive role of ascertaining the credibility and veracity of the testimonies and make a verdict based on the truth they hold. This is because perjury is criminal and can subvert the integrity of a trial. Recognizing how fallible witness memories are, is paramount for those involved in the judicial process since trials circulate around factual determinations of whom to believe. The human memory has a propensity to recall erroneous events and even details that did not happen.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Further, because most hate-crime legislation puts added effort into prosecuting crimes against certain individuals or groups, what about the same crimes committed against someone who doesn't fit into one of those groups? Will the crime be prosecuted to the same extent? If not, you're making things worse for the majority, who are likely to feel underprotected. If the problem is that too many people (of any group) are being mugged, or assaulted, or their belongings vandalized, you should put more effort into prosecuting muggings, assaults, or vandalism. Not to protect any one group, but to protect all
One of the responsibilities of a first responding officer is crime scene recognition. The main objective behind crime recognition is to acquire an in depth understanding of the elements that the investigation will involve. Crime scene recognition plays a significant role in determining evidence collection methods. It entails having an insight of the scene using eyes, smell and sound and recording of any relevant material. Defining the degree of the crime scene is one of the most critical steps in recognition of the crime scene (Holden, 2006).