Prosecutors can sometimes get away with misconduct as it is extremely difficult to prove that misconduct had actually taken place. Often times the prosecutor is viewed as being on the side of justice and as a result it is difficult for the defendant (who is accused of a crime) to turn the tide against the prosecution. Although during the trial both the defense as well as the judge may report a prosecutor for misconduct, this rarely happens as these reports are often dismissed. This is because as long as the prosecutions misconduct does not affect the outcome of the case, then it is tolerated, meaning that a prosecutor can harass a witness or the defendant so long as the harassment did not have anything to do with the outcome of the trial. The fact that the prosecutor works in the interests of the state can be seen as the underlying factor here.
Some possibilities for convicted felons for sentencing are fines, monetary sanctions, probation, community service, electronic monitoring, incarceration and the death penalty. One main criticism of restorative justice is that it fails to provide adequate protection for individual rights. Also one offender may end up being treated very differently from another who has committed a similar offence but has a more (or less) demanding victim. There are many good things about restorative justice. The offender may experience how it feels to be the victim perhaps preventing similar behavior again.
9. Explain the rationale behind the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that indigent defendants must be provided with free-of-charge attorneys. In your answer be sure to make reference to the case of Gideon v. Wainwright. What types of lawyers may be appointed? 10.
Murderers James Hamm and David Mumbaugh depicts different ways of paying their debt. Jane Bernstein’s view of understanding appropriate punishment for murder is altered when she encounters the different ways paying a debt and the influence of the Victim’s Bill of Rights. She suggests that there’s validation in allowing victims to play a role in the decision of a criminal’s release, yet they should not confer the power to determine one’s destiny. All too often, individuals who after being convicted of their crimes, served their sentences and are due for release, but are then subjected to the wrath of their victims and/or their relatives. At times, there are even attempts through the legal system to have their sentences reduced and released on “good behavior”.
According to the Legal Resource Library, “The biggest drawback to plea bargaining is for the innocent defendant who decides to plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to avoid the risk that he or she will be found guilty at trial.” Plea bargaining requires the defendant to waive three rights that he/she is normally protected by until the Fifth and Sixth Amendments: the right to a jury trial, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to confront hostile witnesses. (Cornell.edu) Some people may try to argue that plea bargaining in unconstitutional, however, this argument has been repeatedly overruled by the Supreme Court. There are a lot of controversial issues surrounding plea bargaining, and victims’ rights groups are arguing that the victim should have inputs and a voice into the bargain that is being established between the prosecutor and the defendant. Victim rights activists also feel that defendants undermine the criminal justice system in its entirety and defendants are let off too
A normal lawyer would not that have done as much as Atticus has done if he was to defend Tom. During the trial, Atticus tries to provide as much evidence as possible to the jury to prove the innocence of Tom Robinson and that Bob Ewell was the one who beat up Mayella. During his cross examination with Heck Tate, he repeatedly asked Mr Tate which side of Mayella’s face she was beaten on, when Atticus confirmed that Mayella was beaten on the right side of her face, Atticus asked Bob Ewell to write his name on a paper, although the intention of this request was unclear to the Mr Ewell before he done it, he figures it out after he did it. Judge Taylor says ‘ You are left handed’ to Mr Ewell, this suggests that Bob Ewell could well be the one who beat up Mayella as he is left handed and Mayella was beaten on the right side of face. Although there’s clear evidence that Tom was innocent, the verdict is that Tom was still convicted, because such a decision to make Tom innocent is just something that would rarely happen as the intolerance in Maycomb towards the blacks can’t simply be changed by one person, Part of the reason Atticus failed the trial is that he doesn’t have much support form the people in
| Hearsay Testimony | By: Richelle WilliamsClass: Criminal Evidence—James AlexanderDate: February 16, 2014 | | Hearsay evidence refers to the kind of evidence the probative force of which depends in whole or in part on the competency and credibility of some persons other than the witness by whom it is sought to produce it. The testimony of a witness is regarded as hearsay when a witness testifies to the declarations of another for the purpose of proving the facts asserted by the other person. Hearsay evidence is normally excluded from a trial because it is deemed untrustworthy. Although hearsay is generally not admissible in court, there are certain statements that are accepted as not being hearsay, and there are statements
Selene Chino Final Paper Professor Kenneth McGuire Criminal Justice 1010 Keep It, Change It, Or Let It Go? Not all laws from our past have been useful to us such as allowing slavery, discrimination, limiting voting rights and many other things that have drastically changed. So why do we keep trial by jury? Trial by jury according to the dictionary by Farlex is a trial of a lawsuit or criminal prosecution in which the case is presented to a jury and the factual questions and the final judgment are determined by a jury. There are certain reasons as to why a trial by jury is not effective such as the jurors may be misled, uninterested, and maybe unwilling to be there but is somewhat forced the outcome of a trial could end in any amount of
These individuals were incarcerated due to improper interrogation techniques and/or the admission of their guilt as a result of coerced confessions, leading ultimately to their wrongful convictions. Even in a post-Miranda age, there remains a growing host of individuals who have been arrested and convicted essentially based upon their interrogator-induced “I did it,” statement as suspects, when no other physical and/or other credible evidence suggested their true guilt. (Leo, Ofshe,