The fact that the prosecutor works in the interests of the state can be seen as the underlying factor here. The prosecutor can get away with misconduct; because if it were proven that the prosecutor was actually responsible for misconduct it would greatly undermine the goal of the state, which is to seek justice. If the prosecutor is misconducting themselves then it gives the impression that the prosecutor is not interested in justice, but more so a conviction, whether it be done so legally and ethically, or not. Prosecutorial misconduct happens, and
This is a problem that a lot of nig corporations face these days when being funded by investors or government agencies. There are cases from the past where government funds were given to an organization to use for training purposes. When funds are coming and going in an organization, un ethical people do not record all the necessary information to track the funds correctly, showing that there is more available that there actually is. When this happens, audits are necessary to find where the monies are missing from, eventually exposing the guilt parties so that they can be prosecuted for their
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.
While Ethical Naturalists believe it holds great importance as it can convey facts and help us to understand ethical theories, there are those who strongly disagree with this. For example Intuitionists, such as Moore, believe that our intuition is more useful when wanting to know how to act morally than knowing the definitions of ethical terms. Although Non-Cognitive theories disagree with the factual content of ethical statements, it is clear that they still see some significance in ethical language. However rather than seeing it as facts, they accept that morality is subjective and suggest that the importance of ethical language is provided by the emotions conveyed in the phrases used. Perhaps more so than Emotivists, Prescriptivists see ethical language as fairly meaningful.
One of the features the Crime Control Model considers to be most important is the prevention of crime. While this model proclaims it is permissible to make mistakes in the entire criminal justice system, it assumes guilt by fact and the person is guilt unless proven innocent. This is one of the downfalls of the Crime Control Model. The concern with this model is a quick and speedy conviction despite the innocence of the alleged criminal. Many wrongful convictions have been overturned because of the proponents of the Crime Control
There is a moral difference between Shelton’s killing of his attackers and that of his other victims. Darby and Ames caused personal harm to Shelton and thus gave him the moral right to try and prevent any other future pain that could be caused by these men, but the other victims were combatants in the war that Shelton waged against the “system”. When looking at Darby and Ames, Shelton takes a more utilitarian approach when dealing with their killings. The government “system” is supposed to punish those who are wrong. But in the trial of Darby and Ames, only Ames was punished severely while Darby was allowed to go free.
Is the death penalty unjust? Blackmun is opposing towards the death penalty. He claims that there is many faults in the system. Therfore thay should not be allowed to decide whether one should be kiiled on their commited crimes. In contrast to Scalia I think he has good points but he needs a better argument than the judical system has faults.
Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.
Unless the government is able to prove the existence of these elements, it can't obtain a conviction in a court of law. The due process model is a model of the criminal justice system that stresses that every criminal justice conclusion is built on scrupulous information. Due process stresses the adversarial process, the rights of defendant and the rights of the formal decision-making procedure. It is vital to realize that courts allow individuals to defend themselves based on entrapment, self-defense or insanity. These, however, must be proved appropriately to allow courts practice fairness in defenses.
People deserve a reasonable trial for instances, there are individuals who are accused of crimes he or she have not committed. Whereas, certain people have committed crimes that are found not guilty for the simple fact one has the money to hire a high-class lawyer. The situations concerning these accusations tend to protect others that can afford to be represented financially the ones who cannot manage to pay for high-class lawyers settle for court appointed attorneys. “Although appellate courts rule that improper statements made by prosecutors do not render sentencing proceedings unfair, some judges express concern that the error may not be harmless” (Edwards, 1995). This action should be carefully view by higher authorities in making sure that justice is served correctly and