It states that no one can be held for a crime unless a grand jury has indicted him or her for the crime, which the grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence to take them to trial. The Fifth Amendment also states that no one can be tried more than once for the same crime, which is called double jeopardy. Double jeopardy has been known to be decisive if a person is being tried for a lesser crime. Example, a person hits someone with a cast iron skillet and wounds him or her so extremely that he or she expires. If the criminal is charged and tried for murder, but found innocent, then he or she cannot be charged with a reduced offense for the same crime, such as a serious assault.
DNA evidence, available in less than ten percent of all homicides, cannot guarantee that we won’t execute innocent people (ACLUNC, 2013). If someone is convicted and later found to be innocent, you can release him from prison, but not bring them back from death. Others further argue that the death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It simply doesn't apply to people with money. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty (Marceau & Whitson, 2013).
The "deterrent" theory is debatable. Serial killers, rapists, molesters etc. would rarely consider their potential demise via Capital Punishment prior to committing crimes. Criminals usually operate with the belief they will not be caught. 3.
The fact that the penalty for armed robbery has gone up to twelve years from nine years does not pass through a criminals mind because they genuinely do not expect to be caught for the crimes they commit. (Critic, 2006) Craig Jones, director of the John Howard Society of Canada, said offenders focus on methods and strategies of how not to get caught for their crimes much more than they consider the sentence if they do. This theory explains why deterrence is not the best method to prevent crime because it does not explore the reasons why people commit them. The general public does not know the
The purpose also is if law enforcement was to take the evidence it would not be used in the court of law unless issue or that person can be set free of all charges. Basically one wrong moved can make us lose a suspect of a horrible crime if we are not careful. Law enforcement just need to be cautious so they are doing their jobs correct, and setting a person free will get them into trouble (cjlf.org, 2011). When we are identifying the exclusionary rule it is a great rule to have so police have to stop and think. Police have to think before they search because it could cost them a lot if they just do what they want.
Aside from the verdict from the Hinckley trial, the public’s view on the insanity defense is not altogether accurate. There’s a misconception that criminals who use this type of reasoning as a plea can evade punishment. When it comes to the use of the insanity defense, only about one percent of criminals use this type of justification. By using the insanity defense, the criminal is admitting they are guilty of the crime however they are requesting a not guilty verdict based on the state of mind they were in at the time of the crime. This can get tricky for a defendant because if not proven mentally ill, they will be found guilty and usually endure a harsher sentencing for the crime.
Criminal ensure that police are not around by choosing the place and time they will commit their crime. They choose a time when their target(s) is/are at their weakest or alone, due to them being stronger, having a weapon or any other advantage to benefit. This will leave the victim at a disadvantage and the battle will not be equal. With the right to bear arms will give victims the opportunity to overcome criminal assaults by defending themselves or simply leaving showing the criminals your weapon as a threat. The police do not reach the scene of the crime until after the assault is committed.
No one wants to convict an innocent man or woman of a crime they didn’t commit, so surely no one wants to convict a juvenile—without knowing. The process of the juvenile court system all depends on the seriousness of the offense/crime and whether the juveniles denies involvement or claims involvement. If the court finds that the juvenile is involved, or the juvenile claims involvement, the court will then decide the juveniles punishment based on best interest for the juvenile. For adults, the goal of the court is to punish the adult if found guilty of committing a crime. Juveniles, however, are much younger and may require a different approach.
Depending on the crime: misdemeanor, felony, or petty offense; punishment is rendered after a conviction is determined. Mitigation by the defense attorney occurs prior to sentencing. According to The Law Offices of Patrick Maher (n.d.), “after a guilty finding, the judge gives the attorney an opportunity to speak on behalf of the client. This is called mitigation, defined as “to make less severe.” This is a very important part of the process and can have a dramatic impact on the judge’s decision.” The crime and circumstance dictates punishment and sentencing. Punishment can include probation, imprisonment, community service, and fines.
A life of incarceration without the possibility of parole is a realistic alternative for the small number of offenders who are likely to be executed in any given year. Justice does not mandate death but justice does request that murderers be punished. If punishment is reasonable for returning justice and the moral order, it does not necessarily follow that capital punishment is moral. “The death penalty only allows us to extend the pain. It allows us to continue to blame one another, to turn against one another, to learn to hate better”.