False testimony, exaggerated statistics and laboratory fraud have led to wrongful conviction in several states. Since forensic evidence is offered by "experts," jurors routinely give it much more weight than other evidence. But when misconduct occurs, the weight is misplaced. In some instances, labs or their personnel have allied themselves with police and prosecutors, rather than prioritizing the search for truth. Other times, criminalists lacking the requisite knowledge have embellished findings and eluded detection because judges and juries lacked background in the relevant sciences, themselves.
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.
The criminal justice system relies heavily on eyewitness identification for investigating and prosecuting crimes in that, it may be the only evidence present for identifying criminals in certain cases (Wells & Olson, 2002). The strong weight given to eye witness identifications is nonetheless a matter of concern as it eye witness identifications have been demonstrated to be flawed, even when witness confidence is high. Experience has shown that the convincing and sincere witness can often be mistaken. Memon (2008) explains where eye-witness testimonies have been greatly unreliable; where Jean Charles de Menezes was shot by police as a result of mistaken identity. According to eye-witnesses he was described as suspicious, jumped over a ticket barrier and was wearing a wearing a bulky jack supposedly concealing a device.
Homicide is murder but not all homicides are illegal some are considered justified homicide an example of justified homicide is when its done as an act of self defense. Homicide is a heinous crime that is very serious and will result in going to jail for a long time.This is what homicide is. Scenario Two: What is the most serious offense Lori can be convicted of? Explain. Lori committed a controversial crime that many people believe was the right call to make but a crime is a crime you can’t break the law just because you don't like it and in this paragraph i will explain to you what law Lori will most likely be charged for.
There has been many a time in my life, as I’m sure there has been in everyone else’s, that being given the second chance has made the difference. But I do believe, however trite this may sound, that if you do an adult crime, you do adult time. Minors that commit certain serious crimes should be tried as adults. Some youths are even known to commit crimes without thought because they know they cannot be tried as adults. Violent, preventable crimes by minors have long plagued America’s larger cities but have scarcely been punished because of the age of the perpetrators.
Another major point is that our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. This contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Has one ever thought of the victim’s family when the whole court cases are going on?
Why did Brooks knowingly lie about what Spradley said? “She had been beaten, and one of her eyes was bloodshot and swollen” (“Justia US Law, 2011) when she came into the police station earlier that year. Brooks may have thought that by making those false statements, it would give justice to what had happened to her, even though he may have been innocent of the charges currently filed against him. The third and final context to consider is criminal justice. This view is that sometimes the criminal justice system fails and non-law-abiding citizens get away with certain acts.
Wrongful convictions are the result of the court system admitting insufficient evidence into court. The court system has many ways to help reduce or eliminate the causes of wrongful convictions. The court system can help reduce or eliminate these causes of wrongful convictions by first identifying why wrongful convictions occur. Wrongful convictions occur primarily due to eye-witness misidentification, false confessions, improper forensic science, government misconduct, informants, and bad attorneys (University, 2009). Ways to reduce or eliminate the cause of wrongful convictions by eye-witness misidentification by put into operation the following procedures that have been shown to reduce the amount of wrongful convictions through the use of eye-witness identification.
What are the problems with non-interrogatory forms of evidence? Choose two forms of non-interrogatory evidence to discuss. Having enough evidence is key in charging, prosecution and finally conviction of criminals, unfortunately most cases result in the police needing and wanting more evidence. Due to insufficient evidence the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will not be pursued cases further, even if the police believe they have the right suspect. However there are other types of evidence collection apart from that of questioning, which falls under the title of non-interrogatory forms of evidence such as surveillance and scientific evidence.
Many criminals commit crimes because they know that their offenses have light sentences and in no time they will be out on the streets wreaking havoc once again. This bill would make it harder for armed robbers to be out in the streets soon after their conviction and highly discourage them to repeat their offense. If a criminal knows that he can commit an armed robbery and only get three months sentence I believe he will more likely repeat his offense. If a criminal knows that an armed robbery conviction would give him six months in prison I believe that would be more than enough for the criminal to think it over and over before committing armed robbery. Many criminals do think before Prison term policy recommendation proposal 4 they commit a crime.