Ambiguity In The Criminal Justice System

For example law enforcement may interpret and process a crime like a burglary as a crime of trespassing, so this leads inaccuracy. James gives a good example of this, “For example, if a local law enforcement agency does not closely follow UCR or NIBRS definitions, the agency might classify an assault against a woman as an attempted rape, or a trespass as a burglary” (22). Many times local enforcement agencies do not follow the definitions of the NIBRS in the interpretation of crime, and this leads to crime rates in different categories to be skewed. Another problem with the NIBRS is the organization (FBI) that interprets crimes does not include many types of crimes, and these crimes are many times white collar crimes. According to James, “the NIBRS most likely undercounts corporate and occupational crimes” (22). The next time of crime measurement has many problems as well, and this the National Victimization

The purpose of this abstract is to critically review the primary data sources used in the criminological research. The two key factors that measures crime are distinguished: official crime statistics, which are based on the compile data records of offenders and offenses processed by the police, courts, and corrections agencies; and unofficial crime statistics, which are produced by people and agencies outside the criminal justice system whom can add value to the data source (Regoli, Robert M., and Hewitt, John D., 2008, p 62). This abstract will discuss the strengths, weaknesses and differences of both data sources using arrests and self-reports to calculate the prevalence of crime in the United States.

Discretion in policing and the court system is a necessary and unavoidable facet of criminal justice work, yet it is still very controversial. Discretion exists when courtroom actors (police officers, attorneys, judges) have the flexibility to choose an appropriate response to a situation. Police discretion is defined as “The opportunity of law enforcement officers to exercise choice in their daily activities” (Nowacki, 2015). This means that actors with a great deal of discretion at their disposal may allow biases to affect their decision-making. These decisions lead to important implications throughout the criminal justice process, especially in the courtroom. The process begins with the decision to arrest by a law enforcement officer in the field. Once the case is forwarded to the prosecuting attorney, multifarious avenues of discretionary decisions are available to resolve a case. Potential issues that could arise and that are ever-present in everyday policing include racism, sexism and socialism (Miller, 2015). These issues ultimately have a negative affect on the criminal justice process, leading civilians to not trust the one process and actors that are there to help them. While discretion should play a role in the actions a courtroom actor takes and cannot be eliminated entirely, instead it should be limited and controlled throughout the criminal justice environment so that citizens can once again trust the process and so that there will be no disparities.

Since the beginning of time, the United States’ Criminal Justice System (CJS) has been scrutinized and will continue to be. If significant changes were to occur within the CJS it could potentially take decades. Different persons, institutions, governments, and even departments within governments have different views; it is a natural occurrence. Thus, as with any subject matter, there are always controversies that cause disruption within society. Often, the controversies stem from the lack of understanding and the historical patterns of unsupported data.

Discretion is the eminence of once behavior or the way of speaking in order to avoid any offensive occurrence or speaking up any private issues or information in public. It is the self-determination for someone to choose or think what should be better to be done in particular circumstances. Especially for a judge, a public official or other private party has the authority to make decisions on any legal matters or other big official subjects. Thus, a person who is authorized with the power of discretion often thinks about how to apply the given supremacy.

The media portrays officers negatively and results in lost of trust towards the officers and the system. The criminal justice system is not completely accurate and reforms must be done to reduce crime and improve the negative assumptions people have of the system. Many people in society do not understand or are not informed about the criminal justice system and judge it negatively. People do not trust the criminal justice system because of media or they are not aware of the problems that affect society. In order to help people change their perspective, the system needs to better inform the public about laws and that each case is different and not everyone will be convicted the same or set free.

Since the policy was enacted in the early 1990s, three strikes laws have been one of the most controversial issues facing the American criminal justice system. In general, advocates believe that locking up criminals will protect society. Critics believe that three-strike policy can only be effective with offenders that are on their last strikes (Worrall, 2008). However, other critics explain how three-strike laws don’t significantly reduce crime because most criminals mature out of the criminal lifestyle (Worrall, 2004).

Discretion, undoubtedly plays a massive role and is implemented in various aspects of the system. But what is discretion? Discretion, as defined in Canadian Criminal Justice: A Primer, is merely the freedom to choose among different options when confronted with the need to make a decision. As significant part of the criminal justice system in Canada, being a police officers “involves the use of a significant amount of discretion” (McKillop & Pfeifer, 2004) . Due to the portrayal of the police by the media, the general public believes that there are certain methods and procedures that officers have to follow where it is clearly stated that if this happen you have to arrest them or if that happens you have to detain the person. In reality, police officers have to put forth their own judgment based on all the other surrounding circumstances which include the presence of a weapon or what the aggravating or mitigating factors were. This act of making a decision based off of the surroundings is also known as the totality of the circumstance. For example, if a police officer stops a vehicle that was speeding and finds out there is a toddler on board, the officer now has the decision to either arrest the driver and take custody of the toddler or to just let the driver go home safely with a warning involves their own judgment. Nevertheless, discretion does not mean that the officers can completely depend on their judgment; they still have to follow certain guidelines the Canadian

In the criminal justice system there is very rarely a single linchpin that can be pointed to and held responsible for the failure to convict a seemingly guilty person. This reigns true for the very public prosecutions of both Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman. In the eyes of a vast majority of the public, fueled by media spectacle and opinion, Anthony and Zimmerman were guilty even before they ever saw the inside of a courtroom. There simply could be no other answer. The public was subsequently outraged when, after what seemed to be trials of certainty, juries acquitted each. The public sought to find someone, or something to blame. The verdict could not be accepted and many turned their focus to condemn the workings of the criminal

The American Criminal Justice system is arguably one of the most fair systems in the world. However, like anything it has its flaws. There are many flaws but the largest three, in my opinion, would be the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any other country, the high penalties for drug users, as well as the jury system. The high incarceration rates and the penalties for drug users affect each other but they are still issues on their own. In fact, many of issues within our system coincide within each other.

The U.S. criminal justice system is founded on the belief of opportunity. A district attorney does not have to report an accusation even when the crime is obvious. Juries utilize discretion in evaluating the proof. Grand juries use discretion in determining whether or not to revert an accusation. The discretion that is most heard about is the discretion implemented by prosecutor as to whether or not to prosecute a case. Discretion occurs in the criminal justice system because objective is a component of many offenses; if there was no unlawful intention, there would be no lawbreaking; yet, there are infringements that do not have an exact directed obligation. Nearly everybody takes part in the criminal justice system and practices discretion.

Across the world there are many different types of criminal justice systems to keep and maintain order and peace or the social code of conduct, otherwise known as the law of the land. The criminal justice system tries to deter individuals from disrupting the peace and order of society by educating their citizens on the consequences and punishments for failing to abide by the law. The criminal justice system can be categorized in three main parts; policing where the investigation is held, the courts where judgment is made, and corrections where the type of punishment is served.

Discretion at each level in the criminal justice process is necessary in order for the criminal justice system to operate efficiently because each case has its own characteristics. The criminal justice system is made up of rules and discretionary judgments that balance one another to be used in accordance with the professional experience of officials to determine if a situation will continue on to the next level. [1] While discretion is the very essence in determining the best course of action to take to allow for the most desirable outcome in each unique situation, each stage should be fair and in compliance with the laws, policies, and procedures.

Shimeka, I really enjoyed reading your post as it was well researched and worded in a way that was easy to understand. You are very correct in that unity of command and unity of direction have a hand in how well an organization operates, especially one involved in the criminal justice field. They are similar concepts, but different as unity of command deals with “functioning of people” while unity of direction is “concerned with activities” (Difference of unity of command and unity of direction, 2012, par. 5). Too many police departments across the country are having problems because there are too manty people giving orders or they have no unity of direction when trying to achieve departmental goals. Younger officers are getting burned

Firstly, recorded crime statistics are collated through the collection of data by law enforcement agencies, such as the police in England and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in America. It focuses on the crime that is reported by the public and then what is chosen to be recorded by the police. During the mid-late 19th century, these statistics formed the basis of information about crime, however, although they still provide raw data for publications such as the Offenders Index, they are now viewed critically. This is because, according to Mayhew and Hough (1988), the recorded crime statistics are “adequate as a measure of police workload, but because of unreported and unrecorded crime – deficient as an index of crime”.