Crime Control Vs Due Process Essay

There are three significant issues concerning law enforcement, namely enacting the law, police discretion, and assessment of criminal behavior. Different entities create and enact laws that are specific for the societies those laws represent.

The criminal justice system consists of models and theories that often contradict one another. Of these models are the crime control model, the due process, model, the consensus model and the conflict model. In this paper these models are evaluated and defined, as well as each entity in the criminal justice systems role within each model. Policing, corrections and the court system all subscribe to each model in some way and in a hurried manner in cases that dictate such a response. As described by Erik Luna in the Models of Criminal Procedure, the following statement summarizes the aforementioned most appropriately.

The major difference between the crime control model and the due process model of law enforcement is that crime control works to repress criminal activity, and due process works to protect a person's rights. Crime control is more focused on the community well-being, versus due process which focus's more on the person who committed the crime. Crime control also believes that it is better to detain an innocent suspect rather than let them be free until proven guilty. Obtaining evidence becomes the number one priority for crime control. Due process only allows evidence to be collected a certain way. Criminals may be allowed to go free if a there was an error in collecting evidence. For an example, in the O.J Simpson case there were issues involving

The way the criminal justice system should handle crimes has always been a debated subject. For over the last forty years, ever since the war on drugs, there are more policies made to be “tough on crime”. From then, correctional systems have grown and as people are doing more crimes, there are plenty of punishments for them. In the mid 1970’s, rehabilitation was the main concern for the criminal justice system. It was common that when someone was convicted of a crime, they would be sentenced to prison but there would also be diagnosed treatments to help them as well. Most likely, they would have committed a crime due to psychological problems. When they receive treatment in prison, they can be healed and would not go back to their wrong lifestyle they had lived before. As years have gone by, people thought that it was better to take a more punitive stance in the criminal justice system. As a result of the turnaround of this more punitive criminal justice system, the United States now has more than 2 million people in prisons or jails--the equivalent of one in every 142 U.S. residents--and another four to five million people on probation or parole. The U.S. has a higher percentage of the

The Due Process and Crime Control Models are able to coexist. Frank Scmalleger, a noted criminologist, support a new approach where "it is realistic to think of the U.S. system of justice as representative of crime control through due process." (Schmallager et al, 1999) In using both of these models law enforcement and the judicial system can

The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.

The “get tough approach” to crime control has been prevalent since the 1960s. This approach takes the stance to a more firm and no tolerance policy against crime, hence the term “tough” in the actual title. “"Tough" crime control normally denotes more emphasis on police resources, faster apprehension of criminals, quick trials, and more severe sentences for guilty offenders” (Skoler 1971:29). The “get tough approach” emphasizes the need to arrest and punish criminals over rehabilitation and addressing the social factors that underlie criminal behavior (Barkan and Bryjak 2011). Deterrence of other criminals through severe punishments is the primary focus. The “get tough approach” of criminal justice institutions has been under scrutiny due to the outcomes that we will discuss further on. The purpose of this paper is to simply present the pros and cons that have resulted from the “get tough approach” on crime. The paper will try and remain completely unbiased to the “get tough approach” and solely focus on results that have come from said approach. We will begin by discussing the background and history of the “get tough approach” and what led to its development. We will then discuss things such as incarceration rates (US Department of Justice), crime rates (Dilulio 1995) juveniles in prison (Hinton 2015), policies that have been implemented (Shephard 2002), correctional costs, and destabilized urban neighborhoods (Barkan & Bryjak 2011; Black 2007; Mauer 2006) that result

Duo Process and Crime Control Model are very much different from each other, and have different values to the criminal justice system. Due Process Model believes that policing within the criminal justice system is crucial to preserving justice within society. Also, Due Process Model believes in the rights of the defendants and proving their guilt is essential to keep the government in control. Due Process Model believes that people that are detained are perceived to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. On the other hand, the Crime Control model believes that the people that are arrested need to be punished by the government if they are found guilty. Overall, the Crime Control model has a negative effect on the criminal justice system and believes that the rights of the defendant exceeds the amount of money spent on employing police officers and building prisons.

In this case, the advantages of the crime control model would be that they would catch more guilty people. Which is a good thing because they may be getting the dangerous or hateful criminals off of the streets, increasing the safety of the public. Along with that they would actually be getting punished because in many cases criminals are let go. While the advantages of the due process model would be that the ones found innocent would be let go if there was no evidence. Sadly, many incarcerated are not guilty and in this case all of the strip searches and questioning would give them the ability to prove their innocence.

In order to keep a safe society, it is important to establish a nation with

The jury system in America is also influence by the English jury system. Another one of America’s constitutional right is due process which is the basic for fairness that is important in the judicial system which allows our system to work with honor and integrity. According to Currie (1992), the factors of due process involve the United States Constitution; Amendments V, and XIV and in 1970 Illinois State Constitution adopted some rights for due process.

There are two distinct types of models that are found in the English criminal justice system. These are the crime control model and the due process model. They vary in their characteristics and are considered to take divergent objectives. Basing on their evident differences, one of them is actually considered being more effective than the other if the new wave and rate of crime being witnessed in the society is anything to go by. This paper therefore seeks to identify some of the differences between these models and point out that which is considered as effective in dealing with rate of crime in our current society.

The criminal justice field faces the challenges of getting criminals off the streets, and prosecuting them, while using limited funds and manpower. Citizens expect results, and want to feel safe when they are in their own neighborhood. On the other hand, citizens in our democratic country expect people to be treated fairly, and feel the need to make sure that no innocent people are wrongly sent to jail. It is a balancing act of keeping the community safe on one hand, and on the other, making sure that no one’s rights are violated. It is like being told to do a job, but then having all these rules and obstacles you have to navigate around in order to do your job. The following paper is a study of the differences between due

There has long been a debate over which, if any, are the most effective methods of crime control. Governments from bottom to top in our nation have poured over the issue with mixed results for as long as there has been a nation. Until very recently deterrence was completely based on fear of punishment. However, recent years have provided us with a more complete understanding of crime and its roots among the more desirable parts of our society, specifically the mind of a criminal. Through the study of psychology, specifically free will, determinism and social identity, we may find that situational crime prevention is a better means to deter crime in our nation.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things seized.”