Criminal and Civil Law in the English Legal System Essay

The criminal justice system plays an important role in this society, it is meant to protect and serve. This “system” is also meant to maintain the peace and enforce the laws set by the government. However, the criminal justice system is not even close to perfect. It has many flaws, some of which are: police brutality, death penalty, mass incarceration, gun violence, and especially wrongful convictions. A majority of the flaws that the system has can be easily fixed and can be set straight. For example, the issue of wrongful convictions has been relevant for quite some time and has the potential to decrease its probability of occurring by focusing on the importance of scientific evidence, rid of faulty witness testimonies, and make sure that the lack of evidence and/or government misconduct, if applicable, does not determine the outcome of the case.

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.

Do you have any recent example of this from a recent case that you can tell me about?

The Plaintiff’s estate was sequestrated in Federal Magistrates Court on May 12 2009, for failure to pay Council court costs [10]. An application by the Plaintiff for an extension in time to appeal this sequestration was

A Civil court is as the name implies a court system based on disputes between average citizens which are far different from a criminal court where you are dealing with convicts. Just like a criminal court, a civil court also has a set of procedures listed by the judicial system in 1937 with over 86 different rules. Civil cases usually involve disputes between people or organizations. The court case Fenton v. Dudley in 2014. Fenton V. Dudley is “A lawsuit against lawyers who had filed a Fair Housing Act lawsuit against the plaintiff, which is the person who filed the lawsuit, and it later made its way from federal court to state court” (“Civil Rights -- federal court jurisdiction”). Both Civil and Criminal court both have the privilege of a trial by jury, depending on the circumstance.

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

The differences between legal rules and other kinds of rules is that criminal law refers to the consequences associated with breaking them. As the substantive law meaning that it is the law of crimes, referring that Criminal law is the code conduct that all in the society need to follow the rule, and the prohibitions on murder, assault, and burglary. Meaning that if an individual violates or commits these crimes they are going to be treated as a criminal by punishing act from the state. Civil law is refers to procedural law to follow the rule of the state from someone that has committed a crime. Which it is divided into 5 categories, for example torts, property, contract, family, and juvenile law.

When it comes to the United States, (U.S), the majority of the American people love their seconded amendment rights. As stated in the textbook, Constitutional Law and the Criminal Justice System by J. Scott Harr, Karen M. Hess, Christine Orthmann, the second amendment of the United States Constitution, for the most part, protects the U.S. citizens rights to “keep and bear arms” (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 167). That being said, each state in the U.S. will vary in their firearms laws. For instance, some states make it easier for their residence to purchase or use a firearm; other states may have stricter laws that require a more scrutinized screening process. To be more specific, most states vary in elements, such as the exceptions to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, the waiting period on purchasing firearms; if someone needs a license to own or purchase a gun; if registration is required; and if a record of the firearm sales is sent to the local police. Other factors that will differ from state to state would include, if some firearms are permitted or not allowed to be sold or owned by a state, the concealed carry laws, hunter protection laws; range protection laws, and finally, not all states have firearm injury lawsuit preemption.

The Criminal Justice System, a system the British government set up to deal with the treatment of law-breakers, has three main goals to achieve social order, these are, (1) enforcing criminal law, (2) maintaining law and order in the society, and (3) helping victims. This may seem to be a well thought of system, but like any other organisation, there are flaws, and one of the major flaws is discrimination, and the bias that stems from discrimination.

The purpose of civil law is to “deal with the disputes between individuals, organizations, or between the two, in which compensation is awarded to the victim,” (“Civil Law vs Criminal Law.”, 2012). Civil law applies when there is a dispute between private parties, and the government is not involved. The lack of government involvement also leads to easier negotiations. Civil cases can be much more flexible since there is typically no law being broken and thus, no legal actions have to be taken. The less rigid civil law cases also generally allow them to be settled quickly and without controversy. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, more than half of general civil trials conclude in state courts, meaning they are able to reach an agreement and do not have to continue spending unnecessary time and money on the case (“Civil Justice.”, 2017).

If you are the injured party of a crime, you report it to the police

Looking into criminal justice procedure, many administrations are at work. Starting with the police, to the courts and concluding in corrections. Though all these sectors have different tasks, their combined focus is processing the law. Regardless what the process is called criminal justice will continue to serve with discretion, conviction, and correction. When first presented with the question whether criminal justice is a system, non-system, and network I leaned toward a network. Throughout our discussions, lectures, and readings I felt the process presented itself as a network. Intertwined divisions working for a common goal. Further into my research and help from Webster, I decided that the criminal justice

Throughout the United States there are many different laws among the fifty states that make up this union. The laws are different throughout the states because of the need of the laws. Living in one state and not having the advantages or disadvantages of a law in another state would not be that unfair or unequal. This is true because if you don’t like a law in your state you could always fight it and try to change it or you could always move out of that state and go to one that has the laws that you like.

The law of conspiracy is considerably more complex and uncertain than it need be because the statutory reform of the area largely contained in Part I of the criminal law Act 1977 was only partial. As a result, there are now two types of conspiracy – statutory conspiracies governed by the 1977 Act, and an important but limited range of common law conspiracies, which were expressly retained by the act, still governed by the old common law rules, (Tomlins & King, 1992). The most recent of the conspiracies is the conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to corrupt public morals and the conspiracy to outrage public decency; statutory conspiracy entails any agreement to commit a crime

This persuasive precedent was followed in the case of R v Gotts (1992) where a defendant charged with attempted murder tried to use the defence of duress in the Court of Appeal. The ratio decidendi of R v Gotts (1992) then formed its own binding precedent.