Ex Lovers Summary

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 criminal trial process aims to provide justice for all those involved, while it succeeds in the majority of cases, it effectiveness is influenced and reduced by certain factors. These include the legal representation involved in a case and the availability of legal aid, the capacity of the jury assessing the trial, the credibility of scientific evidence and the impact of social media on the trial process. Due to such flaws the criminal trial process is not always an effective means of achieving justice.

Criminology is a field that has been researched prolong. Most of the information explaining crime and delinquency is based on facts about crime (Vold, Bernard, & Daly 2002, p.1). The aim of this paper is to describe the theories of crime and punishment according to the positivists Emile Durkheim and Cesare Lombroso, and the classical criminologist Marcese de Beccaria. The theories were developed as a response to the industrialisation and the modernisation of the societies in the 18th and 19th centuries and were aiming to create a rational society and re-establish social solidarity (Vold et al 2002, p.101). The criminological perspectives of crime and punishment will be discussed in a form of dialogue between the three theorists exploring

The problems surrounding the criminal justice system range from a variety of issues in different areas of the system. But i believe they are all connected back to a societal problem, that has to do with a outdated philosophical notion “redemptive violence”. I will break down each aspect, which i find most troubling. I will cover problems between policing and peacekeeping, corrections options, and the issue of redemptive violence which is a major issue in the philosophy of the criminal justice system. These issues represent problems that have always been key topics when discussing problems of ethics in criminal justice. Policing and Peacekeeping are roles that have long been debated in usefulness to stopping crime. Corrections comes with the reality of incarceration having little chance of success but more likely a higher rate of recidivism. I well also touch on briefly the issues of attorney discretion. While the issue of redemptive violence ties them all in, As i well show this philosophy is the “root of all evil” in the issues facing the criminal justice system.

Introduction: While most people consider the system as an adversarial process, many cases are settled in an informal pattern of cooperation between the major actors in the justice process. (The prosecutor, defense attorney, judge, and other court personnel.)

The criminal courts are responsible for determining the guilt or innocence of the person that is accused (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). As well as the courts are supposed to conclude the appropriate sentence while protecting their rights of the accused. The outcome that comes from the criminal courts is that the judgement is made to be fair, impartial and no political intrusion. Furthermore, the main focus of the courts is the find the fundamental problems, the interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration and the accountability to the community. (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). The court is supposing to keep the fairness and equality through the society.

Court History and Purpose. The courts are a critical component of American criminal justice because they determine what should happen to people charged with violating the law. Courts are important beyond criminal justice, too. Disputes that arise between private parties, businesses, government officials, and the like are brought to court in order to ensure that they are heard, ideally, in a neutral forum (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2011). Succeeding in liberation and independence is difficult within the world and as simple as legally right and legally wrong. Courts emphasize on the power of the state and the legitimate use of force and protect people against the random use of legislative authority. The tension among the general

Criminology is the definition of our crime today, it defines many aspects and elements that challenge our common sense understanding of crime. The term ‘Criminology’ was first introduced into the English language in Garland 1988 by a criminologist Havelock Ellis (jones, 2013, pp. 2-3). However criminology was present in the 1860’s as Henry Maudsley a medic that worked in the prison systems to study insane and feeble - minded criminals (jones, 2013, pp. 2.) Criminology gives an understanding to those that seek justice although some victims may prevent crime or encourage it to gain the same significance. The reasoning of crime has changed considerably over the past 40 years, some say it was the change of the criminal justice system abolishing Capital punishment in 1965, or just the development in different legislations. Making punishment more psychological rather than physical punishment may have increased the velocity of the crime rate today as some may argue it is less harsh. Criminology is one to justify these changes to prevent criminal offences. Criminology is enforced to understand and analyse the extent of offences and how legislation is formed and put into practice. Development in crime in our

‘A Peacemaking Approach to Criminology’ was written by Louis J. Gesualdi, and published in 2013. It contains a review of different writings, which relate to criminology. The main argument of Gesualdi lies in promoting a humane way of handling crime and deviants. The book proposes a peaceable way of dealing with offenders in a manner that accords respect to human rights. Further, Gesualdi notes that the criminal justice system is concentrated on inflicting harm on the offenders by punishing them. He argues that the system is fixated on the notion of reacting to crime rather than prevention. Hence, the book proposes an approach where restorative justice and prevention of crime can be accommodated in the criminal justice system. The main

A prosecutor looking for real justice, Adam Foss demonstrates just how effective rhetorical devices can be to persuade a population to defend the rights of others. When telling the story of how people end up in the criminal justice system, Foss tells “Even in our ‘worst.’ I saw...childhood trauma, victimization, poverty...interaction with the police…”(3:24) Many people tend to see people convicted of crimes as inhuman or lesser than us. However, Foss begins to humanize them. Moreover, he states that the reason these people commit crimes isn’t because of some violent, unfathomable reason, but rather because of their rough experiences earlier in life. To fix crime, people must step up and fix issues that cause crime, not throw people into a broken

Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.

Christie’s argument has strengths and weaknesses. It is debatable whether or not conflict as property is positive or negative. We can examine this in detail through a selection of legal perspectives such as the Consensus and Conflict perspectives. A weakness in Christie’s view is that he places extreme focus on the concept of stolen property. He emphasizes stolen property of conflict in a negative context, and does not emphasize on situations of people giving their conflicts away willingly. One could argue that the activists who perceived a flaw in the system essentially gave their conflict away and that it was not stolen. Activist groups turned to the notion of changing the laws pertaining to domestic violence because they needed resolution, and that resolution could

This essay will be comparing the competing ideologies of two key thinkers in criminology; Cesare

Brandt also discusses how utilitarian’s believe that reform needs to take place in the criminal justice system. What is being proposed begins with reforming the juvenile court system with more psychiatric treatment and programs to assist with crime prevention as well as asking for more social awareness to help these programs. This reform would then be extended to the adult population. After a guilty verdict is rendered, the experts would complete an evaluation and decisions would be made regarding treatment for each individual and a timeline created to establish when such individual could be reintegrated back into society. This type of sentence may not follow utilitarian views but there views regarding

The function of the criminal courts in society is to control social order and protect the community. The criminal justice system is always changing because of updated laws. The criminal court has five components; the judge, the prosecutor, defendant lawyer, the defendant and the juror. Each component works together to provide the best result for both defendant and society. There are a few models inside the criminal court system that help depict the usefulness of how the courts work. Two of these models are the adversarial model and the second is the consensual model. The adversarial model is when the prosecutor and the defendant 's lawyer both speak before the judge and jury to show evidence pertaining to the defendant trying to prove innocence or guilt. In a consensual model, is where the prosecutor and defendant 's lawyer hash out the charges against the defendant and agree on an appropriate punishment. (Barken),pg 268 There are two more models inside the criminal court system that help portray the court 's efficiency this would be Due Process Model and the Crime Control Model, these solves the predicament confronted by the criminal courts to guarantee a person freedom and the need to protect the people. These two models comprise of analyzing crime and permitting the right justice to be conveyed. Due process method was intended to verify defendants had their rights ensured and that they had a reasonable opportunity to protect themselves in court. This model assumes that