Is Our Justice System Fair?

In 1789, each of the thirteen states had already establish a judicial system such as criminal and civil cases. The United States Constitution is the original document in which it established fundamental laws for the national government as well as protecting the right of the citizens. The U.S Constitution was designed to avoid too much power in the system of checks and balances. As years went by, the Constitution began to adapt to the modern changes. Subsequently, the judicial system began to full fill the U.S Constitution’s purpose. Both Federal and State have their own jurisdiction and functions as stated in the Constitution. However, in recent years the judicial system has been broken due to lack of structure in law on the book and law in action.

For a society that is greatly influenced by Crime Scene Investigation, Criminal Minds and Bones, a confession of the offender is seen as an ultimate checkmate of the case because it implies the guilt of the confessor. Thus, a confession, especially the ones with detailed account and perfect representation of emotions (Leo, 2008), outweighs the evidences of innocence and stirs the case against the accused (Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985). People believe that they are open-minded about the possibility of false confession but in reality, the public, law enforcers and justice officials have biases that often infer guilt to the suspect instead of investigating for the truth, which leads to wrongful conviction. According to Leo and Drizin (2004), false confession is the primary cause of law miscarriage (Leo and Drizzin, 2004). False confessors lived many years in jail before being exonerated while others remain imprisoned (Leo and Drizzin, 2004).

Research shows that the human mind is not like a tape recorder, we neither record events exactly as we see them, nor recall them like a tape that has been rewound. Instead, witness memory is like any other evidence at a crime scene; it must be preserved carefully, or it can be contaminated. A case I would like to mention is the Calvin Willis Case. One night in 1982, three young girls were sleeping alone in a Shreveport, Louisiana home when a man in cowboy boots came into the house and raped the oldest girl, who was Ten years old. When police started to investigate the rape, the three girls all remembered the attack differently. One police report said the Ten year old victim didn’t see her attacker’s face. Another report which wasn’t introduced at trial said she identified Calvin Willis, who lived in the neighbourhood. The girl’s mother testified at trial that neighbours had mentioned Willis’s name when discussing who might have committed the crime. The victim testified that she was shown photos and told to pick the man without a full beard. She testified that she didn’t pick anyone, police said she picked Willis. Willis was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life in prison. In 2003, DNA testing proved Willis’ innocence and he was released. He had served nearly Twenty Two years in prison for a crime he didn’t

Long-standing disparity among ethnic races in the justice system has lasting effects on its communities. In America, 60% of inmates through the state and federal justice system are either black or of Spanish descent becoming up an overwhelming incarnated population. With such a high number of ethnic people incarnated the neighborhoods these individuals live in our bound to face the repercussions of mass incarceration. Poverty and unemployment in these communities fuel the steady flow of the population more likely to be incarnated over a lifetime. Most children in these neighborhoods grow up admiring individuals in their family or community who have been to jail more than once in their lifetime.

the juvenile portion of the criminal justice system. The article found that, “black youth were

The United States Criminal Justice System is one that is supposed to protect and serve all. This idea should not discriminate against ones race, gender or any other identifying characteristics. Although it should not, it occurs more than just what the news outlets may bring to light. Minorities and those who do not fit societies “norms” are often the targets of unfair treatment from those who are in charge of protecting. These groups of people often feel that just because their skin is a different color or they may identify as something a police officer does not believe in, they will be the next target for injustice. However, a justice system cannot work and will ultimately fail when those being protected do not feel safe. In order for the

Factors such as misinformation and eyewitness talk can easily affect the memory of eyewitnesses and therefore affect their testimony_. Evidence which is usually provided during eyewitness memory reports helps to determine the guilt or innocence of a perpetrator in a criminal proceeding_. With the help of many basic psychological and neuroscience studies, it has been indicated that because memory is a reconstructive process it is likely to be influenced and vulnerable to change and misinformation_. Due to memory being vulnerable, any minor memory misrepresentation can have severe consequences when used in the courtroom_. Memory errors when regarding the identification of a perpetrator of a specific crime has been focused on during research

The question of fairness and equality in the criminal justice system has its original roots dating back to the Magna Carta in 1215 AD. The latest document to define the criminal justice is the United States Constitution which specifically in the 14th amendment which states ”no state can make or enforce laws on its citizens, nor shall they deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor will they deny equal protection of the laws”. Section one of the fourteenth amendment means that the states cannot make any laws or enforce them on any person without due process and makes it illegal to deny equal protection. The founding fathers envisioned a justice system that is blind as evidenced by the

Schemas are powerful frameworks that influence how people notice, interpret, and remember information. Although they could serve as efficient shortcuts in problem solving under most daily circumstances, unconscious activation of schemas could introduce persist biases in the context of jury decision-making. Like any other people interpreting a set of complex or unfamiliar facts, jurors cannot help but be influenced by schemas when evaluating evidence and applying the law during a trial. Although they may not be correct in their assumptions about the law, jurors do not come to trials as blank slates. They typically bring with them existing schemas that shape the way they view the law, the evidence and the defendant, and these schemas

The novel Unfair: the new science of criminal injustice, is a collection of short pieces addressing different situations in the criminal justice world where psychology plays a major role in determining outcomes. Chapter 6, "The Corruption of Memory”, addresses the problems with the process and using of an eyewitness testimony to convict someone (108-132). John Jerome White’s real-life example is used to demonstrate the problems with eyewitness testimony and how mistakes made during the process can ruin someone’s life. In the case of John Jerome White, he was misidentified as the man who raped and robbed a 74 year old women, by the victim herself (6 weeks later), which resulted in him spending 28 years in prison. To make it worse the actual guilty man, James Edward Parham, was in the lineup one person away from Mr. White and he was not caught again until he raped another victim. Many errors were made in how the case was handled and although they were not intentional they still magnify problems in the justice system and how we view our memories. From immediately after the crime to the point a suspect is put behind bars, the questioning, interrogation techniques, line up methods, and cross examinations can all effect the victims and witness’s recollection of events. Human memories are thought to be strong but with all the information that needs to be processed they are not as reliable as thought. However, this is not accounted for in the criminal justice system and it can greatly affect the outcomes of cases like John Jerome White’s. The point of the criminal justice system is to provide justice like it says in its name and although it happens more times than not, if there are possibilities of not providing justice they need to be fixed. Chapter 6, "The Corruption of Memory”, looks at what went wrong in order to wrongly convict an innocent man which ended up costing him half his life and how psychological principles could help prevent this from happening again.

As a lawyer, when one asks me to describe the criminal process I tell them, “it is a truth-finding exercise”. Indeed, it is only by discovering the truth that the Australian criminal justice system is able to guarantee a fair trial and justice. However, it is harder to explain that the truth, at least in the legal arena, is not always ‘objective’. This was made evident by my nine-year old nephew during a heated episode of Law & Order. “Uncle, he’s definitely guilty”, she boldly proclaimed. Of course, she was pointing to the accused who had been convicted of perjury a decade ago. My feeble attempt at explaining that he was not necessarily lying just because his account was inconsistent with the ostensibly more credible police witnesses’ version proved futile.

The foundation of the criminal justice system in the United States was founded on the idea of blind fairness of justice for every person that is interacting with our system of justice (King, 2016). There are many different layers to our criminal justice system from law enforcement, the judicial system, to corrections that can be very intimidating from anyone that is not used to interacting with the system as a person that has been criminally charged. This daunting element of our criminal justice system is one that can lead any defendant feeling like they have been backed into a corner. In our court system one key factor that has become standard practice is the use of plea bargains for criminal defendants(Clatch, 2017). We see that the use of

One of the most interesting things I learned from doing my research on community corrections in my jurisdiction is how the criminal justice system is committed to being fair and balanced. I have observed in a court arraignment how a judge briefed everyone in the court about proper protocols during the hearings .The judge said he could not start court hearings unless a prosecutor was present, and that he cautions the inmate the right to remain silent, and also discussed to the inmate his rights. Community-based corrections developed as a result of dissatisfaction with institutional confinement and in recognition of the problems encountered by inmates reentering society after prolonged incarceration. Belinda R. McCarthy, Bernard J. McCarthy, Jr,& Matthew C. Leone (4th edu.). (2001) Community-Based Corrections. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. In writing this paper I will inform and discuss the various programs and rules applied to handle offenders who have violated state laws according to the criminal justice system in NC. I will write about the following subjects in the following order: 1) Parole and probation, 2) Community and drug courts, 3) Pretrial release, 4) Victim aid, and 5) Community service (as a function of service of sentence).

Jury members have the right to ask questions during a trial under their first amendment rights to free speech. In addition, questions are an essential tool for them to effectively complete their jury role in the trial and be informed. Although, it is a fine line to walk between clarity and the need for fairness as well as self expression to be met at the same time as the efficiency of the trial. Due to this issue, I believe that it would be beneficial for jury members to pass questions through the bailiff to the judge to be read out by the judge. The judge would then decide whether it was on topic before allowing it to be answered. Through this system, the jury’s right to free speech would be met, court order would be maintained, and the jury

Experiment 1 results found that many of the students failed to remember the initial data provided to them at the onset of the study, which provided the effect of misinformation on the memory of the participant: “These analyses revealed a significant main effect for misinformation items, F(1, 163) = 9.89, p = .002, ηp2 = .06, 90 % CI for effect size = [.01, .12] (Cochran et al, 2016, p.721). This data confirms that the students had not retained the original memory of the crimes committed, which resulted in a large-scale choice blindness. In this manner, the multiple –choice segment of this study exposed memory lapses as part of the re-evaluation process of the participant 's memories. Therefore, misinformation was not properly identified in the remembrance of these criminal scenarios.