Prosecutor Controversy

The role of the prosecutor boils down to three main goals. The prosecutor is responsible for investigating the crime committed, decide whether or not to proceed with legal proceeding, and finally, if legal proceedings are instigated to appear in court.

Today’s justice professionals are in the public eye more than ever. There are a multitude of devices out there that allow civilians to capture every move a street officer makes. It is more crucial now than ever that these officers arm themselves with the knowledge of ethics along with the items on their utility belt. The wrong choice in any decision a justice professional makes will have the public ready and willing to lash out. These difficult ethical decisions are all part of the job that they have taken. Taking the time to learn about what is right and wrong is essential to their positions in society.

In the past, police officers and the public only had their word as their testimony. They had no choice but to try convince the jury that their side of the story was the truth. High profile cases between officers and the public have left the public searching and wanting answers. Some law enforcement departments have added another piece of equipment to their police officers for their added protection, while they patrol the streets. This controversial piece of

The justice system’s failure to prosecute police brutality is a hot topic since most riots and acts of public violence surround this issue. One of the obstacles with prosecuting police brutality is a lack of evidence. As stated by Andrew Walter in an overview of police brutality, the failure to prove police brutality cases “stems from...difficulty in

While all of the topics that we have covered throughout this course have been troubling, the topic of prosecutorial misconduct is to me one of the most distressing; the mere thought of the possibility of misconduct by prosecutors gives me the chills, and the numerous examples featured within the assigned chapter readings, in addition to the online articles, only further my skepticism in the legal system and those individuals holding official positions. There appears to be a lot of similarities between prosecutorial misconduct and the topics that we discussed as possible reasons for faulty forensic science, such as a common trust bias in police officials, lack of universal standards, and other cognitive biases such as confirmation bias and belief perseverance.

The Crown prosecutor is the head legal representative of the prosecution who are appointed by the crown. They are briefed by the Director of Public Prosecutions for some cases and deal with both state and federal matters.

* Although the police, judges, defense attorneys, and probation officers remain involved in specific duties, the prosecutor proves challenged in phases of the court process. Prosecutors challenge judicial decisions at times (Byrd, 2001). The office of the prosecutor proves part of the executive branch of the government. In all phases of the court process, given broad discretion, his/her job is to advocate the guilt of defendant vigorously. The prosecutors represent the people. Prosecutor screen the case. They determine if a crime has been committed. They research the crime to examine if a suspect has proved properly identified and if the evidence is sufficient to support a guilty verdict (Schmalleger, 2011).

Prosecutorial Discretion comes from the Bordenkircher v Hayes (1978) case. The Supreme Court ruled “ so long as the prosecutor has probable cause to believe that the accused committed an offense defined by statute, the decision whether or not to prosecute, and what charge to file or bring before a grand jury, generally rests entirely in his discretion.” (Whitebread, Slobogin, 2008, p591) Some states require the prosecution to give them a detailed written reason as to why they chose to dismiss a case. In most cases, the prosecutor has absolute authority and are rarely challenged. Similar to most government officials, prosecutors also have both legislative and administrative restrictions.

In the American Criminal Justice System, there are four key attributes in the role of the prosecutor. There are discretion, resource dependence, sequential tasks, and filtering. The prosecutors are lawyers that are accountable for presenting criminal cases in trial. The United States Attorneys are pointed by state or government, and represent the federal government in courts. They prosecute all adults who commit felonies and juveniles who commit delinquent crimes. Conjointly, the prosecutors have further responsibilities, such as legal adviser of the country commissioners, the Board of Elections, and written admonition of the prosecutors.

Prosecutors play a critical role in determining a defendant’s guilt. Despite this role, the powers ascribed to prosecutors have long been debated. In the 1960’s and 1970’s the United States Supreme Court sought to clarify the powers ascribed to prosecutors in three cases. These cases included: Brady v. Maryland 373 U.S. 83, Giglio v. United States 405 U.S. 150, and the United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97. Although the issue explored by the Supreme Court differed in each of these cases, the verdict in each case helped to clarify whether or not prosecutors in the United States had the right to suppress evidence.

The Amendments found in the United States Constitution contain several provisions to protect citizens from various infringements from the government. These provisions have greatly influenced what law enforcement is today. Due to the power of a law enforcement official, the public expects officers to be held to a higher ethical standard. Part of that expectation entails that officers will follow in the law and lead by example. Unfortunately, no one is perfect and departments will always have those law enforcement officers who stray from what is right and act questionably on and off duty. To ensure that officers are being held accountable for their actions, departments will employ their own Internal Investigation division to help identify, discipline, and/or remove employees found guilty of misconduct. Therefore, it is important that administrators develop safeguards to ensure that internal investigations are conducted fairly and ethically, demonstrating the best interest of both the

I too, like Ms. Burleson, am curious why Oklahoma is ranked second in the nation. I feel you have a strong topic and I like how you chose a topic regarding something you have observed while working in law enforcement. You also bring up an interesting point with how mental illness has been brought to light in the recent years in reference to shootings and murders. In my opinion and observations, I have observed a recent trend of defense attorneys using the mental illness title as a possible defense. More often than not their clients pass the competency evaluations with little to no problem.

The relationship between law enforcement and prosecutors, which goes hand-in-hand, can’t be overlooked. Evidence of a crime that detectives and law enforcement discover is as equally important as a good trial on part of the prosecution. If detectives aren’t able to find good solid evidence – that case usually isn’t bothered in being pursued. Several years ago, in the late 80’s, there was a murder case in Southeastern Oklahoma which now serves as a tragic example to the need for honest, constitutional work in the criminal justice system. Disreputable investigative procedures, fraudulent sources, and bad evidence were the foundation of this case that shattered innocent lives.

1. When being a prosecutor one must be un-biased despite if they already made up their mind that the accused is guilty. Therefore, we have a saying that all courts and law enforcements should abide by, which is “everyone is innocent until proven guilty.” The prosecutor’s job is to collect evidence that he or she may provide to the court to prove if the defendant is innocent or guilty.

The prosecutor's interest in the prosecution is to win, and for the unscrupulous, unethical prosecutor to win regardless of the guilt or innocence of the accused. The prosecutor's career path could be injured by failing to win, showing the lack of skill as a prosecutor for a lost criminal case, or poor professional judgment in obtaining an indictment which later was dismissed. The prosecutor's career path is enhanced by being, and being known as the "winner", which enables the prosecutor to get more