When we were little children, an adult would ask you what you want to be when you grow up. Most children want to be dancers, singers, doctors, lawyers, etc. I always wanted to be a lawyer and advance to being a judge. Now that I am older, the judicial system is where I need to be, just not a prosecutor or judge. I have changed my mind about being a prosecutor and judge because it is too political. I would be fair. However, I would not make a very good political candidate. Even though each professional holds a specific job that they must perform, there are issues that must be resolved. Professionals in the judiciary branch of the government, including prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges, they must execute justice by upholding …show more content…
Because judiciary professionals face three main issues on a regular basis, the judge is responsible for coming up with a decision. The prosecutor is responsible for having enough evidence to pursue a trial. “The prosecutor is the representative of the state and wields tremendous power” (Wright, 2012). The defense attorney is responsible for proving beyond a shadow and a doubt that the client is innocent. “The job of the defense attorney is, by any standard, difficult. It is difficult for a variety of reasons. First, defendants often talk to the police without an attorney present. When they do this, they themselves in crimes and to provide police with evidence that can later be used against them. Second, defense attorneys often handle so many cases that it is simply impossible for them to understand the details of each case. To manage the large number of criminal cases they are responsible for, defense attorneys often have little choice but to spend only a few minutes with each defendant and to base their legal recommendations on the information they receive from their clients and the prosecutor’s office. Third, most of the defendants in the criminal justice system are from the lower socioeconomic classes. These defendants sometimes do not fully understand their legal rights, nor do they have resources to hire expert witnesses or to investigate the evidence obtained by the
Biological Theories have been related to crime for a long time. The Biological Theory talks about how one’s brain has an impact on committing crime or not. Dr. Jim Fallon, a neuroscientist from California talks about the biological influences in a brain. He believes that the combination of three major aspects can determine whether someone is psychopathic or not. Fallon states a combination of genes, damage to the person 's brain and the environment surrounding the individual will have the biggest impact on a person (Fallon, 2009). A real world example of the biological theory in full effect was the crimes of David Berkowitz, aka “Son of Sam. Berkowitz was accused and found guilty of killing over 6 people in New York City. After being convicted and locked up for a few years, studies had shown that Berkowitz had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Berkowitz also claimed that his neighbor’s dog, Sam had told him to do the killings as well (Biography). Comparing the Biological theory to my own life was pretty simple because there is a genetic factor that runs in my dad’s side and that is tempers. Tempers tend to flare fairly easy, and luckily so far there has no issues with the law, however like Fallon had said, with the right combination, anyone is possible to commit a crime at any time. I feel like in a biological theory, this would have a major impact on my life
Criminologists seek to understand the commission of crime in a given society, attempting to figure out why certain crimes occur, and then to study how these can be prevented, and deterred by individuals. The two key approaches I will examine in this assignment is that of the early 'Classicalist' approach, and the opposing 'Positivist' approach, each of which are crucial for understanding modern criminology today.
The defense attorney represents the defendant, the person accused of committing a crime or a wrongful act. Criminal defendants who are unable to come up with the money for to hire a lawyer are allowed to have the judge appoint them a lawyer who is then paid with public funds.
Defense attorneys have a wide variety of responsibilities, from defending their clients, building a case, and presenting the cases that they have built in court. First the defense attorney is presented with a case, and they have to decide if their case is strong enough to represent. After the decision is made to represent the client or not a case has to be built. Attorneys must work long and tiring hours to build a case strong enough to hold up in court. Defense attorneys must familiarize themselves with the ins and outs of the case before they can start building a defense(Read Write Think). Defense attorneys can work for an individual client, or work for the government as a public defender (Bureau of Labor Statistics). When presenting the case to the judge and jury, defense attorneys must be confident with the case that they are presenting. Attorneys must use hand gestures and
It is hard to believe that a system that is supposed to promote fairness wouldn’t be so corrupt. However, there are ways to help this section of the Criminal Justice System become less flawed. For the public defense attorneys, an increase in
Crime and Punishment Part III Essay Prompt Psychology stems from the Latin root “psyche” and translates to the “study of the mind.” In the novel, Crime and Punishment, the author Fyodor Dostoevsky, ventures into the psyche of his main character, Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov suffers greatly in this novel both physically and mentally.
In our nation, there are few career positions which hold reverence toward the public like the judge. I can imagine being a judge it takes a person with integrity, high morals and unwavering commitment to sustain a successful career at being a judge.
After spending a lot of time learning about crime theories and what motivate some to offend and engage in crime I believe the Strain Theory is the best theory explain why most people engage in crime in the United States. Unlike other countries in America every person is expected to make a progress in their life and the society and even someone's family wont accept him/her as a good person unless they work hard and exceed in their life regardless. That is why many take education as a way to reach their goals and make a progress in their life. However; with the high cost of education and the mental abilities it required many find an easier way to succeed and make a progress by engaging in crime. People, media, and even Hollywood
Criminological theories have been used on a micro and macro level scale in order to search for an answer as to why people commit crimes. The broken windows theory and routine activity theory have been selected as the two theories provide different perspectives as to why crime occurs, and how to solve crime. The theories will be examined in order get a historical origins, outline main principles, distinguishing characteristics, misconceptions and critaziams of each theory.
While in my class I learned a variety of things but the most important topics that stood out to me were the cases. As a class we went over several criminal cases but it were only a few I preferred. One of those cases were Berkemer v. Mccarty. The case originally came out of the U.S District Court for Southern District of Ohio, but later was brought to the Supreme Court. The crime that was charged was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and drugs. An Ohio State Trooper by name of Williams observed McCarty weaving in between lanes. The officer then pulled him over, and the officer asked McCarty If he had been drinking. Honestly, McCarthy stated that he had consumed two beers and marijuana. After the confession he was taken
There are several theory’s that have been developed to answer the question of why do crimes occur as well as what makes offenders commit crimes (Lilly, Cullen and Ball, 2011). One of the first theories developed was Classical School theory. Classical theory focuses on the offender as a whole and how he or she wants to commit the crime due to free will (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball, 2011). While reading through an article written in The New York Times, there was a crime that was discussed that has become an important topic in the media. The title of this article is “Prosecutors to Seek Death Penalty for Dylann Roof in Charleston Shootings”, written by; Chris Dixon. The article was interesting considering it showed the classical theory is still in effect in today’s era.
Every theory of crime has at least 2-3 meta-theoretical levels above it. The fundamental issues are usually addressed at the approach level, and are often called the assumptions, or starting points, of a theory, although the term "assumptions" more strictly refers to the background or domain boundaries one can draw generalizations about. Above the approach level is the Perspective level, the largest unit of agreement within a scientific community, and in fact, the names for the scientific disciplines. Perspectives are sometimes called paradigms or viewpoints, although some people use the term paradigm to refer to untestable ideologies such as: (1) rational choice; (2) pathogenesis; (3) labeling;
Also, it needs to be taken into consideration that if genetics are proven to be the reason for crime, future social problems would result. Troublesome issues like genetic discrimination, loss of employment, and denial of insurance could be the unwanted effect if the public unanimously take the side of nature and not nurture (Possible Theories for Crime). If information was spread that there was a specific gene that produced a criminal, there would be a natural hatred towards that entire family line. This could wrongfully discriminate a family member that was not actually “evil” at all, and take away the chances of an innocent child to live a normal life. It would result in an unfair world that would not be willing to aid specific families
As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.
Many theories of crime are macro theories, which are used to explain crime based on a large group of people or society. While macro theories are the predominant type of theory used to explain crime, there are also a variety of “individual”, or micro, factors which are equally important. Two such individual factors s are maternal cigarette smoking (MCS) and cognitive ability, or Intelligence Quotient (IQ).