Wrongful Convictions Have Touched Japan

Being wrongly accused of a crime and sent to prison for years is something people would not think of happening to them on any day. However, it does occur. Two men, Richard Alexander and Kirk Bloodsworth were accused of a crime and sent to prison. Both of these men were exonerated through genetic DNA testing years later.

In “Remarks on Signing the Bill Providing Restitution for the Wartime Internment of Japanese American Civilians” by Ronald Reagan and “An Apology” by Kevin Gover, both passages give argument on how the existing government bears responsibility for its historical misconducts. First in the speech by President Ronald Reagan, he addresses how the American government is to this day still held accountable for their past actions towards people from Japanese ancestry living in the United States when the government forcibly removed them from their homes, placed them in makeshift internment camps without trial or a reasonable justification. Then in the second speech by, Assistant of Indian Affairs Department of the Interior, Kevin Gover, the speaker

With the number of DNA exonerations growing in the recent years, wrongful convictions reveal disturbing trends and fissures in the justice system. It shows how broken the system is, and why it needs urgent fixing. According to Huff (1996), over ten thousand people are convicted wrongfully for serious crimes each year. This study established that factors leading to wrongful convictions are false eyewitnesses, a prejudiced jury, incompetent prosecutors, and suspects’ ignorance. Where DNA evidence clears a suspect, array of reasons emerge; misconduct, mistakes, to race and class factors. It is important to make DNA data available to attorneys in order to enable them mount a strong

This may also be due to the credibility of scientific evidence, for example the scientific evidence of DNA is hard to disprove in court as members of society are made to believe through the influence of social media that if there is DNA evidence present the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. While DNA has helped solve many cases and been used in court during the criminal trial process to prove and disprove an accused innocence it also adds to the flaws in the efficiency of the trial process. There are cases in which the accused had been wrongfully convicted due to DNA results, such as the case of Farah Jama where a man was wrongfully convicted of rape through the evidence of DNA alone. Farah Jama was convicted of raping a woman in a nightclub in 2006, in 2008 before a jury he was sentenced to six years jail by Judge Paul Lacava. Farah was found guilty of rape solely on the basis of DNA, adding to the suggestion that the jury is persuaded by the DNA evidence. In early 2009 a solicitor took on Jamas case, asking for the retesting of the key DNA sample, the scientist who retested the sample expressed doubts to its reliability. Jamas was later acquitted and it is highly likely that he was convicted of a crime that never took place. This was a miscarriage of justice which raises the question whether or not scientific

The Innocence Project was established in the wake of a landmark study by the United States Department of Justice and the United States Senate with help from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (Schneider, 2013). This study found that there were numerous reasons why people are wrongfully convicted including, but not limited to eye witness identification, perjured testimony, improper forensic science techniques, and government misconduct (Roberts & Weathered, 2009) The original Innocence Project was founded twenty two (22) years ago as a part of the Cardoza School of Law of Yeshiva University in New York City, New York (Davis, 2012). The Innocence Projects primary goal is to exonerate those whom have been convicted of a crime when there is DNA evidence available to be tested or re-tested (Mitchell, 2011). DNA testing has been possible in five (5) percent to ten (10) percent of cases since 1992 (Risinger, 2007). On the other side, other members of the Innocence Project help to exonerate those have been convicted of a crime where there is no DNA evidence to test. A goal of the Innocence Project is to conduct research on the reasons for wrongful convictions, how to fix the criminal justice system, as well as advocate for those who have been wrongfully convicted (Steiker & Steiker, 2005). The members of this organization strive to teach the world about the dangers of wrongful convictions. To date, this non-profit legal organization, has freed three hundred eighteen (318)

Most Americans know the key aspects of our criminal justice system, but fail to learn about criminal justice systems of other nations. However, it is important to learn about other country 's criminal justice systems in order to effectively compare it to ours. It helps us realize the faults in our justice system, and fix them. In this paper, I will be comparing the various aspects of the individualistic United States justice system to collectivist Japan 's.

We do not now how many innocent individuals are currently imprisoned, but we have an idea of the number of people who have been exonerated of crimes for which they were convicted. The National Registry of Exonerations has identified 1491 men and women who have been exonerated from state facilities since 1989 in the United States (University of Michigan Law School, 2015). From 2005 to 2014, there was an average of 64 exonerations from state facilities per year, with exonerees serving an average of twelve years. The Innocence Project (2015), which takes cases in which DNA analysis can be used to prove a prisoner is innocent, has secured 329 post-conviction DNA exonerations and is actively working on 250-300 cases.

DNA exonerations are very common. So much so that in the United States alone, there have been “317 post-conviction DNA exonerations” (2014). The very first DNA exoneration dated back to 1989. The Innocence Project examined these DNA exonerations and found that “8 of the 317 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row. Another 16 were charged with capital crimes but not sentenced to death” (2014). More so, the average time served was about 13.5 years, and the average age was 27 (2014). This means that before the age of

There have been many incidents where cases have needed a solid prosecution in order to convict the defendant in a murder or rape case. This is where DNA Testing comes in to help. By taking a DNA test, a person can be found guilty or not guilty. If a person claims they have been raped there can be a sperm sample taken from the suspect in order to prove that he is guilty or not. In addition, in a murder case there can be blood taken from the suspect so they can tell of his innocence. There are several ways to determine whether a person is guilty or not by this method. Many cases have begun to use this method saying that it is foolproof. People say this is the method of the future of crime

Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based

Certainly it is not something that would have happened in the American court system, and the result can seem alien to those in common law countries. In 2009, Knox and Sollecito were convicted of the murder of their British roommate. The appeal process began the following year, and it was found that supposed DNA evidence that placed them at the crime scene was unreliable. In 2011, the convictions were overturned, and Knox returned home to

False confessions have been a leading factor in destroying the lives of many innocent people. Since the advances of technology, victims of false confessions have been exonerated from the charges previously placed on them while others are still fighting for innocence or died a criminal. One technological advance that has exonerated many individuals is DNA testing. According to Randy James, DNA testing was discovered in 1985 and was first used in court to convict Tommie Lee Andrews (Time, 2009). Today many Americans are convicted because of false confessions that have not yet been overturned with new evidence (Kassin, 2014). Although DNA testing has led to freedom for many innocent Americans, there are still many innocent people who are locked

The sentencing philosophy of Japan is a better philosophy of trying to utilize all five of the goals for contemporary sentencing. Japan’s sentencing philosophy tends to emphasize retribution and rehabilitation (Harris, 2013, p. 251). Japan is unique when compared to other countries because of their low incarceration rate (Reichel, 2008, p. 414). When determining how to proceed with the disposition of the offender, Japan bases its decision on how it will benefit society instead of concern for the individual offender (Harris, 2013, p. 251). Unlike many countries, the Japanese public has a great deal of trust in the members of its criminal justice system (Harris, 2013, p. 251).

Philosophers are commonly divided regarding the issue of punishment when it comes to crimes (Pollock, 2005). As punishment generally involves the infliction of pain, I would follow Japan’s rationales to justify punishment infliction (Pollock, 2015). Japan’s sentencing philosophy is not different than most countries in that the country utilizes two objectives as a rationale (Terrill, 2015). Based on the social cohesiveness of the citizens and the overall homogeneity of its society, Japan’s justice system shows greater impetus directed toward emphasizes retribution and rehabilitation then deterrence and isolation (Terrill, 2015).

For some time now, the Japanese criminal justice system has been regarded or perceived to be a successful justice system model. The success is mainly attributed to Japan’s culture and even embedded in the language itself (Goold, 2004). The success has drawn interest among criminology scholars and practitioners either for the purpose of broadening their knowledge or to emulate its criminal justice system (Ebbe, 2000). The interest is based on statistical data that indicate low levels of criminality in the developed nation of Japan in comparison to others. From these statistics, it would imply that Japan’s way of dealing with crime is more effective in its prevention. While the statistic might be solid, the texts on the criminal system may