American legal system are guarantees of due process found?
The “Due Process” law is a term that gives a procedural fairness through a criminal proceeding. The law protects an individual rights through the Bill of Rights. The “due-process model” is to “ensure that innocent people are not convicted of crimes.” In 1960 the “ due- process standard” , Chief Justice Earl Warren, had the effort of to protect innocents from the “power of the state in criminal proceedings.” There is a split between “Substantive” and “Procedural” due process. Substantial mandates and defines the rights, and the procedural process imposes “ those rights or seeks to redress for their violation.” Due process gives the fairness of the following principles that does
…show more content…
If an officer were to do a search on a property,to do so the police officer must have evidence to get a warrant. There can be an abuse of of power of a police officer contradicting the Fifth Amendment by using statements as evidence of committing a violation. Abuse of power can be using brutality on citizens, by using police force tactics as a tool of assault. The list of abuse by police is a form of a corrupted police officer when abusing authority for the public.
In what kinds of situations are police officers most likely to use force? When has too much force been used?
The situations in which police officers have to use force is by “reasonable circumstances.” Defined to be the acquired of physical restraint with a citizen of the public. Within an encounter, and officer is trained to use an amount of force when approaching a restraint that is not comprehensible. The use of force can be pushing or hitting, but also be threatened with a baton stick, a police dog, or pepper spray. Most situations of the use of force is merely grabbing, and interlocking of the body, retraining through handcuff, or chemical weapons. Studies have shown that police are most likely to use force during an arrest of 39%, disturbance of 21%. And domestic encounter at 11% on a graphic scale pie
One of the benefits of due process is demonstrated in the Belshaw case. The inquisitorial system of justice is based on crime control; the Swiss police had a hard time in Canada with Mr. Belshaw, because of his right to due process, under Canadian law. Both systems of justice share common beliefs, for example, they both look for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In Canada we fight about facts and laws, where-as the inquisitorial system searches for the facts. The adversarial system has a separation of powers with the police, crown, defense, and the judge. It is quite different for the inquisitorial system of justice, the police do the arrest, then they present the facts to crown, which then decide if they have a case and turn over the evidence to the judge. The only problem is that the judge decides what will lead them to the truth. How any evidence was collected is irrelevant. In due process if the police obtain evidence and violate the law or a persons charter of rights and freedoms the judge will exclude the evidence from the hearing, even if it would help or prove that the person is guilty. These two systems of justice are generated in democratic traditions.
With the articles and past research that I have collected, studies tell us that less than 3 percent of police-citizen contacts involve the threat of physical force by the police. The percentages are higher when the level of force is below lethal force, for instance 20 percent of arrests may involve some type of special or needed force to obtain and control the suspect in able to put him in custody. In the academy, police officers are taught to use equal or greater force to subdue the suspect and do what is necessary to protect the public and also look out for officer safety. Most incidents of force are low level applications such as using the arms, hands, legs, or their bodies to gain control of the suspect. Every police officer is supposed to be trained to a certain standard, and should be able to use the correct amount of force for the situation at hand. Police officers have situational training in the academy on what level of force to use if necessary. All police officers are equipped to handle most if not all situations or levels of force that is need to
Over the years, our nation has witnessed countless cases of police brutality. It has developed into a controversial topic between communities. For instance, deindustrialization is the removal or reduction of manufacturing capability or activity can lead to more crimes when people are laid off. Police officers are faced with many threatening situations day-to-day gripping them to make split second decisions; either to expect the worst or hope for the best. The police are given the authority to take any citizen away for their action that can ruin their lives. With that kind of power comes great responsibility, which is one main concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force might or
There have been a number of officers who have been accused and convicted of using excessive force. In one case in a maximum security prison in New York there were two correction officers that were caught on video hitting an inmate that was handcuffed behind the back. According to the video it did not appear that the inmate provoked the assault in anyway. Both officers that were involved in the assault were later fired by the prison and they were found guilty of a civil rights violation.
The use of force is a heated topic among many people. What is the “Use of Force Continuum”? It is the level of force an officer can use when arresting or subduing a suspect. According to Hicks (2004), “It is considered morally reprehensible for an officer or a sovereign agent to use excessive force without due necessity. However, once the need arises for a proper escalation of force, both the doctrinal theses of just war and the use of force continuum provide for a proper and morally principled use of necessary force” (pg. 255). The use of force continuum was created to guide officers so they are less likely to use excessive force. The officer is expected to use more force than the suspect, but no so that it is deemed excessive. According to Lyman
Police use discretion through weighing the costs and benefits of each situation (Wilson, 1968). The helpfulness of their choice is much more important than obeying their duty or moral. Thus, when normal force is explained it is done under the pretense of justifiably. To recap, normal force is simply the force used under police discretion that is neither legally taught nor brutal (Hunt, 1985). Normal force is justified by taking responsibility for their actions, yet denying they were wrong because of situational or abstract events. At other times officers use excuses for normal force and recognize their use of force as inappropriate. They will recall emotional or psychological states as a reason for such inappropriate actions.
Just how much force is appropriate under various circumstances can be debatable. When an officer uses excessive force, he or she violates the law. Most brutality is directed against minority groups or otherwise powerless populations. Officers who engage in brutality rationalize their use of extralegal force, they claim they are punishing those groups that threaten to disrupt the social order. The importance of understanding racism in the context of police brutality cannot be underestimated. Many police officials automatically regard racial minority group members as potentially dangerous regardless of their particular activities, gestures, or attire. This perception of racial minority citizens as “trouble” sometimes translates into racially discriminatory police behavior. Most police officers expect citizens to always surrender to police authority. When citizens challenge it instead, some officers view such behavior as the unofficial crime of disobeying a police officer and use physical force to gain compliance. So what can be done to help prevent police brutality around our
Officers abusing their power can range from taking bribes, choosing who they decide to let go and who to prosecute, and even abusing their power by molestation. In July of 2009 two Phoenix police officers lost their jobs after they stopped a bikini clad woman who had run from a rear end collision. The officers handcuffed her, drove her back to the accident scene to complete the paper work, and then drove her to elementary school where they knew that they would be alone. When they reached the school one of them fondled her breasts, abdomen, and buttocks while the other one watched and did nothing to help he...
Police violence remains a dire human right violation, especially in the United States. Over the last decade, police have applied force and aggression in ways that leave people wondering if they are discharging their duties. Recently, law enforcement seems to have taken a different turn characterized by aggression and violence when dealing with the public. Cases of unjustified shootings, physical assault, fatal chokings and violent treatment have contributed to the ongoing problem of police brutality in the America. Worse still is the fact that a greater proportion of these cases go unreported and undetected. This has partially encouraged violent police officers to continue applying force when dealing with the public. This new law enforcement
Most law enforcement agencies have policies that determine the use of force needed. The policies describe the escalating series of actions an officer can take to resolve a situation, first level is officer presence which means no force is used, and just the mere presence can reduce
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
Police corruption and misconduct come apparent in many different forms. A basic definition for police corruption is, when an officer gets involved in offenses where the officer uses his or her position, by act or omission, to obtain improper financial benefit. The main reason for such corruption is typically for personal gain, such as bribery. Police abuse of authority occurs in three different general areas such as physical abuse, psychological abuse, and legal abuse. Physical abuse is such abuse where one uses excessive force or physical harassment. The psychological abuse occurs through disrespect, harassment, ridicule, excessive stops, or intimidation. Finally, legal abuse is abuse that occurs during unlawful search and seizure or manufacturing evidence (Pollock, 2012). One source describes police corruption in eight different ways. They include: corruption of authority, kickbacks, opportunistic theft, shakedowns, protection of illegal acts, the fix, direct criminal acts, and internal payoffs (Roebuck & Barker, 1974).
According to the National Police Academy, in the past year, there have been over 7,000 reports of police misconduct; fatalities have been linked to more than 400 of these cases (Gul). Police brutality is often triggered by disrespect towards the police officer. The most noticeable form of brutality is physical, where Chemical gas, batons, tasers, and guns, can be used for physical intimidation or to actually hurt people. Police brutality can also take the form of verbal abuse or psychological intimidation. It seems reasonable to understand that sometimes the police are put into situations where excessive force may be needed. But, because some officers use these extreme actions in situations when it is not, police brutality should be addressed and looked into by both the police and the public. For instance, a police officer who beats a nonviolent protester with a baton would probably be accused of excessive use of force, under the argument that the police officer probably could have dealt with the situation less violently.
This paper compares and contrasts popular opinions and professional assessment of police brutality and acceptable use of force. This is not only a sensitive subject, but one that proves hard to identify. The main takeaway is that each encounter is different. Within each situation, the details and contributing factors are also different. Police have to serve the public and are entrusted with an inherent amount of power. The line when that use of power becomes abuse of power is not always so easily defined. There are occasions where the evidence shows a clear abuse of power by the police. There are instances where the public opinion views a situation as excessive, however, the police are following acceptable practices and procedures.
In any given setting, police officers are responsible for maintaining order within a, sometimes overly chaotic, society. They are given the responsibility of acting as protectors of the defenseless and upholding justice, at the risk of injury to themselves or even the loss of their own life. In addition, it is inevitable that an officer will eventually come into physical contact with an individual, who may be volatile or avoiding arrest, which nonetheless increases the odds of a physical confrontation. The distressing truth is that, although being assaulted is not a requirement of their profession, it is essentially unavoidable. With that said, police officers realize this fact and readily accept the reality that at any given moment, be