The problem of judicial corruption in United States is immense. The Sixth Amendment in the United States Bill of Rights refers to the right to a speedy, fair and public trial. Unfortunately, our judicial system does not always maintain these rights. The United States judicial system is very corrupt and most of our country’s citizens do not know how corrupt it actually is. When thinking about the judicial system, words that come to mind are justice, morality, and fairness. Sadly, these words are not accurate descriptions of this system. Correct depictions of today’s judicial system are corruption, rigged courts, extortion, and phony trials. Our legal system does not bring truth or justice to our courtrooms. Overcoming this corruption is not easy for the average citizen or anyone who is not in on the “game”. This problem affects everyone, but only benefits four types of people; the judges, the lawyers, the clients paying thousands more to the lawyers to win their case, and the police. Judges today are not playing fair, and they are accepting bribes from equally corrupt lawyers that are desperate to win a case and improve their case winnings over their losses. The lawyers are asking for more money from the clients so that they can secretly hand over cash to the lawyers and ask for “favors” in the courtroom. With all of this injustice, comes fear implanted in the client, who is then willing to spend more on a lawyer to guarantee their success in a case; “fear and injustice equals more money for lawyers and judges”(Sachs). Many people know about or have witnessed this corruption taking place and numerous attempts to rid of it have been made. It is not an easy task attempting to bring justice to where justice should be made. There ... ... middle of paper ... ...ut the Local Bar or Bar Association - Aren't They Supposed to Go After Crooked Lawyers and Judges?” FAQ on US Judicial and Legal Corruption. Blogspot. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. Sachs, Les. “So the Current State of Legal Corruption, is Really Supported by Both Political Parties, the Democrats and the Republicans Together?” FAQ on US Judicial and Legal Corruption. Blogspot. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. Sachs, Les. “Is it True that Once I Become a Victim of Judicial and Legal Corruption, I Basically Become an "Outlaw" to the Whole Legal System in America?” FAQ on US Judicial and Legal Corruption. Blogspot. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. Fine, Victoria. ” My Dad Tried to Right a Wrong, Now He's Behind Bars Unjustly.” Huffington Post. Huffington Post. 12 Jan. 2010. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. Hays, Tom. “Judges On Wrong Side Of The Law.” CBSNEWS.com. CBSNEWS. 7 May. 2009. Web. 31 Oct. 2011
Pagan writes a captivating story mingled with the challenges of the Eastern Shore legal system. This book gives a complete explanation backed up by research and similar cases as evidence of the ever-changing legal system. It should be a required reading for a history or law student.
Criminals can come in many different shapes and sizes. For example, a criminal can be classified as being a murderer or a criminal could just simply have committed fraud in a business setting. There is a large diversity of criminals and it is the judge’s job to determine what is a fair punishment for a guilty verdict. Judge Ron Swanson, a federal judge for the Florida District Court of Appeal, deals with using cost-benefit analysis daily to determine what is fair for everyone involved. Before becoming a judge, Judge Swanson was a prosecutor coming out of law school in the University of Florida. As a prosecutor and a judge, Judge Swanson has always worked to bring justice for the victims, the defendant if he or she is innocent, and for the citizens
criminal justice system is considered to be adversarial and complex; that is there are two sides essentially competing for victory amidst a maze of multiple potential legal ramifications (Patton, 2013). Gideon was designed to ensure that every defendant involved in the process received a fair trial. Since the government hires lawyers to put defendants on trial, it is only fair that defendants receive legal representation in order to ensure the trial is balanced on both sides (Patton, 2013). The reality is that since the Gideon ruling, the number of cases going to trial has substantially decreased. In 1963, the number of federal criminal defense cases that went to trial was at fifteen percent. As of 2013, that number has dropped to 2.7 percent (Patton, 2013). This is not a reflection of an overall reduction in crime or an overall reduction in the number of charges found to have enough evidence to proceed to trial, but an increase in the amount of plea bargains (Patton,
Our forefathers were bright enough to establish a system of government with a series of checks and balances to maintain a balanced government. For the past decade a series of checks and balances has begun to fail our government. In our failing system of government inmates have taken advantage of the court system and have flooded it with an inconceivable number of frivolous lawsuits. Laurel Walters, a writer for the Christian Science Monitor, investigated inmates' lawsuits and found that these "recreational litigators...are suing the courts as an intramural sports activity." Action needs to be taken in order to rectify and protect "US" from this squandering of our tax payer provided funds and resources. Today in a world when knowledge is power, I'm ready to hand other tax payers an entire empire.
The justice system present in the United States is one of fairness, equality, and human rights. In a court of law, all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights that nothing or no one can take away. What is to happen when these rights are denied, abused, or ignored? It is a frightening outcome when unruly factors destroy the basis of this system. As a victim of injustice once said, “People have prejudices, people have fears, people have hates. These things cloud our ability to reason.” Injustice has a tendency to overshadow reason. How can one feel safe in this country, when no one is totally safe from the sometimes unjust scrutiny of the law? If justice rests on one being innocent until proven guilty, what is to happen when one is to be guilty until proven innocent?
Justice was dilatory, expensive, uncertain, and remote. To the rich it was a costly lottery: to the poor a denial of right, or certain ruin. The class who might profit most by its dark mysteries were the lawyers themselves. (Plucknett 73)
6. Neubauer, D.W. (2002). America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth: Thomson Learning.
The American people rely on the justice system set up by our founding fathers to uphold certain standards of fairness and equality. Society is brainwashed into believing that the justice system is to flaw and bad people are supposed to go to jail. However, this has not been the case for many years due to corruption in the Supreme Court followed by the Federal Courts and other inferior state courts. The American justice system has taken on a life of its own, following theories of fairness that are no longer connected to the needs of a free society. Instead of a justice system that weeds out the good from the evil, power has been given to the prosecutors, finding a good lawyer is harder than it seems, and rules have become unconstitutional.
The media plays a big role in shaping the people’s perceptions about the court system. Without media we would remain uneducated to the occurrences outside our social groups. Media and especially news coverage provide us with important point of contact with the rest of society. In debunking popular myths about our court system we will look at the “facts” (the truth, the actual event, a real thing). With a myth being based upon “exaggeration” or heightening of “ordinary” event in life. Myths become a convenient mortar to fill gaps in knowledge and to provide answers to questions social science either cannot answer or has failed to address. Myths tend to provide the necessary information for the construction
The criminal justice system is always criticized for a range of issues concerning the injustices that has taken place throughout history and even today. Many political leaders and social activists have sought to reform the criminal justice system; however, some have realized that there are systematic barriers that inhibit reformation. Political ...
The Criminal Justice system is not fair! In spite of a façade of legal neutrality, class, and race-based justice is contradictory. Therefore, maneuvering through every criminal justice setting, which includes law enforcement behaviors, selection or juries, and sentencing guidelines. Such inequalities show partiality towards the privileged, allowing them to benefit from constitutional securities and police dominance; also, without paying the price associated with expanding these securities to minorities and the underprivileged. The double standards perpetrate even excessive costs on the public by jeopardizing the criminal justice system and by intensifying national ethnic and cultural divisions. If sizable sectors of the population lose faith
Despite the longstanding acceptance and promotion for the crime-fraud exception, it appears that the use of the exception to report fraud has been relatively scant and use of ethical rules to sanction lawyers is similarly rare. For those that may favor private regulation or the ability of the market to dictate its own terms it seems that the equilibrium reached was one without lawyers disclosing of their own accord. This could be just viewed as an information failure problem—even if the ability to report fraud up the ladder was technically already available, lack of knowledge may have prevented lawyers from reporting fraud when they otherwise would have done so.
It is no secret that the American legal system is distinct from other developed Western nations in its practices and laws. This variation, termed “adversarial legalism” by Professor Robert Kagan in his book, Adversarial Legalism, has two salient features: formal legal contestation and litigant activism. In civil and criminal law, jury trials and a specific lawyering culture exemplify these traits. Though adversarial legalism responds well to the American desires of justice and protection from harm while simultaneously respecting the societal fear of a government with too much power, it leads to extremely costly litigation and immense legal uncertainty. To reconcile the American view of justice and the undesirable outcomes of formal contestation and litigant activism, the legal system has gone so far as to reform large parts of the system, including bureaucratic regulations and the plea bargaining process. However, as Kagan states, rather than reduce the costliness or uncertainty of the legal process, these procedural changes have merely lead to an increase in litigation and, therefore, an increase of adversarial legalism in criminal and civil law.
Judicial officers are afforded tremendous amounts of discretion in the execution of their duties. With this discretion comes an insurmountable amount of responsibility to exercise it with care, as a judicial officer’s decisions have life impacting results on those who they exercise their discretion upon. It is also very important that judges make ethical decisions and recuse themselves from cases in which their discretion may be compromised by personal bias in favor of any particular party they are presiding over. Knowing when, and having the fortitude to recuse themselves is often the key decision to make to prevent the crossing of any ethical boundaries. Judges, being the highest level with the most authority within the criminal justice system, are especially entrusted with the use of their discretion. Historically, there is little consequence to judges who exercise their discretion poorly or unethically in the carrying out of their duties.
“Drive the corruption from the land, don’t harbor it any longer, past all cure, don’t nurse it in your soil – root it out!” (164).