3. Both Cole and Bjerk discuss the role of discretion among prosecutors. Discuss the importance of discretion as they describe it. What implications might this have for the legitimacy of the court system?
Cole discusses the importance of prosecutorial discretion when it comes to mandatory minimum sentences and changing decisions. Cole (2012), while the prosecuting attorney has discretionary power to determine the disposition of cases, the power is dependent upon the police for their work and input on the facts and evidence of the case. Knowing this information, all three entities still operate within their own branch to a different set of guidelines. A prosecutor is able to go around these laws by charging the victim with a lesser crime than
Delattre discusses discretion in chapter 5, for he writes that judgment and rules, respect for limits, policies and laws, force and deadly force, and anticipation and planning, which shape and or create individual discretion. Delattre says that, discretion is allowed, because there are too many variables in situations and regulations can’t dictate what to do every time. Good policies only set boundaries for discretion, though the chief or commanding officers, also can set boundaries on policies to enforce more or less. Policies can’t be fully enforced, so there needs to be discretion concerning what policies are more enforced based on factors such as, limited resources and manpower. Though policies can make discretion good or bad, depending
The New York Times bestseller book titled Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case examines the O.J. Simpson criminal trial of the mid-1990s. The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, relates the Simpson case to the broad functions and perspectives of the American criminal justice system as a whole. A Harvard law school teacher at the time and one of the most renowned legal minds in the country, Dershowitz served as one of O.J. Simpson’s twelve defense lawyers during the trial. Dershowitz utilizes the Simpson case to illustrate how today’s criminal justice system operates and relates it to the misperceptions of the public. Many outside spectators of the case firmly believed that Simpson committed the crimes for which he was charged for. Therefore, much of the public was simply dumbfounded when Simpson was acquitted. Dershowitz attempts to explain why the jury acquitted Simpson by examining the entire American criminal justice system as a whole.
A crime being committed is the first event to initiate our criminal justice system. On June 12th 1994 a double murder was reported at the residence of Nicole Brown Simpson the ex-wife of the then beloved Orenthal James (OJ) Simpson. It was discovered that Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman had been brutally murdered and the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) began their investigation, this being the second step in our criminal justice system.
One contradiction in the job of the prosecutor is that they have nearly limitless direction in critical matters; however, prosecutors’ are also held to a very high ethical standard. Prosecutors must screen cases to determine which ones need to be prosecuted; nevertheless, this is the source of controversy with most people. “What makes charging decisions more intriguing and controversial is the fact that in making this decision, the prosecutor has nearly limitless discretion” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This means the prosecutor’s charging decisions are beyond any judicial review, so it must be apparent that a prosecutor
Discretion is often one of the most critical aspects of a police officer’s daily duties. In the past, police discretion was considered taboo until 1956 when a study conducted by the American Bar Foundation discovered that there is nothing illegal or improper about discretion, and that it is in fact of practice (“The Role of Discretion in Police Work,” 2012). Before discretion was officially accepted as practice, police officers would not admit to be involved in police discretion. The basic definition of discretion is the use of personal choices when carrying out typical police job duties. For example, a police officer may decide to arrest one suspect for police interference, but will let another suspect go home, for the exact offense. When using discretion, however...
According to Siegel, Schmalleger, and Worrall (2014), "prosecutorial discretion is a decision of a prosecutor to submit a charging document to a court, or to seek a grand jury indictment, or to decline to prosecute". (p. 204) In other words, it is when the prosecutor intentionally fails to mention a piece of evidence towards the defendant that can potentially free them of any charges. This behavior affects charging decisions, such as, Courts in the News, the case of Petros Bedi, he spent more than a decade in prison, because the prosecution knew a witness was paid in exchange for a testimony.(Siegel, Schmalleger, and Worrall, 2014, p. 210) Regardless of Petros Bedi criminal past, that does not mean he should be treated unfairly. Prosecutors
The degree of force that officers use is heavily influenced by police discretion in real-world situations rather than espoused by a certain agenda. Discretion can be classified into four different categories where administrators, the community, and the individual police officer exercise differing degrees of influence in decision-making. What is needed to help officer discretion is a central ethos that will guide discretion when all other rules fail to help.
Discretion is defined as the authority to make a decision between two or more choices (Pollock, 2010). More specifically, it is defined as “the capacity to identify and to document criminal and noncriminal events” (Boivin & Cordeau, 2011). Every police officer has a great deal of discretion concerning when to use their authority, power, persuasion, or force. Depending on how an officer sees their duty to society will determine an officer’s discretion. Discretion leads to selective enforcement practices and may result in discrimination against certain groups of people or select individuals (Young, 2011). Most police officer discretion is exercised in situations with individuals (Sherman, 1984).
So much is to be said about law enforcement and the discretion that is needed to maintain good order, impeccable judgment, and discipline within the ranks. Discretion is a topic that varies from person to person and institution to institution; it holds many different meanings and can be used negatively if sound judgment is not exhibited.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
How prevalent is police discretion and why does it exist? Can discretion be eliminated? Should it be? Due Date March 11 2005
In this essay a discussion will be explored about the benefits and problems associated with police use of discretion. Which current policing strategies have the most potential for controlling officer discretion and providing accountability, and which have the least, and why is that the case? And finally, how might these issues impact the various concerns facing law enforcement today?
Every day police must make important decision within society. Decision making encompasses whether to enforce the law or not to enforce the law in certain circumstances. One can observe discretion is situations pertaining to traffic violation or those as a result of a minor or private offence. One may have experienced this when an officer decided to provide a warning instead of issuing a speeding ticket. In certain circumstances, officers consider many variables when exercising their discretionary decision. Such decision may include but are not limited to offender’s demeanor, age, economic status, race, gender, or maybe even an offender’s health. Situational variables can also influence an officer’s decision on the basis of the seriousness of the crime,
Laws and procedures are the most common basis for officers choosing not to allow offenders to remain free based on their discretion, a study by Mendias and Kehoe (2006) has found. The study found that laws or responsibilities were the main reason for a decision to suspend discretion in eighty-two percent of cases involving an arrest. The study also found that keeping the peace and procedural implications were the primary justifications for ex...
When the media sensationalize cases about police officers abusing their powers, the public’s immediate response is to demand restrictions on them. While the abuse of discretion exists, allowing police officers to exercise discretion without controls is vital due to the unpredictable and multifaceted nature of crime. Thus, abolishing police discretion would be detrimental because police officers will primarily become law enforcers who ignore individual circumstances, cannot make meaningful differences in others’ lives, and cause inefficiencies in the criminal justice system.