To achieve justice for all involved, then every party must submit their contribution honestly; additionally, they must critically think about motives behind their actions and words. This is the ideal mindset when accusing a crime, but there are people only want the upper hand and will use any means possible to have it. These people will place false accusations against those who have wronged them, or to place blame elsewhere. These people do not wish to persuade criminal justice, but use the system for their own gain. False allegations are a rapid issue that punctures the justice system.
Perpetrators of false allegations will have an underlying motivation in one of these categories: “mental illness/depression”, “attention/sympathy”, “financial/profit”, “alibi”, or “revenge”. These perpetrators develop a “self-victimization plan” in order to get temporary relief from life problems due to attention from society. They often overlook what would happen to them if the truth was ever revealed (McNamara), and rather wish to soak in their current success. If a woman had an affair, and is found out by her partner, then she may claim that the individual forced her as a cover-up for whole ordeal. In one case, Ralph Myers, a man with
…show more content…
In order to get the defendant freed, then there must be evidence pointing to his innocence, or a recantation from the victim, which may be hard to come by for reasons as stated above. Imagine being confined behind bars for a crime that you did not commit. Some innocents are even sent to Death Row, where any day their execution can be scheduled. Samuel Gross did a study that the justice system has a 4.1 percent error margin of sending innocents to death, and that since 1973, there have been “144 death-sentenced defendants have been exonerated in the U.S.”, but Gross predicts that “at least 340 people would have been put to death unjustly in that same time period”
Justice can be achieved through various processes and principles if applied correctly, similarly justice can also be denied through these same processes and principles. This is exemplified through the Andrew Mallard case (M v The Queen 2005 HCA 68), and the missing persons case of Kieffen Raggett (2007) which shows how the incorrect application of processes like police investigations and coronial inquests can lead to justice being denied. Furthermore, legal principles such as; the rights of the accused and victims, are instrumental in achieving justice as shown through the application of these principles within these cases. These processes and principles can fail due to prejudged conclusions, police corruption, human error and cultural barriers
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
In America we believe in the saying “you are innocent until proven guilty” but we the people are remarkably swift to point our fingers at someone we believe that committed the crime. This habit is frequently displayed within our criminal justice system when a crime is committed we quickly assume it has something to do with the first person we can link the crime to. We tend to naturally feel sympathy for the victim therefore; if the individual accuses one for a crime the jury has no reason not to believe the victim. Society does not bother to care if the individual did not do the crime because as long as someone was caught and accused of the wrongdoing, then we the people can proceed on with our lives knowing we punished someone for the crime
For example, Ted Bundy and terrorists like Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh who have committed serious crimes. Furthermore, during the first decade of the 21st century there were 26 percent more executions in the U.S. than in the 20th century. For instance, during the same time period, the U.S. murder rate decreased by 24 percent (Marquis, 22). However, how would you know if someone was innocent or not? What if they had been framed by the actual killer? That’s why it would take a long and complex process to find out whether that person had not committed such crime. Therefore, innocent people could be put to death for doing no such crimes.
The Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of executing someone who claimed actual innocence in Herrera v. Collins (506 U.S. 390 (1993)). Although the Court left open the possibility that the Constitution bars the execution of someone who conclusively demonstrates that he or she is actually innocent, the Court noted that such cases would be very rare. The Court held that, in the absence of other constitutional violations, new evidence of innocence is no reason for federal courts to order a new trial. The Court also held that an innocent inmate could seek to prevent his execution through the clemency process, which, historically, has been "the 'fail safe' in our justice system." Herrera was not granted clemency, and was executed in 1993..
Criticizers of the death penalty will argue that the wrong person may be convicted and sentenced to the death penalty, but a fair trial and the appeal process ensures ample time in the event of any false allegations. They can only be exonerated if new evidence arises or a state governor calls off the execution.
Therefore, under these ethical standards, prosecutors cannot file charges if there is not enough evidence to support a conviction, they also do not file if it is not in the public interest to do so. This is what makes the possibilities limitless; however, three key factors also play a part in determining which cases to prosecute. If prosecutors follow these three factors in determining cases then the contradiction of limitless discretion and high ethical standards should be remedied for others. These are factors that should be followed are as followed: the seriousness and nature of the offense, the offender’s culpability, and the likelihood of being able to obtain a conviction at a trial. “Ethical conduct, then, must be the core of the prosecutor’s role in the criminal justice system” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). Therefore, even though prosecutors have almost limitless discretion in their decisions, they still must
When lies are taken as the truth by scapegoating it can kill innocent people and have adverse effects on the other community members.
If an error occurs in the procedure, the criminal will face a painful and cruel death. Even more horrifying, an innocent person can be placed on death row. “The reality is that there are few innocent people on death row; the vast majority of these inmates did, in fact, commit the crimes for which they were found guilty. These killers brutally took the lives of innocent victims. By not recognizing the lives of their victims as sacred, they cannot claim their own lives are sacred. In the end, the death penalty is an individual punishment for an individual crime” (Bowman and DiLascio). Although this quote tries to offer a counterpoint to the argument that the death penalty should be abolished, it still admits that there are innocent people on death row. An innocent man placed on death row results in two casualties of innocent men while the brutal murderer sleeps peacefully each night. Errors in the death penalty can destroy families, terminate friendships, and disintegrate love and companionship. Since there is no guarantee that every person on death row is guilty, it is too dangerous to risk more innocent
When the victim does not fit the ideal victim attributes which society has familiarised themselves with, it can cause complications and confusion. Experts have noticed there is already a significant presence of victim blaming, especially for cases involving both genders. The fear of being blamed and rejected by the public is prominent in all victims. Victim blaming proclaims the victim also played a role in the crime by allowing the crime to occur through their actions (Kilmartin and Allison, 2017, p.21). Agarin (2014, p.173) underlines the problem of victim blaming is due to the mass of social problems and misconceptions within society. The offender can have “an edge in court of public opinion” if victim blaming exists, resulting in the prevention of the case accomplishing an effective deduction in court (Humphries, 2009, p.27). Thus, victims will become more reluctant to report offences because of their decrease in trust in the police and criminal justice system, leading to the dark figure of
When a person is accused of being "guilty", society must assume the person is innocen...
Great effort has been made in our criminal justice system in pretrial, trial, appeals, writ and clemency procedures to minimize the chance of and innocent person being convicted and sentenced to death. Since 1973, legal protections have been so great that 37 percent of all death row cases have been overturned for due process reasons or commuted. Inmates are six times more likely to get off death row by appeals than by execution.
Without the understanding of what really happened in an event or place and time justice is not being sought out and can’t be dealt to those that need it. We all have felt wronged, at one time or another, in one form or another and I feel that is why we all have a common interest in seeking justice.
... More guilty people are found innocent opposed to innocent people being found guilty. In my opinion, the courts are not strict enough and let far too many people go that shouldn't be let free. Only five people have been taken off death row because they were found innocent by D.N.A. Others were said to be innocent, but who really knows?