In criminal law the principle, presumed innocent until proven guilty is sometimes twisted and altered to presumed guilty until proven innocent in many wrongful conviction cases. Many factors go into the deliberation and reasoning behind an investigators, juries and courts verdict and occasionally their decision is actually wrong and an innocent person is locked up behind bars, to serve a sentence that they do not deserve because they are not a criminal. False confessions from an innocent suspect is very common in the interrogation room and by it is their own fault because they admit to being a part a crime they truthfully were not part of due to misleading questions or statements by the investigators. Another factor that could place an innocent person in prison is wrong scientific discoveries and false DNA evidence. Doctors sometimes misinterpret injuries and causes of death and this can really alter a case's outcome significantly. Finally, witnesses may report false sightings, or report something that they thought they heard but misinterpreted it entirely. More laws should be put into place to protect the innocent suspects, and to insure that nobody goes to prison that really does not deserve it and more citizens should be trained to accurately give a description of a suspect to decrease the wrongful conviction rate.
It is understandable why a criminal would lie about committing a crime which they did commit to get out of trouble and stay out of jail. In majority of prisons worldwide, 90% of convicted criminals claim innocence. Many people are in the opposite situation when they are being accused of a crime they do not know about or not connected to and police officers or investigators are profiling them based on previous case...
... middle of paper ...
...ent people are not punished for a witnesses mistake.
A wrongful conviction is the worst thing that a jury, witness, investigator or judge could be responsible for. The burden and the guilt that will be placed on the shoulders of them, knowing an innocent person had to spend time out of their personal life in prison is unbearable. Nobody is perfect, but everybody should try to be as close as possible to perfect when they are putting a person in prison for a crime they are sure they committed. Compensation will help the innocent victim who had to waste time in prison but nothing will replace the time missed away from families and many families turn on and hate the person thrown in jail because they thought they were indeed guilty, little to their knowledge their innocent. Money can sometimes buy happiness, but it cannot replace lost love and wasted time in prison.
The aspect of wrongful conviction is established within law to protect the innocent from being abused by the law. Nevertheless, the real issue of concern is the fact of whether wrongful conviction actually helps those who cannot help themselves. With that said, another important underlying factor is whether the criminal justice system has restrictions set up to help those from being innocently convicted and those who have been convicted and later was found to be innocent. By looking at the case of Guy Paul Morin, one will see how the police, courts, and criminal justice system failed in aiding the innocent and bringing justice in society, as well as showing that the system has failed in helping its people, and what must be done to aid those who have been wrongfully convicted.
In a handful of occasions such as in an interrogation it seems reasonable enough to lie to an individual in order for them to confess to a crime. A case law that shows this was Frazier v. Cupp in which according to Police Link, “ The case involved the interrogation of a homicide suspect who was falsely told that an accomplice had already implicated the suspect in the killing.” In the case of Frazier v. Cupp kept on getting integrated even after he asked to speak to a lawyer so as a result he ended up doing a written confession where he confessed about being part of the murder that was later used as evidence against him.
If that does not occur to the reader as an issue than factoring in the main problem of the topic where innocent people die because of false accusation will. In addition, this book review will include a brief review of the qualifications of the authors, overview of the subject and the quality of the book, and as well as my own personal thoughts on the book. In the novel Actual Innocence: When Justice Goes Wrong and How to Make It Right authors Barry Scheck, Peter Neufeld, and Jim Dwyer expose the flaws of the criminal justice system through case histories where innocent men were put behind bars and even on death row because of the miscarriages of justice. Initially, the text promotes and galvanizes progressive change in the legal
Wrongful conviction is an issue that has plagued the Canadian Justice System since it came to be. It is an issue that is hard to sort out between horrific crimes and society’s desire to find truth and justice. Incidences of wrongful conviction hit close to home right here in Saskatchewan as well as across the entire nation. Experts claim “each miscarriage of justice, however, deals a blow to society’s confidence in the legal justice system” (Schmalleger, Volk, 2014, 131). Professionals in the criminal justice field such as police, forensic analyst, and prosecutors must all be held accountable for their implications in wrongful convictions. There are several reasons for wrongful convictions such as racial bias, false confessions, jailhouse informants, eyewitness error, erroneous forensic science, inappropriate, professional and institutional misconduct and scientific limitations that society possessed prior to the technological revolution (Roberts, Grossman, 2012, 253 – 259). The introduction of more advanced DNA analysis has been able to clear names and prevent these incidences from occurring as often. As well as the formation of foundations such as The Association of Defense for the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC). Unfortunately, mistakes made in the Canadian Justice System have serious life altering repercussions for everyone that is involved. Both systematic and personal issues arise that require deeper and more intense analysis.
If, someday, I committed a horrible crime and was going to be punished for it I would definitely lie to save myself. I might tell the truth if I was being eaten by guilt and didn’t care about anything anymore, but definitely if I didn’t care very much. If anybody says they would tell the truth, I’m sure if something really happened they would lie too. It’s human nature to want to survive and thrive, and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to stay out of prison or not get the death penalty. In a real situation, where I would die if I were found guilty of your crime, I would definitely lie to save myself.
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.
False confessions are receiving more public attention now that people are speaking out about having to serve jail time for a crime they did not commit. 2015 was a year to remember for false confessions starting in January when a man was released after serving 21 years in prison. The protocols that interrogators are trained to follow are dangerous because they allow investigators to have complete influence on innocent people to make false confessions.
Depending on what study is read, the incidence of false confession is less than 35 per year, up to 600 per year. That is a significant variance in range, but no matter how it is evaluated or what numbers are calculated, the fact remains that false confessions are a reality. Why would an innocent person confess to a crime that she did not commit? Are personal factors, such as age, education, and mental state, the primary reason for a suspect to confess? Are law enforcement officers and their interrogation techniques to blame for eliciting false confessions? Regardless of the stimuli that lead to false confessions, society and the justice system need to find a solution to prevent the subsequent aftermath.
Among various arrests, people who are put in jail or prison due to their confession must make them a proven criminal, right? Unfortunately, not everybody who confesses to a crime is in fact guilty. A false confession is an act of confessing to a crime that the confessor didn’t commit. That creates a conflict involving the individual being accused and the trust towards police interrogation. For instance, after nearly eight years in prison, Nicole Harris sued eight Chicago police detectives, alleging that they coerced her confession (Meiser Para.2) The police detectives incorrectly informed Harris in failing “the polygraph test” indicating that she lied about not committing the murder of her son, Jaquari Dancy (Meiser). She felt that there was
Are there really innocent people on death row? At least twenty-three people have been executed who did not commit the crime they were accused of (JAICLC). And that 's only those that we know. And here lies a natural danger of capital punishment...when we execute an innocent person; the real killer is still on the streets, ready to victimize someone else. But when an innocent person is arrested, he is often the motivating reason behind further investigation, and if he is executed, than the case remains closed forever or until someone else gets killed by the real perpetrator. Often the only people who know what really happened are the accused and the dead. It then comes down to the skill of the examination and the defense lawyers as to whether there will be a conviction for accidental murder or for manslaughter. At times, a detective could naturally make an error and possibly lead to the conclusion that the innocent committed the crime. Whether it be multiple years in prison or even capital punishment there is no possible way of revenging or forgiving the judge and jury for this miscarriage of justice. There must always be the concern that the state can order the death penalty justly. In America, a prisoner can be on death row for many years awaiting the outcome of numerous appeals (Short). In simpler terms killing another being with or without evidence is not fair, decent, or ethically
The Innocence Project, using DNA evidence, has gone back to past cases and exonerated innocent people when they were wrongly convicted. There may be many reasons that several people are wrongly convicted every year. However, there are 6 reasons deemed as the most important regarding wrongful convictions. These reasons are eyewitness misidentification, unvalidated or improper forensic science, false confessions or admissions, government misconduct, informants or snitches, and bad lawyering (understand the causes).
Wrongful convictions in Canada is a very sensitive and disturbing topic that has created concerns as to why individuals are being wrongfully convicted. As people in Canada read about cases involving wrongful conviction, such as Guy Paul Morin, Rubin Carter and David Millguard, it often undermines their faith in the criminal justice system. Tunnel vision, the use of questionable DNA evidence, and eyewitness misidentification are the three main causes of wrongful convictions in Canada. Recognizing and addressing these concerns has led to a reduction in cases of wrongful convictions in Canada.
Criminal Law declares what conduct is illegal and proscribes a penalty. Although, we rely on our court system to administer justice, sometimes the innocent are convicted (Risinger). Most people would not be able to imagine a person who is convicted of a crime as innocent, sometimes that is the case. Imagine what a variance that is: an innocent criminal. In an article by Radley Balko he asks the question, “How many more are innocent?” In his article, he questions America’s 250th DNA exoneration and states that it raises questions about how often we send the wrong person to prison. The other issue that follows is the means of appealing the court’s decision and who they can turn to for help.
The statement "It is better that 10 guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" summarises and highlights the mistakes and injustices in the criminal justice system. In a just society, the innocent would never be charged, nor convicted, and the guilty would always be caught and punished. Unfortunately, it seems this would be impossible to achieve due to the society in which we live. Therefore, miscarriages of justice occur in the criminal justice system more frequently than is publicised or known to the public at large. They are routine and would have to be considered as a serious problem in our society. The law is what most people respect and abide by, if society cannot trust the law that governs them, then there will be serious consequences including the possible breakdown of that society. In order to have a fair and just society, miscarriages of justice must not only become exceptional but ideally cease to occur altogether.
The worst thing in life is paying for another man's mistake. Sadly, this is something that occurs frequently. After watching a video about the wrongful conviction and the imprisonment of Ronald Cotton, I was baffled. I find it absurd that an innocent person can lose their freedom for a crime that they were not involved in. Ronald Cotton is not the only unfortunate individual who has endured wrongful imprisonment. Bennet Barbour, James Bain, and many others have been convicted of crimes that they did not commit due to faulty eyewitness testimonies.