1. The text lists three inherent contradictions in the job of the prosecutor: (a) Prosecutors have nearly limitless discretion in the most critical matters they must consider, yet they are held to very high ethical standards. 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 …show more content…
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
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
In chapter twelve, Joel Samaha has discussed various court proceedings before trial. Samaha begins to elaborate the importance of the prosecutor’s decision in determining whether there is a concrete case against the alleged defendant. The evidence at hand ultimately dictates the proceeding of events in court. Along with evidence, the lack of resources might add to the difficulty in charging an individual. Prosecutors are faced with an overload of cases; ultimately prosecutors are forced to prioritize their cases based on their resources and the evidence provided. The cases that are regarded are then considered for suspect detainment. Probable cause to detain suspects is undergone so that the case may proceed to trial. Typically an arraignment
Reasoning: The responsibility of the prosecutor is to disclose information and evidence. If there is a promise being made by an attorney, then the information should be must be attributed to the government. The Supreme court had found that the prosecutor’s lacked to disclose evidence that was relevant to the defense. The prosecutor had also failed to correct the false evidence that had been presented at the
Well written procedures, rules, and regulation provide the cornerstone for effectively implementing policies within the criminal justice system. During the investigational process, evidence collected is subjected to policies such as Search and Seizure, yet, scrutinized by the Exclusionary Rule prior to the judicial proceeding. Concurrent with criminal justice theories, evidence collected must be constitutionally protected, obtained in a legal and authorized nature, and without violations of Due Process. Although crime and criminal activities occur, applicability of policies is to ensure accountability for deviant behaviors and to correct potentially escalation within social communities It is essential the government address such deviant behavior, however, equally important is the protection of the accused which also must become a priority when investigating criminal cases.
Steve Bogira, a prizewinning writer, spent a year observing Chicago's Cook County Criminal Courthouse. The author focuses on two main issues, the death penalty and innocent defendants who are getting convicted by the pressure of plea bargains, which will be the focus of this review. The book tells many different stories that are told by defendants, prosecutors, a judge, clerks, and jurors; all the people who are being affected and contributing to the miscarriage of justice in today’s courtrooms.
Manarin, B. (2008). Role of the Prosecutor. In J. V. Roberts, & M. G. Grossman (Eds.), Criminal justice in Canada: a reader (3rd Edition ed., pp. 36-47). Toronto: Thomson Nelson.
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
Police officers often encounter situations where the decision to use discretion challenges the way and the type of job that officers would normally conduct. Each day an officer is on the job, discretion when it comes to job duties appears, sometimes without any warning. Officers constantly struggle with the appearance of discretion, and often times do not know how to handle the situation when it does appear. Discretion may take many different forms in the job duties, but it always involves the officer letting a crime “slide,” rather than questioning every suspicious person. Letting a crime “slide,” for certain offenders, is of great concern for the administrators of police departments, because there is potential for ethical issues to surface later on. This essay will examine police discretion, factors that influence discretion, whether exercising discretion is appropriate, and the concerns that administrators have when it comes to police using discretion in the field.
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
Prosecutors are arguably the most influential figures in the American criminal justice system. They decide which charges to bring, what plea bargains to offer, and what sentences to request. According to attorney advocates, prosecutors across the country are abusing their legal power and getting away with it. The most common forms of prosecutorial misconduct are hiding exculpatory evidence and engaging in improper examination and argumentation. Another form of intentional misconduct is the use of false testimony to win convictions. In 2009, Goodman, a well-known attorney in Chicago represented Brian Wilbourn in a federal narcotics case. Prosecutors knowingly allowed an informant to testify that Wilbourn sold crack cocaine out of a penthouse apartment over a three-year period when he was in fact nowhere near the scene at any time. Stephen Saloom, a former attorney, acknowledges that prosecutors are abusing their power, he quotes "As best we can determine, most prosecutors ' offices don 't even have clear internal systems for preventing and reviewing misconduct, but perhaps even more alarming is that bar oversight entities tend not to act in the wake of even serious acts of misconduct. We do not accept this lack of accountability and oversight for any other government entity where life and liberty are at stake, and there 's no reason we should do so for prosecutors"
The relationship between the prosecutor and defense goes way back from when the court system was first created. Sometimes both parties will cooperate with each other, it just depends on the case. This essay will first describe the difference between the two parties. Next, it will then describe their relationship. After that it will then show how in some cases both parties come together to reach an agreement. Especially in today’s world how some people will take a plea deal instead of going to court.
In the year 2014, law enforcement in the U.S. estimated 1,165,383 violent crimes reported (“D2014VC”). Imagine all the people needed just to get to the bottom of these cases! There is an abundant amount of Americans solving mysteries every day to keep others safe. There are crimes being committed all around the U.S. at every second of the day. In John Grisham’s The Pelican Brief, he displays a firm relation between investigators and lawyers through the Criminal Justice System of acquiring suspects and evidence, indicated in the book with an exploration of the scandals of Supreme Court Justices Rosenberg and Jensen (Grisham).
This paper is intended to examine ethical issues in Criminological research and criminal justice. This paper will analyze the multitude of ethical concerns, as well as discuss the confidentiality requirements as it pertains to criminological research.
In this essay, I will describe the elements of a criminal act, address the law of factual impossibility, the law of legal impossibility, and distinguish whether the alleged crime in the scenario is a complete but imperfect attempt or an incomplete attempt. I will address the ethical or moralistic concerns associated with allowing a criminal defendant to avoid criminal responsibility by successfully asserting a legal defense such as impossibility. The court was clearly wrong to dismiss the charge against Jack of attempted murder of Bert.
The criminal investigation process is able to achieve justice to a great to a great extent. They are effective in achieving justice, as they are able to balance the rights of the victim, offenders and society and also provide fair and just outcomes. For these reasons, the criminal investigation process is largely able to achieve justice.