Robbery: Due Process and Criminal Control Methods

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Due Process Model
Crime Control Model
Discussion
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Nowadays, efforts to contain the high rates of crime in society have been faced with many challenges. The hard economic times have proved difficult to many in our society. There is widespread unemployment among young people which has led to an increase in poverty and decreased living standards. As a result, criminal activities have risen to an alarming rate with elaborate criminal gangs being formed. According to Walklate (19), robbery is the act of taking something that is of high value from somebody through the use of force or using other means like using threats. The common law defines robbery as acquiring somebodys property forcefully and depriving the full enjoyment of the property.

The main characteristic and differentiation of robbery is the application of violence or/and intimidation. There are different types of robbery with the main ones being; armed robbery which involves the usage of guns or other weapons, carjacking which is taking from somebody forcefully, and piracy, among others. Every nation around the globe must come up with measures of reduction of crime in their areas of jurisdiction.

Various approaches are applied to deal with robbery and associated crimes. Some nations are of the view that these social evils are highly influenced by nurture that is the environment one grows in. this has had good results as lawbreakers undergo a vigorous rehabilitative session to guide them in correcting their wayward behaviors (Mappes and Zembaty 13). The other approach is on being answerable to the crimes committed and therefore the robbers are subjected to spending long periods in correctional facilities around the country. Whichever approach is used the end should always justify the means. This essay focuses on the due process and crime control methods applied in diluting robbery in our society and the reasons why they should be applied efficiently in dealing with this crime.

Due Process Model

The two approaches to criminal justice are in a normative state and there is always a risk of seeing one or the other as better or worse depending on the application. However, flexibility is desired in dealing with situations in the criminal process. Due process provides that everyone should be presumed innocent until a court of law makes a ruling on the innocence or guiltiness of the suspect. Its ideologies are based on the formal structure that constitutes the law system rather than on controlling the crime. It is of the notion that it is better to have a robber or any other criminal free in the society but undergoing the complex judicial process rather than have an innocent person in jail whose rights have been curtailed (Bowling 58).

This model fails to appreciate the ability of crime investigating and prosecuting officers and views them as being informal and much liable to commit errors during the process of their work. It stresses that wrong information and facts can be collected especially when one is in jail due to the experienced emotional stress (Maguire et al 54). Therefore, the person is subjected to unnecessary duress and often investigators may use psychological or even physical coercion to obtain the needed information. As a result of all these, many hours are needed in retrieving evidence that must be accurate and reliable.

Before a suspect is either sentenced or acquitted, the courts move slowly taking many months or even years while still, the robber is free in our streets in the cities. This model believes that a person is not responsible for their acts but the influence of society plays the bigger role in determining the deeds of individuals. If society never instilled good morals in the children while they were growing up, they are liable to engage in social crimes like robbery. Hence, society must correct the behaviors mainly through rehabilitative procedures.

Crime Control Model

The second approach to the criminal justice system is the Crime Control Model. It is a theory that stresses crime reduction in our societies by increasing the police and their arresting and prosecutorial powers. It emphasizes curtailing the criminals rights of liberty by putting them in police cells until the courts can be able to determine their cases. It gives priority to governments around the world for having the powers to protect society without giving much consideration to the liberties of individual citizens (Mappes and Zembaty 56). If the law enforcement agencies fail to curtail criminal activities in society, it will increase the breakdown of public order.

This will cause the disappearance of human freedom. This model places more weight on governments to ensure all suspects are screened, the guilt ones are determined and they are placed under custody where they belong. This guarantees social freedom to the law-abiding citizens of the nation. In eliminating robbers in our society, all suspects with enough backing are put in cells awaiting the determination of their cases by a court of law. This will give freedom to other innocent people to walk about in their daily hustles without fear of encountering robbers. This will have many benefits and economic growth will be recorded.

Discussion

All the above methods are recommendable in fighting crimes in our society. However, each of the models has its disadvantages through viewing crimes from different perspectives (Farrall and Calverley 20). To solve these problems, a hybrid system should be incorporated in dealing with criminals in our country. It is worth noting that none of the approaches is superior to the other and their incorporation of the stronger points of each will work a bigger way to solving robbery problems in our society. To start with the society has a bigger role to play in a childs behaviors. The due process model views a criminal not as due to his or her deeds but as a result of influences in their homes or the society at large.

The first change should start at homes where parents should be liable for their childrens behavior. A parent should ensure a child is brought up in a moral home and neighborhood. Virtues should be instilled when these youths are at a tender age to discourage engagement of immoral behaviors. If the child fails to listen to this guidance he or she becomes liable for their actions. This will reduce cases like happened in the Canadian Supreme court where judges reduce the sentence of a convicted criminal as a result of failure in the family-like mistreatment or engagement in drugs.

The Canadian Supreme Court considered a Battered Woman Syndrome as an acceptable defense for a murder charge (Lavallee para.5). The case was a landmark ruling in which as a result of frequent beatings by her husband, she could not take it anymore and resulted in shooting him as he walked away from her. Such a vice is detestable in society but the judges ruled in her favor.

The police and the prosecutors should be empowered in handling the suspected criminals and where the evidence alluded is enough arrests should be made. They should be taught on efficient scrutinization of evidence to retrieve credible information that can be used in court (Bowling 58). This will ensure only the suspects with strong evidence against them are locked away in cells. Also, by so doing the innocent ones are left free until the courts can prove otherwise. The citizens will therefore build a strong trust in the judicial system and this will reduce criminal robberies in our society.

Conclusion

In conclusion, neither the Due Process nor the Criminal Control approach is superior to the other. Both are applied to reduce social crimes like robbery in our society through a different approach. It is, therefore, necessary for governments to establish a common point between the two approaches in diluting modern-day robberies. This will result in a society that is free of crimes.

Works Cited

Bowling, Bernard. Criminological Theory 1. Cleveland: Pearson Education Ltd, 2002. Print.

Farrall, Stephen, and Calverley, Adam. Understanding desistance from crime. Berkeley: Open University Press, 2005. Print.

Maguire, Mike, Morgan, Rodney, Morgan, Rod, Reiner, Robert, Lester, Ray and Albert Walford. The New Walford. 4th ed. Oxford, NY: Gower Publishing Company Limited, 2007. Print.

Mappes, Thomas and Zembaty, Jane. Social Ethics. 7th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill , 2006. Print.

Lavallee, V. R. Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Court of Canada, 1990.

Walklate, Sandra. Understanding Criminology. New York, NY: Open University Press, 2007. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!