Category: American Criminal Justice System

Throughout the history of the American justice system there has been no shortage of evolutions both in practice of all aspects of the American justice system but also evolutions in technology that makes the justice system more precise. This increase in accuracy among all phases of the justice system maintains the assertation that someone will be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. However, before all of these current advancements in practice and technology many people were wrongly convicted of crimes they did not commit. These convictions have recently been overturned within the past two decades. One such exonerations of guilt was that of Jeff Deskovic in 2006.

Jeff Deskovic was convicted the rape and murder of a 15-year-old female in 1990. The case file states that in November of 1989 the fifteen-year-old girl was taking pictures for her school’s photography class. Two days later her body was found naked and showed signs of being raped and strangled. Police imediately turned their attention to Deskovic who was only 16 at the time. The police stated that Deskovic became the number one suspect due to him “being late to school the day after the victim disappeared”. Also, the police claimed that “he had been overly distraught with the victim’s death, visiting her wake three times”. Deskovic further aroused police suspicions when he started to conduct his own investigation. And between December of 1989 and January 1990 police spoke with Deskovic multiple times.

During the duration of this case there were multiple issues with police misconduct as well as forensic malpractice. During the span of time between increased suspicion in Deskovic and Deskovic’s conviction police asked Deskovic to take a voluntary polygraph test. There is a few problems with the administration of the polygraph test. One of the first things noticed is that a sixteen-year-old is not a legal adult. This means that they cannot submit to a voluntary polygraph test without parental consent. Another problem with the administration of the polygraph test was that the polygraph was done via private company this private company was ran by a local sheriff. This sheriff was informed that he had “been hired to get a confession”. While original police reports state that they received a confession from Deskovic upon review the confession was coheresed and involuntary and his constitutional rights were violated during the polygraph process. Deskovic was taken to the polygraph testing location without a lawyer or parents present. Throughout this polygraph process Deskovic was interrogated for six hours in these six hours he had been subject to three different polygraph tests and in between these three different polygraph tests he was subject to relentless questioning by the police. During the last polygraph test “One of the detectives accused Deskovic of having failed the test and said he had been convinced of Deskovic’s guilt for several weeks”. Only after six hours of questioning and three sessions of polygraph testing did Deskovic begin to give his false confession. Deskovic began to get confused when officers asked him to give an account of the crime, Deskovic began to switch between talking in the third person and the first person when discussing the event. “Deskovic said, “I lost my temper” and admitted he had hit the victim in the head with a Gatorade bottle, put his hand over her mouth and kept it there too long”. During this coursed confession Deskovic exhibited signs of a mental breakdown, Deskovic was in the fetal position under the table sobbing.

Aside from Deskovic’s forced confession the police began to analyze the biological evidence on the victim according to the innocence project report “The victim was found naked and her autopsy revealed genital trauma. Semen was identified on the vaginal swabs from her rape kit”. Even though there was semen present at the scene and inside of the victim there were none on her clothes. The police tested the semen found on the scene and told Deskovic that if the semen was not a match he would be cleared as a suspect, however the police lied to Deskovic. The DNA test came back negative for a match between the semen found on the scene and Deskovic, however after these findings became known the police did not disregard him as a suspect. Instead the police changed the narrative of the events of the crime. The narrative shifted from the rape and murder happening consecutively to the rape never happening at all. The state argued that the victim had consensual sex which was the source of the semen however Deskovic murdered the victim in a fit of jealous rage.

Despite the biological evidence exonerating Deskovic, Deskovic was found guilty of first-degree rape and second-degree murder in January 1991. This conviction however lacks overall merit due to the change in narrative by the state. After the analysis of DNA, the state changed their interpretation of what happened during the crime. The new interpretation stated that the victim was never raped, the state maintained that she had consensual sex prior to the murder and Deskovic murdered her in a fit of jealous rage. However even though the state maintains that the victim was never raped Deskovic was convicted by a jury of first-degree rape.

Deskovic was convicted in January of 1991 and remained in jail until September 20, 2006. Deskovic’s case was overseen by the innocence project. With the evolution in DNA analysis and the creation of New York States DNA databank of convicted felons the victims original rape kit was tested again with this newly evolved technology. When tested the DNA not only exonerated Deskovic but also matched with a man named Steven Cunningham. According to the innocence project report Steven Cunningham was a convicted murderer in prison for strangling his girlfriend’s sister. With this exoneration by DNA evidence Deskovic was released from prison on September 20th, 2006. According to the innocence project report Deskovic’s indictment was dismissed on November 2nd, 2006 where he was deemed innocent after serving 16 years of his 15-life sentence. The innocence project also stated that Steven Cunningham confessed to the crime that Deskovic served 16 years of his life for.

This case allows for a lot of insight as to how our justice system has changed just over the past few decades. Following this case through all of its steps you can see that every level of the justice system has started to change. Looking specifically at each step, firstly the investigative process has changed dramatically over the past few decades. Especially in recent years police have been being held more accountable to their actions as it pertains to not only the physical aspect of the job but also how they present their findings in court. Police are being held more accountable also with the interpersonal aspect of people and how it pertains to getting confessions and dealing with how confessions come to fruition weather their forced confessions or not and this is in part due to the evolution in understanding the psychology of people and how they deal with interrogation and stressful situations. The next step would be the forensic side forensics has become so much more applicable to every investigation being done today. Not only has forensic analysis become more precise but more specifically DNA analysis has made massive strides in the past few decades as it pertains to homicide and rape investigations. Not only has the accuracy of DNA analysis evolved but the collection of DNA in criminal databases. This collection of DNA in states like New York allow for the quick arrest and conviction of repeat offending criminals.

This is one of the many examples of how the justice system on all levels has changed in order to prevent false convictions. These changes ensure that the courts can maintained the assertation that beyond a reasonable doubt the person who is being convicted of a crime is definitively the person who has committed the crime.

In this essay, I will explain what the key principle of classical criminology is and what influence it has on our criminal justice system. The main key principle of classicism is the Enlightenment thinkers who identified individuals or criminals to have rationality, hedonism, and punishment acting as a deterrent to crime. Rather than thinking about religion and what happens after death, Enlightenment thinkers sought to improve human circumstances on Earth. The reason, science, religious tolerance, and what they called ‘natural rights’ were all-important to these intellectuals (‘What Is an Enlightenment Thinker?’, 2022). I’ll be using to main key theorists of classical criminology, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. The criminal justice system can be defined as “interrelationships among law enforcement, the courts, corrections, and juvenile justice” (Palmiotto, 2021).

Classical criminology is a legal system approach that emerged in the 1700s during the Enlightenment (18th century). Social contract theory was elaborated upon by philosophers such as Cesare Beccaria, John Locke, and Jeremy Bentham to explain why people commit crimes and how communities may effectively combat crime. The classical school of criminology has a significant problem in that the concept that all criminals are rational is neither generalizable to the entire population nor correct, due to the reality that biological conditions may prevent an individual from thinking and acting logically (Carrabine, 2014).

Rationality is a way of analyzing and comprehending. It aids in the identification and categorizing of perceptions, experiences, and concepts into foundation knowledge. The reason is a mental process that demands objectivity and dispassionate evaluation of facts, reasoning, and deduction. In a philosophical sense, the reason is absolute. Some philosophers argue that reason is nothing more than a weapon for winning debates, while others argue that it raises people above their animalistic nature (Rydgren, 2020). Individuals have free will and the ability to make rational decisions, according to Enlightenment thinkers in criminology, so offenders make rational decisions on whether or not to commit crimes based on an analysis of cost, risk vs. benefit. As a result, crime prevention should focus on influencing the decisions that offenders make. This influences the criminal justice system because according to the rational choice viewpoint, the criminal is a rational individual who assesses the possible costs and rewards of committing a crime. Despite criticism, this strategy is prominent as part of the dominant attitude of the criminal justice system in Wales.

Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), interoperate that hedonism was based on a conception of criminals as following a rational choice principle which would dictate whether they engage in crime or deviance. The phrase ‘hedonism’ comes from the Greek word that means ‘pleasure’. The criminal tries to seek pleasure and avoid pain. The criminal justice system employs different forms of hedonism. According to psychological hedonism, criminal behavior is motivated. They are motivated by the pursuit of pleasure. Pursuit of pleasure, according to ethical hedonism, is normative. If the grounds for the criminal’s behavior and acts are evident, the legal system can proclaim the appropriate sentence for the lawbreaker. The use of hedonism in criminal activity implies that everyone thinks, analyses, and acts uniquely. When the system learns to recognize the individual, a pattern in thinking might be discovered. It is the responsibility of behavioral scientists to investigate such trends, but the criminal justice system and law enforcement agencies may also utilize this information to monitor and critically examine the conduct of dangerous offenders. Serial murderers are a type of criminal. The psychological rationale that drives such criminals to execute specific acts exists (‘Hedonism in the Criminal Justice System’, 2013).

Beccaria asserted that three aspects of punishment make a major difference in deterrence: the swiftness of punishment, certainty of punishment, and severity of punishment. Certainty of punishment is when people commit a crime, they should believe they have a good chance of being detected and suffer the consequences (Hostettler, 2011, p. 124). Punishment should be carried out as soon as possible after the act, according to the principle of the swiftness of punishment and if the penalty arrives too late, the deterrent impact may be lost because the individual will be unable to connect the punishment to the unlawful conduct. The severity of punishment is when the punishment is severe enough to offset any possible advantages derived through crime. In the eighteenth century, the death penalty was spread all over Europe, it was not only used for serious crimes but also minor offenses such as theft. Jeremy Bentham’s long-term critical examination of English law and society created the groundwork for the early nineteenth-century political changes that preserved from violent social revolution. He is most recognized for his utilitarian concepts and for broadening the scope of legal theory beyond legal issues. In addition, he and his brother devised the panopticon, a facility for imprisonment and monitoring (O’Donnell, 2020). Torture was practiced in many countries as well and this embraced the inquisitorial system of criminal procedure (Hostettler, 2011, p. 3). The inquisitorial system is a form of legal practice in which the judge attempts to find facts while also representing the interests of the state in a trial (‘Inquisitorial System’, 2022). Beccaria stated that if harsh sanctions do not prevent crime, they should not be applied. Instead, sanctions should be commensurate to the extent of the harm inflicted by the crime. According to Beccaria, the goal of punishment is not to inflict agony on the criminal, but to deter future offenders from committing crimes. Beccaria felt that to accomplish so, punishment should be definite and fast. He felt that if criminals knew they would be punished and if punishment came as soon as possible after the offence, it would have the greatest chance of deterring crime. Beccaria also fought against the death sentence, which was another contentious subject. In his opinion, the state does not have the authority to respond to violence with greater violence. Since the death sentence is only temporary, it cannot be particularly effective in preventing crime. Instead, long-term sanctions, such as life imprisonment, would be more effective in reducing crime since potential criminals would find this a far more unpleasant state than the death sentence (Margit, 2018).

Human rights are norms that respect and preserve the dignity of all people. They control how individuals live in society and with one another, as well as their relationship with the government. Human rights legislation requires governments to do some things and forbids them from doing others. Individuals have obligations to respect each other’s rights (‘What Are Human Rights?’, 2015). Criminal penalties are a type of societal reaction against criminal offenders, intended not just at preserving society against crime, but also at protecting social and individual objects. Criminal penalties are imposed when criminal law is broken, a criminal court procedure is carried out, the offender, the criminal offence, and the circumstances for imposing sanctions are identified. They always deny or restrict some human rights or freedoms as a necessary and fundamental technique of obtaining justice, when it cannot be done in any other way, such as upholding the rule of law in a given community by individuals, this is because they have been convicted that they should obey the law since it is for the general welfare of everyone, not only for themselves, including that specific individual who believes that such behavior specified by the legal norm should not be respected or broken, However, regardless of the justification for applying such sanctions that seriously infringe on basic human rights and freedoms (justified by the state’s mechanism for enforcing justice), they must not cross the line of humanity, necessity, inevitability, and human dignity, particularly personal, moral, and physical integrity (Ashtalkoska-Baloska, 2020).

In conclusion, the key principles of classical criminology all influence the criminal justice system exclusively. As previously stated, the fundamental important premise of classicism is the Enlightenment thinkers who recognized individuals or criminals as having rationality, hedonism, and punishment functioning as a deterrent to crime. Classicism can be used when the criminal justice system examines the illegal act rather than the person who committed the crime. Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham both helped a lot with the changing of the justice system today, as now we do not use such violent actions such as the death penalty or torture.

The main components of the criminal justice system are the police which they main job is to enforce the law. Another main component of the criminal justice system is the correctional agencies which their main job is to carry out sentences imposed by the courts. The main job of a probation or parole officer is to supervise a case load of offenders from post release to parole or probation. They see them monthly, and the main goal is to get them to become productive members of society (Secretary 2015). The other big component of the criminal justice system is the criminal courts which their main job is to conduct fair and impartial trials. The United States constitution requires that criminal justice case processing be conducted with fairness and equity; this requirement is referred to as due process. Which is simply put, means procedural fairness. Evidence-based policing says that officers, administrators and staff should not only be armed with the right equipment, knowledge of the law, and defensive protection, but also have as much knowledge about what tactics and strategies work best to fight crime.

Problems that keep the system from functioning effectively and efficiently are police officers. The police personality often has a bit of their own personal beliefs and values involved. While on the force, police officers learn the appropriate job behavior. Police corruption can range from minor to major unlawfulness. Examples include taking minor or major bribes, denying civil rights to people, and committing violent crimes. There are plenty dangers that come with being a police officer. There are some really dangerous people that could shoot them or do worse. Even training accidents can be dangerous for them. Unwarranted disparities and unduly harsh sentences undermine trust in the rule of law and offend the basic principles of fairness and justice. In an era of limited resources and diverse threats, there is a public safety imperative to devote the resources of the criminal justice system to the practices that are most successful at deterring crime and protecting the public. Some critics say that a number of the most controversial problems related to the criminal justice systems today are reactions to earlier problems. Drug policies, incarceration rates, and the death penalty are commonly named on lists of the most questioned criminal justice issues. The numbers have shown that police officers treat African Americans different and rougher than white people. Racial profiling is the practice of using race or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a crime. The first thing that goes through an African American’s mind when he or she has encountered the police is that they were racially profiled (Free 1997). It has been countless cases where non-white people were wrongfully imprisoned just because it “looked” like they could do it. Over the years the law enforcement has been completely biased on who they arrest for the crime, and sometimes it can end in a deadly scene.

The Uniform Crime Reporting program was started to make a cooperative effort to bring crimes to their attention. The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) gather about 18,000 police departments to give a monthly report on the crime they have on their communities and this create the statistics on the crime that is happening (FBI:UCR). Part one crimes are serious crimes like murder, rape, or burglary, and white-collar crimes, they track them together. Part two crimes are all other crimes, like fraud and embezzlement, that are tracked together. This is a good tool to see where the rates of crimes are up or down and where hot spots are in the country. The bad problem is that all crime is not tracked and not all the crime is not reported. Studies show that more crimes are not being reported then being reported, and the uniform crime report cannot get an accurate data spread like this. White collar crime is a big crime that does not always get reported, but a burglary for three hundred dollars would be. Also, the most serious crimes get reported. For example, if a criminal committed rape, burglary, and murder then the uniform crime report will only accept the murder charged because that is the most serious one. The inconsistency of the uniform crime report can be misleading when the report comes back with the rates of crimes. The uniform crime report can be used as a tool to measuring crime, but not a main source for seeing if crime is up or down. Crimes that are not being reported might be a crime that happens regularly, but it is not being reported to the UCR. The primary purpose of the uniform crime report is to get reliable information back so law enforcement administration and management can operate functionally.

The modern-day criminal justice traditions and practices have evolved for past changes in society. Americans relied on religion and sin as a means of shaping society and its behaviors. Now we have levels of punishment for different kinds of crimes. Indeterminate sentencing urges rehabilitation through pretty unspecific sentences. The positives are the inmate’s time can be shorter if him or her behavior is good. Alternative sanctions are court ordered unpaid work or community service like cleaning the streets or highway. Usually the court gives this to minor offenses. Retribution is an act on offenders for their criminal activity. Incapacitation imprisons the criminal so they cannot commit a crime. Deterrence is an attempt to scare the criminal through punishment or fear of it. Rehabilitation tries to make the offender a better person. Restoration converts the victim of criminal act as ‘wholly’. Congress came together after writing the constitution and decided to create the Judiciary Act of 1789 (Schmalleger 2018). The act founded the Supreme Court and district courts. The dual court system is the division of the courts into two separate systems, one state court and one federal court, and each state has its own court.

The arrest is the first step into the criminal justice system. An arrest is when an officer of the law takes a suspect into custody. The officer has to read them their miranda rights which are as follows: You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have the right to an attorney, and if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Afterwards, they take the suspect up to the station and hold them their until they know the next step. There are three steps into a criminal case, but they all have a process in each one. The first step is arrest, the suspect is taken into custody where he or she is then booked or processed for the crime. If they are able to receive bail then they can post it, and if not, they are kept in the holding cell. The next step is arraignment, and this is where the criminal appears in front of a judge and read the charges to the defendant. They either plead guilty or not guilty. If a plea bargain cannot be reached the case is brought to trial and a jury will decide if he or she is innocent beyond reasonable doubt. If the defendant is found guilty, they have to wait for sentencing and pay their debt to society. When the criminal is done, sometimes they are put on parole. Parole occurs after the defendant served jail time and request an early release. They have to follow the conditions, or they will go back to prison. If the defendant is put on probation, then they get to avoid jail all together. Probation is a sentence that does not involve jail time. Probation is usually given to misdemeanor crimes and nonviolent offenders. Helps the offender stay out of jail.

Sir Robert Peel was the founder of modern policing. He came up with a way to introduce important reforms to the British criminal law. His biggest aftereffects of introducing the reforms were that fewer crimes were carried out by a death penalty sentence and education for inmates first came to light. Sir Robert Peel had nine basic principles. Peelian principle one is where the police officers are here to prevent crime and disorder in their neighborhood. Police officers are in our lives to protect us and keep danger out of our communities. Principle two states the ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions. The people in the community have to get along with the police officers or they will not be able to do their jobs efficiently. Principle three sums up to say that the police force seeks to work with the public to maintain their respect. Peelian principle four states when the police use physical force it puts a strain on the relationship with the community. Principle five simply say that police officers should not cater to every need of the public, but just do their job right and provide service. The next peelian principle says police officers should only use physical force when the exercise of advice and warning did not have an effect. Principle seven wants people to understand that police officers are a part of the community too and just get paid to watch over it full time. Police officers should always do their job and not take advantage of it by being corrupt, says principle eight. The final principle is that police officers should show results by having crime and disorder disappear, and not just doing their job right and trying to deal with it (Nazemi 2009).

A plea deal is an arrangement between a prosecutor and a defendant, where the defendant pleads to a lesser charge for a lenient punishment. If a plea deal cannot be reached, the case will move to trial.

References

1. Free, marvin D. jr., author. african-americans and the criminal justice system. (1997). Criminal Justice Review, 22(1), 110-111. Retrieved from http://db07.linccweb.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.db07.linccweb.org/docview/233188832?accountid=10674
2. Schmalleger, F. (2015). Criminal justice : a brief introduction (Eleventh edition.)
3. Sandy Nazemi (2009) http://www.lacp.org/2009-Articles-Main/062609-Peels9Principals-SandyNazemi.htm
4. FBI:UCR https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/aboutucrmain
5. Secetary, Press (2015) https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/07/14/fact-sheet-enhancing-fairness-and-effectiveness-criminal-justice-system