Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
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.
Introduction
Problem analysis involves studying a problem thoroughly with an aim of understanding how the problem came about and how it developed into its current state. Problem analysis is important because it helps to find out the cause of a problem and its solution as this is the basic assumption in problem analysis. When one identifies the cause of a problem they can eliminate it and solve the problem. The discussion in this paper will identify a problem in the criminal justice system and research possible programmatic solutions by benchmarking best practices.
Main Text
The criminal justice system is dogged by many problems in many countries across the globe. We have the problem of wrongful convictions. Innocent people are convicted and sent to jail for crimes they did not commit while the guilty ones go free.
This is because the criminal justice system is controlled by defense lawyers who are wily judges and the entire court staff that bully witness. This leads to erosion of the public confidence in the criminal justice system because the legitimacy of a criminal justice system rests on it s effectiveness and fairness. It is said to be effective and fair if the accused are investigated thoroughly and convicted after all evidences have been exhausted and they are found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. For example some judges have been sent for refresher courses on how to avoid wrongful convictions (Risman, 2002:1).
There are many factors that may lead to wrongful convictions. The first one is sham prosecutors, overconfident eyewitnesses, lying informants from jailhouses and the inept lawyers and overzealous prosecutors who jeopardize the chances of the accused for fair trials and conviction of the accused prior to the trial by the public and the media especially in the case of high profile cases (Risman, 2002:1). We also have wrongful convictions through mistaken identification by witnesses and lack of channels to address the wrongful conviction.
Identification by eyewitnesses is unreliable at times. This is because many innocent people have been people identified as the wrongdoers and hence the ideal that “no innocent man shall be punished “(Samaha, 2005:241) has not been achieved. These identifications by eyewitnesses account for over half of all wrongful convictions. There is the instance when seven people identified Bernard Pagano as a robber while the real robber was Ronald Clouser (Samaha, 2005:241).
The faulty identifications occur because people are not very good observers and they are not as good as a camera. In addition when under stress we have inaccurate observations which are compounded by our difficulty in identifying strangers and especially from another race according to studies done by psychologists (Samaha, 2005:241).
Racial discrimination leads to wrongful convictions. In a study done in 2004 more Hispanics in the United States were imprisoned than whites for the same crimes. This is due to a number of factors like racial profiling where more Hispanics were arrested in their neighborhoods which are considered high crime areas. Furthermore when taken to court most were incarcerated because they were represented by public legal counsel who was underpaid. The issue of mandatory minimums led many behind bars even for low level crimes (Samaha, 2005:252-255).
Other people are convicted wrongfully due to police corruption. Some policemen will take bribe not to appear as witnesses or to make false confessions on behalf of rich accused. Some will also respond very slowly when called for assistance, others sleep on their jobs and hence do not do proper investigation leading to wrong people being convicted (Samaha, 2005:254). This is because when taken to take a person is assumed to be guilty and trying to b proved innocent instead of the vice versa. The court should not be taken as a place for the guilty one alone to avoid these wrongful convictions.
The police should be made to take responsibility for their actions. They should be prosecuted and disciplined. When they bring false or illegally obtained proof or evidence in court it should not be used to avoid wrongful convictions.
The exclusionary rule should be used. It throws out good evidence because of bad police behavior” this rule prohibits the use of confessions that are obtained by force thus go against the right that protects an individual against self-incrimination. This is because sometimes the accused are tortured and forced to confess they committed a crime. Due to the pressure, fear and pain they go ahead and plea they are guilty and end up behind bars. The rule also prohibits the use of faulty eye witness identification and evidence got through the violation of the right to counsel. However, most countries do not have this rule except England, United States Canada and Germany (Samaha, 2005:254).
Racial profiling and discrimination should be avoided to avoid wrongful arrests of innocent people just because of their skin color.
The policemen should not only record the confessions but the whole interrogation process. This would help to determine whether the police used threats, deception etc to get the confessions they present in courts (Douglas, Burgess W, Burgess G & Ressler, 2006:502). This would also help to know whether the confession originated from the confessor or the idea was put into him or her.
The police should follow the guidelines when conducting eye witnesses’ identifications. A study done by the Innocence Institute of Park University in 2005 found out that many policemen do not adhere to the guidelines. There should be a double blind method where the police conducting the identification is not involved with the investigation at hand. The witness should also be told that the suspect might not be among the mug shots. This will prevent them from identifying the wrong person just because they do ant want to be seen as having failed (Douglass et al, 2006 :498).
Conclusion
More importantly scientific based evidence should be used to avoid wrongful convictions because it is more reliable for instance in case of a rape DNA should be used to identify the suspect as it is more reliable than identification by a witness. The criminal justice system should prevent wrongful convictions by pursuing the truth at the investigation stage. The detectives should use their knowledge to search out the truth objectively. On the other hand the prosecutors should not only be interested in winning a case but in the actual truth. This will ensure that the innocent do not get convicted but the guilty ones get to pay for their actions. This will also help to restore public confidence in the justice system by the system is fair and effective.
References
Douglass, J. E., Burgess, A.W., Burgess, G.A. &Ressler, K.R. (2006). Crime classification Manual a standard system for investigating and classifying violent crimes (2nd Ed.), New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 0787985015, 9780787985011.
Risman, B. (2002). What is wrong with the Criminal Justice System ? Web.
Samaha, J. (2005). Criminal Justice (7th Ed.), Auckland: Cengage Learning ISBN 0534645577, 9780534645571. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
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.