According to Pollock, (2017) a prosecutor’s duties are to a system, or society and not an individual. In this incident, a prosecutor has the responsibility to represent the system and review the evidence that a crime has been committed. The media is the problem in this incident. As we all know the media is always in a hurry to break a story that they commonly get their facts incorrect. Or they speculate on what little information they have. In this incident, as a prosecutor I would not arrest the individual on probable cause, but instead I would refer this incident to the grand jury. This would take several months and by that time the media story would have quietly disappeared from the public. Then I would proceed with criminal charges
The police responded to a tip that a home was being used to sell drugs. When they arrived at the home, Gant answered the door and stated that he expected the owner to return home later. The officers left and did a record check of Gant and found that his driver’s license had been suspended and there was a warrant for his arrest. The officers returned to the house later that evening and Gant wasn’t there. Gant returned shortly and was recognized by officers. He parked at the end of the driveway and exited his vehicle and was placed under arrest 10 feet from his car and was placed in the back of the squad car immediately. After Gant was secured, two officers searched his car and found a gun and a bag of cocaine.
The duty of prosecutorial disclosure is one that is safely entrenched in our understanding of the legal system. The prosecution must disclose evidence that relates to the case and is favorable to the defendant. While not explicitly stated in that duty, it also means that the histories of the witnesses are available to the defense. And when police officers are called to testify at cases, their disciplinary histories come into play as a factor in their credibility. Taking all this prior information into account when addressing the dilemma of the police officer with a good record who used the department computers to look at pornography using his login information, and then lied about it only to confess when the internal investigation proved
Seymour Wishman was a former defense lawyer and prosecutor, and the author of "Anatomy of a Jury," the novel "Nothing Personal" and a memoir "Confessions of a Criminal Lawyer." "Anatomy of a Jury" is Seymour Wishman's third book about the criminal justice system and those who participate in it. He is a known writer and very highly respected "person of the law." Many believe that the purpose of this book is to put you in the shoes of not only the defendant but into the shoes of the prosecutor, the judge, the defense lawyer and above all the jury. He did not want to prove a point to anyone or set out a specific message. He simply wanted to show and explain to his readers how the jury system really works. Instead of writing a book solely on the facts on how a jury system works, Wishman decides to include a story so it is easier and more interesting for his readers to follow along with.
While the police officers have rights to investigate suspect, the duty of care of the officers to suspect exist and the officers were under a legal obligation to exercise care for Mr. Hill. ...
A crime being committed is the first event to initiate our criminal justice system. On June 12th 1994 a double murder was reported at the residence of Nicole Brown Simpson the ex-wife of the then beloved Orenthal James (OJ) Simpson. It was discovered that Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman had been brutally murdered and the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) began their investigation, this being the second step in our criminal justice system.
Reaching epidemic proportions and spreading like a disease, prosecutorial misconduct has cut across geographic and socio-economic areas with the effect of infecting the criminal justice system (Lawless, 2008). Prosecutorial misconduct takes place when a prosecutor breaks the law or code of professional ethics during the prosecution stage. Legal and ethical violations can weaken the conformity to the law and rules that are to be followed within the criminal justice system (Cromwell, P. F., Dunham, R. G., & Palacios, W. R., 1997). In this paper, existing research focused on factors related to prosecutorial misconduct will be presented. This paper will also examine potential remedies that exist to confront prosecutorial misconduct.
“may prosecute with earnestness and vigor-indeed, he should do so. But while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one” (as cited in Neubauer & Fradella, 2014, p. 150).
Dan Locallo is a very contradicting man. When he began his career as a prosecutor he was anything but polite to the defense lawyers. Locallo himself describes himself as “kind of an asshole” towards defense lawyers (Courtroom 302, 59). During his time as a prosecutor, Dan Locallo became intrigued by the opportunity to become a judge. When Steve Bogira asked Locallo why he wanted to become a judge, his reply seemed simple. Locallo claimed that he never wanted to become a judge because of a “power-trip” he does claim that “the power of attraction was a great influence” (Courtroom 302, 59). However, Locallo admits that the real reason why he wanted to become a judge was because he would have the “ability to make decisions, to do justice” (Courtroom 302, 59). As a judge, Locallo seems to express three different personalities, which tend to change depending on the current case at hand. His personalities are being compassionate judge, being an understanding judge, or being a hard-nose tough judge. Each of these personalities are not only determined by the case, but also by whether Locallo will profit on the long run; whether or not he will get reelected as a circuit judge at the end of his term.
When a prosecutor is deciding whether a case should be prosecuted in the courts and charges should be filed against someone, prosecutors consider two important questions: Is it in the best interest of the public to proceed? And, is there a strong reasonable likelihood that there will be a conviction? If the answer to both are yes, then there is the task of deciding whether there is enough evidence to prosecute the case and whether the evidence is reliable and can it be used in court. This means carefully assessing the quality of the evidence from all related witnesses before reaching a final decision.
Scott Peterson was an educated man from California Polytechnic State University where he graduated with a B.A. in Agricultural Business. He was married to his wife Laci Peterson who was also pregnant with their unborn son. In December of 2002 Laci Peterson went missing in the Modesto, California area where she shared a home with Scott. Once the investigation of Scott’s missing wife started authorities began to suspect Scott as a suspect in her disappearance. In April of 2003 a fetus and a female torso that was missing hands, feet, and a head were found on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay. The San Francisco Bay area was where Scott was boating the day of Laci’s disappearance. The body was later identified as Laci Peterson and the fetus as Laci and Scott’s unborn son. Scott was also arrested in the month of April shortly after the discovery of Laci and their son’s body and was later sentenced to the death penalty. Over the course of this paper I will cover the whole event of the disappearance of Laci Peterson, relating it to a sociological theory, the impact the event had on our society and how the media had influence over this national event.
Prosecutors, without doubt, are the most powerful and influential decision makers in the criminal justice system. The decisions they make on who will be charged with a crime or whether to accept a case at all, which charges to file, and various other vital decisions. When it comes to making these decisions, prosecutors possess the power to exercise their discretion at their choice without many limitations. Prosecutors, without doubt, are the most powerful and influential decision makers in the criminal justice system. The decisions they make on who will be charged with a crime or whether to accept a case at all, which charges to file, and various other vital decisions. When it comes to making these decisions, prosecutors possess the power to exercise their discretion at their choice without many limitations. In some cases, determining between life and death. While it is important that an individual in a position that has vast knowledge of the criminal justice system, such as a prosecutor, be able to make these decisions without bias or malicious intent. I do believe that too much of that
In the article “what happens to police officers accused of murder” written by Demian Bulwa, he states that when officers do face trial jurors are reluctant to second guess officers, since officers describe the situations they deal with as “high stake”. In the article it also mentions the factors that pressure prosecutors to file charge against officers. These factors include intense scrutiny of the victims and their role in sparking the confrontations; and intensive media coverage and community response which usually involve protests that later on turn into
The victim, John Kondejewski, a sergeant in the military as well as battle school instructor, was killed on May 15th, 1997 in Brandon Manitoba by the defendant, his wife, Kimberley Kondejewski, in the bedroom of their home (Sheehy 88). The couple was married for over 17 years before the proceeding occurred. Kimberly shot her husband three times that Thursday night; first shot to the chest, second and third shot were closer range, which led the police to charge her with first-degree murder (Sheehy 115). However, she also tried to end her life, fortunately she was only wounded. She even had composed a suicide note addressed to their children, Jennifer and Christopher. The judge assigned to the case was Justice Rodney H
First responders play a crucial role in the establishment of a crime scene. Upon arriving at the scene, the first responders have checked for living victims and have rendered aid. It’s important to create a perimeter around the crime scene (this can be altered if additional evidence is found outside the initial crime scene). Only emergency personnel should enter and exit from the central entry point to control contamination, by creating an exit point; it helps avoid any excessive traffic through the crime scene. By secure the scene to ensure that no evidence is misplaced or damaged, or otherwise compromised. Do a cursory check of the crime scene to obtain any transient evidence and secure any weapons found at the scene (in this case it was already at the scene with the suspect). Crime scene analysts and investigators communicate with first responders and are quickly briefed on the situation, and now a more thorough search can be conducted.
obligation is to protect the innocent as well as to convict the guilty, to guard