Compare And Contrast The Due Process Model And Crime Control Models

When examining criminal justice systems it is important to note two important criminal justice models, the due process model and the crime control models. Most governments function based on several aspects from each criminal justice model; these crime models were initially introduced by Herbert Packer in 1968 (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2014). The due process model in the criminal justice system reflects the formal decision making process and highlights the importance of ensuring the criminal justice system works upon reliable knowledge (Cole, Smith, & DeJong, 2014). The crime control model is based on efficiency and ensuring crime is repressed as much as possible; this model promotes bargaining and often encourages defendants making deals with

The due process model points out the human error factor in evidence gathering and places emphasis on the adversarial trial process by which the prosecution has to prove the accused party is guilty (Aviram, 2011). This due process model is seen in many popular culture television shows in America today like Law & Order and CSI, however it is not an accurate representation of the criminal justice system as a whole. Bargaining, or making a plea deal with the prosecution is a trait emphasized in the crime control model but it is also common practice in the American criminal justice system (Aviram, 2011). While the due process model has several positive aspects it seems to work too well in the United States; as of 2008 the U.S. had 2.3 million people incarcerated which indicates the due process model is working as described but it is also unprepared to account for the social consequences of the existing prison system that is perpetuated by guilty verdicts ("Criminal Justice Fact Sheet", 2016). The due process model, although slower, gives more rights to the defendant and ensures the legal system works toward a resolution in the fairest way possible. Unlike the crime control model, due process works and works without infringing upon the constitution rights of the