Comparing The Crime Control Model And The Due Process Model

Determining which model of criminal justice best explains how this case was handled presents an interesting challenge and requires close examination. Bohm and Haley (2014) state there is no "innocent until proven guilty" thought process with the crime control model. Additionally, the model seeks to efficiently resolve cases quickly which requires …"cases be handled informally..." (Bohm et al., 2014). Conversely, "[T]he due process model is based on the doctrine of legal guilt and the presumption of innocence" (Bohm et al., 2014, p. 15). I see a combination of both models, the crime control model and the due process model, competing with each other, oftentimes within the same group of people.

When viewing the case from the police and prosecution

side, for example, there were reports that the investigating officer wanted to pursue criminal charges against Zimmerman (Trotta, 2012). This would support the argument for the crime control model as Zimmerman did in fact kill Martin. This fact was undisputed and, from the police perspective, Zimmerman was presumed guilty. The State Attorney, however, viewed the case from the due process model in which he considered whether or not factual guilt translated into legal guilt.
Moreover, when viewing the case from the perspective of Martin's family, many in the media, and a large portion of the nation, I can see the same competing models. Their views were based on the fact that Zimmerman killed Martin and presumed he was guilty, with no consideration to whether or not Zimmerman was legally guilty. The simple fact that Zimmerman had killed Martin was enough reason to convict and any justifications for his actions were nothing more than excuses offered to allow Zimmerman to escape prosecution for the crime. This is consistent with the crime control model, but in order for this case to receive closure, the due process model needed to be followed. The due process model calls for the case to be tried publicly, thus dismissing the original decision of the State Attorney to not seek criminal charges against Zimmerman. In essence, their position was one in favor of the crime control model, except they wanted the public to be the "experts of administration" (Roach, 1999, p. 13).
What transpired was an example of the due process model. Zimmerman was tried publicly and exonerated. Although he was factually guilty, there were extenuating circumstances, which he was allowed to present at trial, that made him not legally guilty of the crime of Second Degree Murder.