Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Crime control vs. due process
Roles and responsibilities of a judge
Crime control vs. due process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Crime control vs. due process
Court visits are meaningful enrichments for law students to further understand the Australian court system through actual participation in court proceedings and understanding the justice system works is vital in deepening that knowledge. After attending the Brisbane Supreme court on 6th September 2017, I was able witness and observe a court hearing of some sort and during my confrontation of the supreme court I witnessed sentences and trials which were engaging and model cases at the most. When attending the court, it was visible to me that arrangement of the benches and all spaces drew a layout which distinguished the different roles amongst powers. The courtroom itself was not very large but was large enough for each voice that was spoken …show more content…
All legal procedures set by statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for everyone so that no prejudicial or unequal treatment will result. People who hold crime control values, on the other hand, believe that the most important function of the criminal justice system is containing and maintaining crime and that laws require strict enforcement. The due process advocate focuses on the need to protect the rights of the citizens and with the Hile hearing and my observation of this case I believe that a combination of both due process and crime control are present in this hearing. The court hearing which involved Shane Hile reflected a due process in a way as after the defendant announced that he was guilty of the crimes he committed, Judge Justice Bowskill took his confession into account later considering this when the decision of imprisonment was to be decided. The defendant did receive a fair trial in my opinion as the judge took into account all of the acts that he took to rid himself of his addiction to the use of cannabis and methamphetamine which had evidence from a doctor that proved that Hile was clean for that time between the sentence and him being custody. The judge has equally given him his rights and a fair case and this displays that due process model of justice which focuses on fundamental principle of fairness. It is not only the due process model of justice element that was reflected in the courtroom but also there was a image of crime
Nowadays, the Australian legal system has three powers, which are legislative, executive and judicial. Legislative power is in charge of making the laws; subsequently those laws will be passed to the executive power to administer the laws it...
Just and equitable legal outcomes to evaluate the case include of many expectations that may be met, the outcome of the case was discovered by fair trial which includes correct punishment theories and procedures, Justice Roslyn Atkinson met these through the trial also making it equitable because the punishment theories were applied to the offender Brett Peter Cowan. Punishment options and procedures in Queensland met the current needs of the society throughout this
One of the benefits of due process is demonstrated in the Belshaw case. The inquisitorial system of justice is based on crime control; the Swiss police had a hard time in Canada with Mr. Belshaw, because of his right to due process, under Canadian law. Both systems of justice share common beliefs, for example, they both look for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In Canada we fight about facts and laws, where-as the inquisitorial system searches for the facts. The adversarial system has a separation of powers with the police, crown, defense, and the judge. It is quite different for the inquisitorial system of justice, the police do the arrest, then they present the facts to crown, which then decide if they have a case and turn over the evidence to the judge. The only problem is that the judge decides what will lead them to the truth. How any evidence was collected is irrelevant. In due process if the police obtain evidence and violate the law or a persons charter of rights and freedoms the judge will exclude the evidence from the hearing, even if it would help or prove that the person is guilty. These two systems of justice are generated in democratic traditions.
The merits of both the adversarial and inquisitorial system will be explored throughout this paper. The Australian rule of law best describes as all law should be applied equally and fairly. The five vital operations of the rule of law includes fairness, rationality, predictability, consistency, and impartially. The adversarial system adopts these operations by having a jury decide on the verdict and the judge being an impartial decision maker. In contrast, the inquisitorial system relies heavily on the judge. This can result in abusive power and bias of the judge when hearing evidence and delivering verdicts. The operations of the rule of law determine why the rule of law is best served by the adversarial system in Australia.
In 1968, Herbert Packer was a Stanford University law professor who constructed two models of criminal process, due process and crime control. The due process model was Packer’s view that criminal defendants should be presumed innocent, courts must protect suspects’ rights, and there must be come limits placed on police powers. The crime control model is a model that emphasizes law and order and argues that every effort must be made to suppress crime, and to try, convict, and incarcerate offenders. Packer’s crime control model suggested that most cases ended in guilty please or withdrawals. In contrast, his due process model suggested that cases that go to trail and are appealed were the most influential. The due process and crime control model differentiate in
The Australian Legal System has a rich and detailed history dating from 1066. Law is made in Parliament. We have four sources of law and three courts with different jurisdictions that interpret the law when giving out justice. Important doctrines act as the corner-stones of our legal system. There is a procedure in the courts for making appeals. Separation of powers exists between officials in the courts, the parliament and the Executive. Everyone in Australia is treated equally under the Rule of Law, no matter their office or status. The Law is always changing as society changes, but it can never be perfect and cannot please everyone.
The governance of our present day public and social order co-exist within the present day individual. Attempts to recognize the essentiality of equality in hopes of achieving an imaginable notion of structure and order, has led evidence based practitioners such as Herbert Packer to approach crime and the criminal justice system through due process and crime control. A system where packer believed in which ones rights are not to be infringed defrauded or abused was to be considered to be the ideal for procedural fairness. “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Thomas Jefferson pg 9 cjt To convict an individual because proper consideration was not taken will stir up social unrest rather then it’s initial intent, when he or she who has committed the crime is not punished for their doings can cause for a repetition and even collaboration with other’s for a similar or greater crime.
For the court observation assignment, I visited the Tolland County Courthouse. I went to court on Tuesday April 4th, 2017 from 11am to 12:30pm. The matters I observed in the courtroom regarded a restraining order from an ex-girlfriend to her ex-boyfriend. The details involved in the case included the welfare of their three-month-old baby and the custody battle.
The architecture of the courtroom establishes clear power disparities within the courtroom setting. The physical dimensions of Courtroom 5.1 were organised in such a way that the hierarchal nature of the court is visually clear from the moment you step into the room. The stratification of power amongst the courtroom actors is displayed through the ‘structural elevation’ of the seating (Carlen, 1976, pp. 50). The magistrate is seated at the uppermost level at the bench facing the defendant, solicitors and public gallery. This particular positioning demonstrates pre-eminence which allows com...
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
Guidelines and principles are set out as ideals, but these are easily subject to discretion, prejudice and errors at any stage (Greene and Heilbrun, 2011). The due process model aims to safeguard the defendant at each stage within the process. However, the conflicting crime control model encourages policing and guilty verdicts, whatever the repercussions (Newburn, 2007). This contest is marked throughout the CJS, “...the more we learn about the Is of the criminal process, the more we are instructed about its Ought,” (Packer, 1968, p. 150). For example, few suspects receive proficient legal defence, yet this is a contradiction to the ideological proviso. It may be interesting to research if juries have experienced and recognised any unfairness within trials. Too often the ideologies of criminal justice, due process and crime control result in miscarriages of justice (Newburn, 2007). When rigid regulatory processes result in bureaucracy, this can only cause more drain on
The courts have the function of giving the public a chance to present themselves whether to prosecute or defend themselves if any disputes against them rise. It is known to everyone that a court is a place where disputes can be settled while using the right and proper procedures. In the Criminal court is the luxury of going through a tedious process of breaking a law. Once you have been arrested and have to go to court because of the arrest, you now have a criminal case appointed against you. The court is also the place where a just, fair and unbiased trial can be heard so that it would not cause any disadvantage to either of the party involved in the dispute. The parties are given a chance to represent themselves or to choose to have a legal representative, which is mostly preferred by many.
Some people say that by watching the court system in action, what once was very unknown and unfamiliar, has now become familiar and useful in helping people become more knowledgeable of what happens inside courtrooms. Most people have not been in a courtrooms and only have the perspective that T.V. gives to them. Now they are able to see what really goes on and now can better understand and relate.
The Work of the Magistrates Court and Magistrates In the legal system there are many different types of courts. This essay talks about the Magistrates Courts and the Magistrates themselves. The office of magistrate dates back to the 12th century when Richard 1 appointed "keepers of the peace". They have performed judicial functions since the 13th century and the term, justice of the peace was being used as far back as 1361.