Two Models of the Criminal Process, Essay Example

“The two models of the criminal process?” means that two contrasting approaches that could be used to provide justice through the penal system. It means that the process of serving justice for crime cases follows two practical frameworks or designs. Herbert Packer wrote Parker asserting that there appear to be two distinct criminal equity frameworks. These include proper preparation and wrongdoing control demonstrations (Parker, 1964). The criminal equity framework will not be able to function effectively without these two ideal models, which are restricted to one another. The criminal equity framework should focus primarily on reducing illegal activity, as demonstrated by the criminal control demonstration. If the penal framework cannot successfully address the crime problem, Herbert believes this idea could result in losing a crucial aspect of human freedom.

When there appears to be an increase in the government’s failure to not only catch criminals but also prosecute them, a widespread disdain for legal regulations frequently emerges. According to this theory, preventing crime is crucial to preserving individual freedom. As per the crime control paradigm, this calls for a more cautious approach. It emphasizes the need for severe and immediate punishment for wrongdoers to safeguard the community and instill a sense of security in the general population.

In contrast, the due process approach emphasizes the significance of a just and equitable criminal justice system that safeguards the rights of all parties. It reaffirms that people have the right to be presumed innocent and that the only way to prove guilt is through formal, clearly defined decision-making processes. According to Herbert Packer, the criminal justice system creates legitimate obstacles that the state must overcome before obtaining a conviction.

According to this model, people are notoriously poor observers of the distressing event; Because of this, admissions and confessions made by people in police custody may have been induced by psychological or physical intimidation (Parker, 1964). As a result, law enforcement ultimately achieves what the suspect believes they want rather than the facts. On the other hand, witnesses may be motivated by interest or bias in a way that no one can uncover unless they are specifically tasked with safeguarding the interests of the accused, which is not the case with law enforcement. Using this model, the accused can use facts to refute the charge against him.

The due process paradigm, in my opinion, seems to be the more reasonable of the two. This is because it considers both procedural and substantive factors, emphasizing the necessity of objectivity in the methods used to limit an individual’s rights and the justifications offered by the government. The due process approach also guarantees that laws are applied equally to everyone, without distinction based on gender, age, disability, or nationality. The due process model also admits that the criminal justice system might not always function flawlessly, which could result in excessive charges or false convictions. Fair processes in these situations ensure that the accused isn’t punished unusually harshly. This strategy also encourages techniques that may allow offenders to be rehabilitated rather than punished, thereby helping society by lowering recidivism rates.

On the other hand, the crime control model’s emphasis on prompt and severe punishment could violate people’s rights and result in erroneous convictions. While preventing crime is undoubtedly important, it should not come at the cost of basic human rights and a just criminal justice system. Wayne Welsh and Philip Harris expand on this idea in their book “Criminal Justice Policy and Planning,” emphasizing how crucial it is to incorporate crime prevention and due process inside the criminal justice system. They contend that officials must balance these two methods for an equitable and efficient criminal justice system (Welsh & Harris, 2012). Similarly, Samuel Walker’s “Sense and Nonsense About Crime and Drugs” explores the myths and realities of crime and drug policies in the United States. According to Walker (2010), the criminal justice system must prioritize upholding due process and protecting individual rights. In this text, they contend that policymakers must find an equilibrium between crime control objectives and due process considerations to establish a just and efficient criminal justice system (Cole & Gertz, 2012).

References

George F. Cole and Marc G. Gertz. (2012). The Criminal Justice System Politics and Policies. 10th ed. Cengage Learning. ISBN # 139781111346638

Packer, H. L. (1964). Two models of the criminal process. U. Pa. L. Rev., 113, 1.

Samuel Walker. (2010). Sense and Nonsense About Crime and Drugs. 8th Ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. ISBN-13: 9781285459028.

Wayne N. Welsh and Philip W. Harris. (2012). Criminal Justice Policy and Planning. 4th Edition. ISBN-13: 9781437735000. Cincinnati, OH: Elsevier Science.