Criminal Procedure Policy Paper
The United States’ criminal justice system has conventionally worked under two models; one is the Crime Control Model, and the other is the Due Process Model. The Crime Control Model illustrates the notion that those people involved in criminal activities should be trailed in an aggressive manner and those found guilty punished in an aggressive way. In addition, the Crime Control Model puts emphasis on additional security agents and powers of prosecution. On the other hand, the Due Process Model highlights the view that the accused rights should be well safeguarded in the process of investigation. The Due Process model focuses on lessening the powers held by the government. These models can be compared and contrasted when there is a need to shape a criminal procedure policy in a society (Lieberman, 1999). This paper compares and contrasts the role of due process and crime control models and how they shape criminal procedure policy.
The Due Process Model assumes that a person should not be denied his or her existence, property or liberty without suitable safeguards and legal processes. This model makes it take a moral line in protecting and respecting people from the superfluous of the law. This allows any person who is supposed to be charged with a criminal activity to be safeguarded by the law. The model safeguards the people’s rights and presumes that while a person may be charged with criminal offences, he or she has a right to be defended by the law (Slobogin, 2005). This model has been employed by many human rights activists to argue that even offenders have civil liberties, and they deserve to be secured.
The Due Process Model gives support to the criminal justice system because it attempts to provide for separation of power. This is between a number of entities that take part in the system of criminal justice. Unlike the Crime Control Model that presumes that when a person is arrested, he or she should be dealt with as a criminal, the Due Process Model assumes where a person is arrested and can await a free and fair trial with the verdict either being innocent or guilty. In the Crime Control Model, this means that when an arrest is made, the person is separated from his or her freedom or rights and is perceived similar to people who are convicted. After an arrest, the suspects are supposed to face punishment set by authorities without regard to whether there is evidence of committing a crime or not (Lieberman, 1999).
The Fourth Amendment deals with searches that are not reasonable and seizure of property, as well as individuals. The amendment permits security agents to be given search warrants that describe the location to be searched, the extent, individual, and persons to be seized. This Amendment favors the Due Process Model because a person has a right to demand the evidence form from an officer who is conducting the search. Failure to produce a warrant indicates the privacy and security of a person is violated. The model requires the criminal justice system to prove a due course that will be employed to judge a suspect. The system should be transparent and fair before a person is judged to be a convict. If the search or warrant conducted by a law enforcement agent is not fair or transparent, then the fourth amendment will have been violated (Reed, 1998).
The Fifth Amendment ensures that citizens are not held responsible for a crime except when the jury concurs or if the suspect has committed the criminal activity in public service. The Crime Control Model contravenes the Fifth Amendment. This is because the Crime Control Model presumes that the criminal justice system has a mandate to lessen criminal activities. This should not entail proving whether the person involved in a criminal activity is guilty or innocent. The model encourages radical techniques of solving criminal problems. It emphasizes that crime is as a result of an individual’s irresponsibility and the person should be prepared to face punishment as payment for being irresponsible (Slobogin, 2005). For that reason, the model encourages criminal punishment as a means of lessening the rate of criminal activities in ways that will dissuade other people from taking part in criminal events.
The Sixth Amendment demands fast trials that do not last for decades and also permits for inclusion of a jury that is impartial. This is perceived to save time. The Crime Control Model applies this amendment to charge criminals. The Crime Control Model has a belief that when a person is arrested in the criminal justice system, there may be a negative impact that slows the progress of the justice system process. Moreover, this means that any person who is a suspect should be punished without passing them through the criminal justice system. Also, the model contests keeping suspects in custody while they wait for their trial time on the basis that this will be a faulty precedent (Lieberman, 1999). It also disputes suspect custody because it assumes that when authorities hold suspects while they await trial, it will function as a reason to encourage other individuals to engage in criminal activities.
Nonetheless, the Crime Control Model provides support to a fast means of taking care of offenders. It does not provide for taking the offenders through a criminal justice system process that is lengthy. It hypothesizes the quicker the systems of criminal justice, the more effective it will be to cope with people who engage in crime. The model assumes the duration used by the legal process may be utilized by the law enforcement agents to cope with criminal activities. Also, it assumes the harsher the punishment, the adequate the justice system will deal with crime. As a result, this model provides for any course that will assist the system of criminal justice to cope with criminal activities in an effective way and a fast manner. This is because it simplifies the way criminal events are dealt with (Reed, 1998). It perceives crime repression as the most essential duty of the criminal justice system.
The Bill of Rights can also be applied to the nation through the Fourteenth Amendment. This Amendment protects the liberty, life, and property of all people in the country. The Amendment could apply against actions carried out by the state. This is because refusal to provide them would be perceived as refusal to provide due process of law. The due course line deems a right to be included, not for the reason of being outlined in the Bill of Rights, but because it is necessitated by the due process definition. Moreover, this definition may vary over a period. Nonetheless, the Fourteenth Amendment allows congress to enforce the article provisions through proper legislations (Reed, 1998).
Lieberman, J. (1999). A practical companion to the constitution. California: University of California Press.
Reed, A. A. (1998). The Bill of Rights: Creation and reconstruction. New York: Yale University.
Slobogin, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing due process in criminal justice contribution from Law and social science. Florida: University of Florida Press.