Justice, Mass Media, and crime
Title page 1
Mass Media, corruption, and justice 2
u.s justice system administration process and organization structure 3
Components of criminal justice system 4
Discretion and Force and discretion investigational crimes 5
Sentence alternatives in administration court 6
American correction systems and application in other choices…………………………………………………………………………………………………………7
Ethical issues regarding the criminal justice system……………………………………………………8
References ……………………………………………………………………………………………..9
1: Justice, Mass Media, and Crime
1.1: U.S. justice system administration process and organization structure
The U.S. justice system of crimes comprises of many agencies that deal with problems encountered in crimes. The agencies include federal, state, and local agencies. One agency’s process of lawbreakers may affect another group’s decision. The government branches like executive, legislative, and judicial, give the framework of the system Neubauern & Fradella, 2018). The criminal justice system has various subsystems that house public organizations and employees. Such sub-groups in the order are probation and parole bodies; prosecution and civil defence offices; law enforcement agencies; appellate and trial courts; corrections departments; and custodial institutions. Sentencing guidelines commission may be found in some jurisdictions. Other public and private players in the system are bail bondsmen; defendants; private attorneys; private organizations that offer supervision, treatment of criminals, and assistance Neubauern & Fradella, 2018). Additionally, administrative agencies play a crucial role in criminal law enforcement. Criminal laws and justice policies are formulated by elected officials and legislators even though they play no role in individual cases. The news media, labour organizations, and businesses influence the formulated laws on a policy.
1.2: Components of the justice system of crimes
The policy has coordinated roles in its many different sections. There are three components of a criminal justice system whose aim is to ensure criminals pay and repent for their crimes. These parts are law enforcement, adjudication, and corrections (Neubauern & Fradella, 2018). They are distinct in functionality, and process hence influencing the administration of the system. Various professionals play essential roles in the parts of the justice system. In the law enforcement section, professionals like law enforcement officials investigate and take reports on multiple crimes, collect and secure evidence (Uddin, 2017). The officers may give testimonies in court, and continue with investigations after apprehending an offender. The officers must have at least a high school education to be in a position of enforcing the law. They must, therefore, be knowledgeable about the offender’s rights. This component is vital as it influences the criminal justice system’s administration.
Another element of the U.S. system of law is adjudication or court processes. It is a legal procedure followed by the courts in America while pronouncing judgment on an offender. The courts must go through the following steps: pretrial, arraignment, trial, sentencing, and the death penalty if the crime committed is heinous (Neubauern & Fradella, 2018). Professionals like judges, jury, defence lawyers and prosecutors play a crucial role in ensuring fairness in trial and judgment (Gest, 2018). They work to ensure that the convicts go through fair trials and their rights are not violated. Judges follow guidelines provided by the U.S. and federal statutes while rendering an unbiased sentence. Courts and law enforcement components are different since the latter lacks trials and convictions. The third component is the corrections. This system separates offenders from the rest of the individuals in society. Professionals in this component ensure lawbreakers are rehabilitated, checked behaviour regularly, and hopefully released. Correction officers supervise convicts in the community on parole or probation (Neubauern & Fradella, 2018). The three components are distinct from one another and interconnected. They all play a unique role to influence the administration of the criminal justice system.
1.3: Discretion and Force and discretion investigational crimes
The police officer’s role is to enforce the rule of law and maintain order. They conduct past, present, and future criminal investigations, and if an offender is suspected, they make an arrest (Johnson, 2016). Police are required by the laws of the U.S. to use force where necessary. For instance, an offender may resist arrest during an investigation giving rights to officers to apply force. The use of force has to be done correctly while ensuring civilian rights are upheld. Use of excessive force to the public may result in mistreatment and abuse of suspect’s rights. Pieces of training and policy reforms are made to protect the public, officers involved, and departments. However, some terms which are used by law enforcers to the public become challenging to understand from the audience. A necessary force is deployed by officers depending on situations. Some of the troops that officers use include O.C. spray, verbal commands, deadly force, and officer’s presence (Johnson, 2016). The least amount of power is applied first before progressing on the greatest until the offender’s action is stopped. Administrators produce control documentation like the use of force reports which give warnings to officers who break the law while applying force. The officers are given training, guidelines, and legal update to improve their performance.
Police discretion is a freedom given to law enforcers of deciding life-threatening situations. There is a thin line in making this decision which if an officers cross, he would be breaking the law. Guaranteed levels of discretion are allowed for use to police while on official duty. Preference comes to play while many police officers are performing their work alone. Some decision requires an officer to use discretion which includes whether to; issue a traffic ticket, perform a search, make an arrest, draw her weapon, stop and help someone (Halliday, 2017). Unfortunately, the officers can abuse the discretion without being controlled or seen by the legislative. The use of choice is essential also because it enables law enforcers to simplify their intricate work. The U.S. government gets some relief in expenditure as few people are jailed. Those individuals with minor and first time offence are left to walk free weeding out actual criminals. However, the use of discretion can sometimes lead to discrimination against specific individuals like race and gender (Halliday, 2017). It focuses on criminal activity prone areas ignoring other places that might have criminals. Use of discretion is both a good and lousy undertaking depending on how the law enforcers apply it.
1.4: Sentence alternatives in administration court
Judging an offender who has been convicted is the most frequent use of imprisonment. Court administration looks at other ways to ensure the incarceration of offenders is reduced. Courts use alternative sanctions as a punishment to Courts imposes non-custodial sentences instead of imprisonment as an alternative convict (Russo et al., 2017). Such disciplines may in the form of fines, no condemnation, transformative and restorative justice. It should not be used as an additive penalty to offenders who are sentenced to imprisonment. An alternative to jail term may affect violet rights if not used properly. The lawbreaker who receives the alternative experiences it as a punitive. For instance, the other punishment should not affect the rule breaker’s well-being if it has to be endured with self-possession. Sanctions imposed as an alternative should not humiliate or threaten the offender’s physical integrity.
The court’s administration provides an alternative to incarceration for people with mental health problems and substance abuse. It sees it better to take non- violent criminals who have psychological questions from jails to treatment. They can receive the best supervision and treatment. It is not correct for people to be incarnated without getting a medical checkup. Courts hear cases of those offenders that are nonviolent who had violated small-level felony and have a mental health issue. Drug courts address charges on substance abuse. Courts send offenders or treatments instead of prison after a plea agreement (Porter, 2016). Those who complete the therapy can have their offence removed depending on the guilty plea agreement. However, there are exceptional cases where incarnation would be challenging to apply. The alternative saves the state a lot of money and crime rates reduce since offenders work to ensure they never return to the justice system.
Sex offenders have to be looked at from a different perspective rather than criminal justice outlook. They have a health probe and needs a public health solution. The compassionate method is employed by the administration of courts in the U.S. to ensure those who have an addiction to pornography get help before they commit a crime (Tonry, 2018). Drug abusers have a wide variety of alternatives which are; tracking devices, confinement, and taking part in community services. States like the united states that have high crime rates require restorative justice as an alternative. Citizens’ behaviour has improved in the recent past in American history through the use of other options. The administration of courts sees this as the best cost-effective approach reduction of crimes.
1.5: American Correction Systems and Application in other Alternative
The correction system in America is a collection of agencies controlled by-laws, constitutions, and administrative policies. There are about fifty distinct and separate state, municipal, federal, and county correction agencies. The right to legal counsel is provided by the U.S. Supreme Court and is processed every level of the system. Guidelines of federal systems offer an example to states system to adopt but have no bearing on it (Cole et al., 2018. There are complex relationships involved between local agencies and the state in American correction systems. Many public organizations, profit, and non-profit agencies offer treatment and custody programming. The majority of the correction facilities are controlled and owned by private firms. Critical public correction systems such as health and human services are vital in corrections.
Both state and criminal justice systems use the corrections term as a replacement for agencies that supervise people during incarceration, probation, rehabilitation, and parole state. The correctional system is comprehensive since it oversees many programs and receives less credit. The system’s roles are handling offenders released under a condition, monitoring inmate progress, and those with penalties but require legal supervision. The correction officers in the order play many roles. Some of their tasks include; oversees confinement of inmates, rehabilitation of convicted offenders, reforms, offering counselling services, and organizing education opportunities to the society (Ortiz, 2019). The primary purpose of correction sectors in the U.S. is rehabilitation, retribution, incapacitation, and deterrence. The policies in the system have made the whole process emphasis on treatment and punishment at the same time. Changes have occurred, causing a shift from punitive orientation to focusing on reentry. The U.S. correction sector focuses more on evidence-based evidence, an alternative like restorative justice and specialty. Community supervision is part of reforms and punishment for an offender. Failure to report to a supervising correction officer results in the violation of the law that leads to punishment.
1.6: Ethical Issues Regarding Criminal Justice System
Ethics is defined as how people should treat each other and judicial decisions to be made between good and evil. The American justice system is based on a philosophy that revolves, which also bases its plan on ethics. The practice of law and criminal justice are shaped and built on principles created by ethics. Throughout human history, ethics has been a significant component in this justice of the law. They are implemented and revised often. The revisions provide new measures to officers in their off-duty period and put more emphasis on avoiding personal feelings at work. Professionals like police and representatives of the system are faced with a variety of ethical issues while offering services to the public. The most common ethical problems are avoiding profiling, upholding the law while protecting citizen’s rights, maintain an ethical lifestyle during leisure time, act impartially when talking to civilians, and determination of the right force to use during apprehension (Miller & Blackler, 2017).
A situation where the right course of action is unclear is called an ethical dilemma. This dilemma sometimes presents itself as an opportunity for police officers to gain financially or personally. Some instances of the difficulty offer criminal justice representatives and officers with shortcuts that cause violation of human rights (Hough et al., 2016). An example of such situations may involve officer s’ planting pieces of evidence on a civilian car to support charges on him. Making the right choice by public servants is often tricky due to a lack of clarity on the correct decision to make. Ethical choices cause an individual on duty to hurt civilians or groups of people. However, this choice is the best because it leads to fewer disappointments and harm. Ethical policing are created by laws and conducts procedure frameworks. Public servants like the police can ensure there is justice through principles and thinking critically on an issue.
2: References
Russo, J., Drake, G. B., Shaffer, J. S., & Jackson, B. A. (2017). Envisioning an Alternative Future for the Corrections Sector Within the U.S. Criminal Justice System. Rand Corporation.
Gest, T. (2018). The courts in a fragmented criminal justice system. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(2), 309-320.
Porter, R. (2016). Treatment alternatives in the criminal court: A process evaluation of the Bronx County Drug Court.
Tonry, M. (2018). The President’s Commission and sentencing, then and now. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(2), 341-354.
Cole, D. M., Thomas, D. M., Field, K., Wool, A., Lipiner, T., Massenberg, N., & Guthrie, B. J. (2018). The 21st-century cures act implications for the reduction of racial health disparities in the U.S. criminal justice system: A public health approach. Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 5(4), 885-893.
Ortiz, M. (2019). Restorative Justice in the Criminal Justice System: A Content Analysis. California State University, Long Beach.
Miller, S., & Blackler, J. (2017). Ethical issues in policing. Routledge.
Hough, M., Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Quinton, P. (2016). Does legitimacy necessarily tame power? Some ethical issues in translating procedural justice principles into justice policy.
Halliday, G. (2017). LEJA 518-Issues paper: Police discretion. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation). Western Illinois University, Illinois.
Johnson, R. R. (2016). Dispelling the myths surrounding police use of lethal force.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2018). America’s courts and the criminal justice system. Cengage Learning.
Uddin, M. (2017). Unit 13 Concept Of Criminal Justice System And Police System. IGNOU.