Crime Control Vs. Due Process Models

CRIME CONTROL VS. DUE PROCESS MODELS 13

CrimeControl Vs. Due Process Models

Abstract

Thecriminal justice system is usually a complicated system and keeps onchanging emanating from emerging laws and crime awareness. Thecriminal justice system may differ from country to country, dependingon the laws governing a country. In the United States, the criminaljustice system is usually guided by two models the due process andcrime control models. These two models have different ways of workingwithin the criminal justice system, but have boundaries (Hawkinset al, 2003). This paper aims at describing the two models withregard to their common grounds and their disagreements in regard torights, constitutional issues, and public policy outcomes.

Thedue process model entails a criminal justice model that works underthe understanding that an individual that has come into contact witha criminal agency cannot have their rights declined without followingappropriate legal measures. Thus, any person that has been or isbeing charged with a crime has several rights that the criminalagencies have to uphold since the person is protected under humanrights, which can be said to have a relation with the due processmodel. According to Packer (1968), the due process model seems tohave less confidence in the criminal agencies like the police, andhas the belief that amid the few criminal cases, mistakes can occur.Besides, according to this model, there is a chance of criminalagency acting dishonestly or corruptly. Because of this reason, thismodel is believed to be useful as it can limit the coercive powers ofa criminal agency. Besides, in case there is an incidence indicatingcorruption or mistake, an individual is capable of defending againstthe mistake or corruption using the due process model. Therefore, theprimary objective of the due process model is establishing a system,which a person is innocent until the court proves him/her guilty.

Onthe other hand, the crime control model is a system that condemns aperson for doings an action that is seen as criminal. This modelprioritizes the conviction of persons that have committed a criminalact without the need of waiting the court to decide whether theperson is guilty or not. Packer believes that the crime control modelconcentrates on the conviction and is likely to risk the convictionof an innocent individual in achieving its goal. Therefore, the crimecontrol model can be seen as a scheme set in punishing individualsand making a difference towards a society in mitigating crime andshowing the mass that through these arrests and convictions, it maydepict the criminal justice as being beneficial and effective to thesociety. According to this model, an individual is guilty unlesshe/she becomes proven innocent by the courts.

Theworking of these two criminal justice models is different, but thetwo models usually have common grounds. A common ground amid the twomodels is that they both attempt to tackle criminal acts andpunishing individuals that have committed an act that is considereddeviant by the society. Through punishing individuals that commitcriminal acts, both models try to encourage good behavior in societyby eliminating criminal conducts. Besides, the two models have acommon ground in that they help in the mitigation of crime insociety. Regardless of the manner in which the two models work, theyhave an overall impact of reducing crimes in society. On the otherhand, the two models have an assumption that the criminal process isordinarily invoked by those charged with the responsibility of doingso, when it appears that a crime has been committed. The two modelsbelieve that a degree of scrutiny and control should be exercisedwith respect to the activities of law enforcement officers and thesecurity. Thus, both models incorporate the idea that law enforcementis socially desirable due to the crime preventive effects. Further,both models incorporate the idea that there must be some limits tothe power of the government in pursuing the underlying objective ofpreventing crimes (Gaines&amp Miller, 2013). In addition, the two models have a common groundin that they believe the criminal justice system has to operate withset boundaries of the constitution. Hence, they believe in adheringto the standards set in the constitution.

Thedue process model and crime control model usually differ in differentaspects, despite their common grounds. One of the areas that the twomodels differ entails the right of individuals. According to the dueprocess model, a person cannot be deprived of liberty, property, orlife without following the right legal procedures and safeguards. Themodel follows the constitution in understanding the rights guaranteedto an individual and the processes that may be followed insafeguarding these rights. According to this model, a person can onlylose these rights in case the court of law decides so however,appropriate procedures must be followed in denying a person theserights. Any individual charged with a crime is usually required tohave his/her rights protected through the criminal justice system asguided by the due process model. Therefore, there is protection of aperson’s right, when the due process model is used. However, thecrime control model does not seem to value the rights of anindividual. The model tends to have an absolute reliability on policefact search, treating arrestees as if they are already guilty.Usually, the crime control model believes in the effectiveness of thepolice agency in denying a person’s rights. Once the police agencymakes an arrest, the person arrested is assumed to be guilty, thusdenying the person his rights. The person can only gain his/herrights upon the court making a decision indicating his/her innocence.This is not the case in the due process model since a person arrestedis taken to be innocent and retains his rights, when the due processis being followed of proving that he/she is guilty. Rather thanstarting from innocent to guilty, the crime control model acts in thevice versa direction, where it assumes an individual is guilty unlessproven innocent by the court.

Inregard to the constitutional issues, the two models follow theprovisions of the constitution, but the way of acting is different.For instance, when considering the due process model, theconstitutional guarantees for an individual has to be considered bythe prosecutors and judges during trials. The chief difference in theapplication of constitutional issues stems in based on theconsideration of a person as guilty. Since the crime controlconsiders a person arrested as guilty, then the constitutionalprovisions will be applied to the person as if he is guilty. It isafter the court trial that the provisions of the constitution will beapplied as the court decides. In case the court decides that theperson under arrest is guilty, then all the constitutional provisionstowards a guilty person will apply to the individual. On the otherhand, when it comes to the due process model, the constitutionalprovisions on the rights to an individual are considered. Since therights of the accused are usually protected by this model, differentrights provided by the constitution are usually guaranteed under thismodel. Besides, since an accused person remains innocent until thedecision of the court is reached, all the constitutional provisionsthat apply to an innocent person usually apply accordingly until aperson becomes proven guilty. According to the constitutionalprovision, the due process is critical prior to making a judgment ofa person suspected to be a criminal (Falk,2010). Besides, the constitutional issue of using the police isanother concern that brings a clear difference amid the two models.According to the constitutional provisions, police is considered asone of the agencies that can be used by the criminal justice system.However, the extent over which this agency is used differs betweenthe two models. Although police agency has been given the power ofarresting criminals, the crime control model targets the expansion ofthese constitutional powers such that police are given theresponsibility of convicting. The police agency is seen to play anexpanded responsibility in the crime control model compared to therole they play in the due process model (Roach,1999).

Onthe other hand, the two models also disagree in regard to the publicpolicy outcomes. On the issue of public policy, there are differentissues to consider that are associated with the use of the models(Einstadter&amp Henry, 2006). These issues include stability, justicestructure, discretionary powers, and guilt among others. Comparingthe two models, the crime control model seeks to aggravate long termstability, while the due process model seeks in aggravating shortterm contingencies (Jaishankar,2009). Through treating almost every person as guilty and seeking tofind his/her innocence, the crime control worsens the long termstability since an a person purported to be a criminal may end upsuffering for long before his/her innocence is proved. Besides, sincea high number of individuals may be arrested and assumed to beguilty, when using the crime control model, it may take a long timebefore the cases of the individuals stabilize due to the highnumbers. On the other hand, the due process is likely to aggravateshort term occurrences since it protects the rights of the accused,but the rights of victims. On the justice structure outcomes, thecrime control model leads to closed bureaucratic structures ofjustice, while due process leads to open, linking-pin structures ofjustice.

Besides,the crime control model differs in the public policy outcomes whencompared to the due process model in terms of discretionary powers.In the crime control model, the discretionary powers are usuallygiven to the police and prosecutors, while in the due process model,discretionary powers are usually left with the judiciary andcorrectional officials. This is usually as a result of the forcesthat influence the actions and the functioning of the two models.When it comes to the issue of guilt outcome, the two models have adifference. When finding out whether a person is guilty using thecrime control model, police are usually involved in finding factsthat can make an individual guilty and help in the accusation of theindividual. Therefore, the guilt that is attached to an individualwhen using the crime control model entails factual guilt. However,when it comes to the due process model, a process to find thelegality of incriminating an individual is usually followed.Therefore, the legal process is usually followed in establishingwhether a person is guilty in this case, different criminal justiceagencies may be utilized. Hence, the guilt that is attached to aperson when using the due process model entails legal guilt.

Furthermore,the two models differ in public policy outcomes since they differ inthe sentences that result. The crime control model is usuallyassociated with the result of having harsh sentences while the dueprocess model is usually associated with the outcome of lenientsentences. Since the crime control process considers a person guiltyand tries to find out whether he is innocent, there is a likelihoodof harming innocent individuals, which makes the sentences harsh.Conversely, when it comes to the due process model, an individual islikely to have a lenient sentence because the model ensures that aperson becomes treated like an innocent person until the moment hebecomes proven guilty by the court. Lenient sentence is likely toemerge since the rights of the accused are usually protected.

Inaddition, the two models differ in their public policy outcomes sincethe crime control model focuses in attaining quick, informal justicewhile the due process model focuses on attaining formal,individualized justice. The crime control model provides an informaljustice since it tends to expand the role of police in finding outfault and guilt in individuals. As a result, corruption and mistakesare likely to be associated with the model, leading to informaljustice. However, when it comes to the due process model, a legalprocess must be followed in finding out whether an individual isguilty of an act that he/she has been claimed to be involved inthus, there is formal justice in the due process model.

ACourse of Action for a Law Enforcement Agency that Considers BothViewpoints

Alaw enforcement agency that considers these two models will need somecourse of actions in order to make both viewpoints work. One of thecourses of action that a law enforcement agency would need entailsformulation of rules that will guide them. Rules are critical inguiding a given process, no matter how right a certain process mayseem. When presented with the viewpoints of the due process model andcrime control model, law enforcement agency is likely to be confused,which rules to apply since some of the policies proposed by the crimecontrol model conflict with those of the due process model.Therefore, there is a need of coming up with rules that can be usedwhen considering both viewpoints. This is necessary in order toprovide guidance concerning what to do, when faced with a certainissue in dealing with crimes. Without defining the guiding rules,when considering both viewpoints, it would be exceedingly cumbersomehandling criminal acts since at one time law enforcement agency mayuse the rules of the due process while at another time they mayutilize the rules of the crime control model. This may be difficultbecause it may bring confusion in dealing with criminal acts andindividuals purported to be criminals. Thus, in order to eliminatethis ambiguity in handling of criminal acts, it is critical toformulate rules that the enforcement agency will be using in case theagency chooses to combine the viewpoints of the two different models.

Anothercritical course of action that law enforcement agency should considerin using the different viewpoints of the models entailsimplementation of the rules. It is always important to implement therules that have been set in dealing with crimes, when using bothviewpoints. This helps the law enforcement agency officers to beconversant with what is required, when dealing with a certain issue.For instance, a rule may be made concerning what the agency should doin case there are sanctions or when sanctions should be allowed. Insuch a case, the rules may exist, but may not be well known by theofficers in the law enforcement agency. Thus, implementation of therules is critical since it will allow law enforcement officers to beconversant with the existing laws. Hence, implementation of the rulesguiding the two viewpoints is critical as it makes it easier to knowand follow the rules. Implementation programs can be launched afterthe formulation of the guiding rules in order to encourage theadoption and utilization of the rules guiding the use of theviewpoints of the two models. In addition, the implementation of therules is also critical since it can help the public in understandingwhat is required of them by the combination of the two models.

Inaddition, another course of action that is critical to the lawenforcement agency in considering both viewpoints entails making adecision concerning the source of power in shaping the operations ofthe criminal process. It is critical to determine what agencies ofgovernment will have the power of picking and choosing amid thecompeting demands. This will help in eliminating the collision ofpower or authority that may emerge within the operations of thecriminal process. Collisions may hinder the proper working of thecriminal process since they may bring unhealthy competition that maykill the operations of the criminal process. In establishing thesources of power in the criminal process, it is also critical toestablish the limits of power this will help in eliminating cases oflegislative supremacy, where a body given authority may control otherbodies dealing with the criminal process.

Justificationfor Recommendations

Itis critical to come up with rules that will guide the combination ofthe viewpoints because the two viewpoints have different rulesguiding them. Failure to establish guiding rules will lead to a totalfailure of the system since law agency desiring to combine theviewpoints will be at a dilemma concerning, which rules to considerthose of the crime control model or those of the due process model.In order to remove this ambiguity, establishment of the guiding rulesemerges as the only solution to solving the ambiguity. Besides, it iscritical to consider implementing these rules. The implementation ofthese rules will make it easy to follow the criminal processestablished the law agency officers will be capable of following andusing the rules, when there is implementation. Thus, implementationof the rules is critical since it will allow law enforcement officersto be conversant with the existing laws. On the other hand, it willbe crucial to consider defining the sources of authority, when a lawenforcement agency combines the two viewpoints.

Conclusion

Thedue process and crime control models are the two models used in thecriminal justice system of America. These two models have severalcommon grounds that they share. One of the common ground is that theyattempt to tackle criminal acts and punishing individuals that havecommitted an act that is considered deviant by the society. Besides,both models incorporate the idea that there must be some limits tothe power of the government in pursuing the underlying objective ofpreventing crimes. In addition, the two models have a common groundin that they believe the criminal justice system has to operate withset boundaries of the constitution. However, the two models differ indifferent aspects such as accused rights and outcomes in publicpolicy. The due process model seems to have less confidence in thecriminal agencies like the police, and has the belief that amid thefew criminal cases, mistakes can occur. On the other hand, crimecontrol model prioritizes the conviction of persons that havecommitted a criminal act without the need of waiting the court todecide whether the person is guilty or not.

References

Einstadter,W. J., &amp Henry, S. (2006).&nbspCriminologicaltheory: An analysis of its underlying assumptions.Lanham, Md: Rowman &amp Littlefield.

Falk,G. (2010).&nbspTheAmerican criminal justice system: How it works, how it doesn`t , andhow to fix it.Santa Barbara, Calif: Praeger.

Gaines,L. K., &amp Miller, R. L. R. (2013).&nbspCriminaljustice in action.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Hawkins,D. F., Myers, S. L., &amp Stone, R. N. (2003).&nbspCrimecontrol and social justice: The delicate balance.Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.

Jaishankar,K. (2009).&nbspInternationalperspectives on crime and justice.Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.

McDonald,P. P., &amp Greenberg, S. F. (2002).&nbspManagingpolice operations: Implementing the New York crime control modelCompStat.Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Pub.

Nasheri,H. (1998).&nbspBetrayalof due process: A comparative assessment of plea bargaining in theUnited States and Canada.Lanham, Md. [u.a.: Univ. Press of America.

Packer,H. L. (1973).&nbspThelimits of the criminal sanction.Stanford, Calif: Stanford Univ. Pr.

Roach,K. (1999).&nbspDueprocess and victims` rights: The new law and politics of criminaljustice.Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Siegel,L. J. (2010).&nbspIntroductionto criminal justice.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.