Ethics and Structure in the Criminal Justice System

1. Can a single standard of ethics be applied to all criminal justice agencies? Or is the world too complex to legislate morality and ethics? When looking at the standard of ethics one singe standard cannot be applied as each branch has different duties and tasks. There is a sense of moral ambiguity that everyone has different moral and what is right and wrong. When looking at police officers, they have the right to take away someone’s freedom. If they deem a certain situation to be dangerous, they may shoot. But for instance, the media may say that the situation wasn’t dangerous, and the officer didn’t have to shoot. The court has a duty to perform with efficiency, but with so many cases it is hard to give both time and justice and efficiency. The world is complex and full of hypocrisy that makes it hard to create a single standard. 2. Describe the differences between the formal and informal justice systems. Is it fair to treat some offenders informally? The difference between the formal and informal justice system, is that in the formal system means that the laws are enforced, and you know your punishment. In the informal system you do not know exactly what your punishment is. The informal system uses discretion and is enforced through social groups. With the formal justice system, the government is involved. There are 15 steps to the formal system. The informal system may not go through all of theses steps and may get settled. This usually involved plea bargaining and deal making. 3. What are the layers of the criminal justice “wedding cake”? Give an example of a crime for each layer. When looking at the layers of the criminal justice wedding cake there are four levels level one is if the defendant is rich and wealthy which in return gets a lot of media attention and usually receive the full spectrum of criminal justice procedures such as OJ Simpson. Level two are series Felonies that demand justice such as rape or robbery. third level or less serious offenses often committed by gong or first-time offenders. These usually don’t see court as it is often met with please, reductions, probationary sentences, or dismissal overall. The last level includes hundreds of different misdemeanors such as vandalism or possession of controlled substances. 4. What are the basic elements of each model or perspective on justice? Which best represents your own point of view? The crime control perspective says that the proper role of the justice system is preventing crime through sanctions. The justice system is worth the price if it controls crime rate. The crime control model says not to treat people but punish the guilty. The rehabilitation perspective says that crime is the result of social inequality. The due process perspective says that fair and equal treatment to all people accused of crimes. Decisions be made carefully so no mistakes are made. Nonintervention perspective has limited involvement with criminals. The justice system creates sigma which locks people into the criminal life. The equal justice perspective says equal treatment for equal crimes. Decisions must be standard and have rules and regulations. The last model is restorative Justice which says that criminals are to be reintegrated into society. I believe a mix of models as no one has my views completely, the part of the due process model where everyone be treated equal and equal justice where it says equal treatment. But also, in the nonintervention perspective where being charged with a crime creates a sigma and locks them into the criminal life. 5. How would each perspective on criminal justice consider the use of the death penalty as a punishment for first-degree murder? Crime control perspective would believe in the death penalty, because it would scare off other crimes and punish the guilty. The rehabilitation perspective would not believe in it, because it would not be helping criminals. It is not helping which is the American view. Due process would believe in it if it treated the criminal would be treated equal, and the decision was made careful and no error made. The nonintervention would not believe in this as it is too intrusive and does not need government intervention. The equal justice would believe in the death penalty if the crime deserved it, like murder. As long as the decision is standard and regulated. Finally, restorative justice would not believe in it, because it is not helping criminals get reintroduced into society, it takes them out of the equation completely.