In McClesky v. Kemp the Supreme Court held that a study showing the death penalty in Georgia was imposed on black defendants disproportionately to white defendants failed to establish that any of the decision makers involved in the process acted with a discriminatory purpose. McClesky is a notable case in several respects. First, it highlighted the integrated nature of the criminal justice system and how each component functions to reach a certain result. Second, it emphasized the debate on which actors in the justice system have the most power and what role that power plays in reaching the result. Third, the case also underscored the importance on prosecutors keeping records of their decisions at varying stages of the criminal justice process. …show more content…
The decision to charge or drop charges, what type of charge (such as felony or misdemeanor), or whether to offer a plea, are just a sample of the many powers that prosecutors hold. The greatest form of accountability currently on prosecutorial power are elections. However, despite this, there is still a gap between the powers of a prosecutor and the amount of accountability they hold to the people they serve. This often is a result of many prosecutors across the country running in unopposed elections or elections hinging on the outcomes of individual, high profile cases. Given the vast amounts of power prosecutors hold and how this power is exercised at various stages of the justice system, data-driven prosecution has the potential to provide more accountability for prosecutors. Electing prosecutors at a local level has been a great democratic tradition in our country. However, electing prosecutors also presents certain challenges. One main challenge among them is the tendency for these elections to focus narrowly on noteworthy individual cases the prosecutor either tried or oversaw instead of an overall pattern of outcomes the office has produced. Campaigns either focus on the legal skills or the personal integrity of the candidates. A candidate may be criticized as overly aggressive, or for failing to bring charges in a particular …show more content…
It would be less likely that an office which retains data on its own decisions in many different facets will not be able to run an election explaining to the public the issues and policies it is trying to promote and demonstrating to the public that it seeks to be held accountable. Offices will also have better ways to explain how the policies they ran on are working to prevent crime and at the same time reduce recidivism. Data-driven prosecution will also allow officers to work with other institutions in the community. Accountability can come from many places. Offices will be more proactive and more responsible to the communities on its decisions and its impact. The office will be able to go out into the community and explain its choices, and the office will be able to rebuild community relations. Therefore, the issues touched on in McClesky v. Kemp over twenty years ago still ring true, but data-driven prosecution can alleviate some of the things that hamper prosecutors or create avenues for
Case Summary Part 1 The prosecution is legally bound to disclose to the defense evidence that is favorable to the defendant. Three examples of the prosecutor’s obligations to disclose evidence are Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). According to Rule 3.8, “the prosecutor must make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense, and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by
The American legal system hears many cases relating to liability, but surprisingly, most of these cases concern the prosecutors within their own legal system. In the Supreme Court case Connick v. Thompson, a district attorney’s office denied liability for the extreme misconduct of its prosecutors. The Supreme Court decided that the D.A. office was not liable for the actions of their prosecutors because they did not have a pattern of Brady violations. Contrary to the decision in Connick v. Thompson, the D.A. office should have been held liable for the misconduct of its prosecutors. Brady violations appeared throughout the case, other cases of Brady violations in that D.A. office, and the office’s blatant neglect to properly train its prosecutors.
Prosecutorial misconduct (Westlaw Research Skills Three). iii. Legal issue: Is the prosecutor able to use improper comments that can sway the court against the person on trial? (Westlaw Research Skills Three). iv.
Introduction: The United States Supreme Court cases of Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States, and United States v. Agurs all deal with the prosecution's obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense. These cases establish that prosecutors have a constitutional duty to disclose all evidence favorable to the accused. Failure to disclose this information violates due process and can result in a new trial or acquittal.
Ultimately, Nifong proved in a more extreme example how the prosecutor's dilemma and political influence in the justice system can corrupt individuals -- as every government official is a rational actor who seeks re-election in order to maintain status and power, and unfortunately, sometimes this rationality leads to violations of
Prosecutors must be focused on finding the truth and the facts of the case, not what will look best in
The duty of any criminal prosecutor is to seek justice. A conviction is the end of justice being served prior to sentencing; however justice cannot be served if an innocent person is found guilty. Even though the prosecutor(s) are there to represent the public and has the duty to aggressively pursue offenders for violations of state and federal laws, they shall never lose sight or their own moral compass of their main purpose is to find the truth. In the pursuit of truth, the United States Supreme Court has developed or made rulings in reference to several principles of conduct which have to be followed by all prosecutors to assure that the accused person(s) are allowed the proper procedures and due process of the law granted by the 14th Amendment.
The courts have failed to gain recognition and rejection of the practice of excluding blacks from the jury: First by the composition of the jury panels and second in the use of peremptory challenges to remove black people who reach the panels from which the jury pool is selected. The conclusion that race and racism, continue to be major influences in a jury selection process and in the outcome of juries seems beyond doubt, but Kennedy retains his commitment to anti-discrimination as the appropriate standard in jury selection as in all other aspects of the law enforcement process. Moreover, rejecting procedures that would ensure racial diversity in the jury pool is a complication because they are not focusing on what is more important which
The PBS film “Policing the Police” brings an insider view into the Newark Police Department. As denoted in the documentary, Newark is one of the most violent cities in America with crime rates nine times higher than New York City’s. The Department of Justice investigated multiple cities including Newark and found that reform was a necessity: 75 percent of the time the Newark Police Department stopped people without legal justification. This is evidenced in the film itself through Jelani Cobb’s experiences; many stops he witnesses are done so based on hunches and use excessive force rather than the cops having reasonable suspicion. In my opinion, the Newark PD as portrayed in this documentary desperately requires reform.
Proponents of Nevada's system of electing judges have argued that competitive election of judges is the most democratic way of ensuring that judges remain accountable to the people. Proponents add that elections affirm the electoral beliefs of candidates who present themselves for judicial positions. These arguments rest on the reality that judges cannot be politically neutral in their personal capacities. Rather than conceal the political penchants of judicial candidates, it is better to have them known. Such political inclinations can only be known through campaigns that precede judicial elections.
“The law may be color-blind as it is written, but not as it is enforced.” Racial bias in the death penalty can be traced back to Furman v. Georgia, where handing down the death penalty sentence, unfairly, constituted as a cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The reinstatement of the death penalty with its new sentencing guidelines, implemented by the Supreme Court, was to ensure that the death penalty sentence was used in a constitutional way. Despite these guidelines, somehow, racial bias has found a way to thrive. It has been documented that an individual is more likely to receive the death penalty in a case where the victim is White than in cases where the victim is Black.
Criminal trials are not perfect, but by requiring evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, they can prevent several miscarriages of justice. Considering that innocent individuals may arrive at trial for misidentification, police misconduct or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time, these individuals are at a disadvantage since by being offered plea deals they avoid trial and avoid the burden of “ beyond a reasonable doubt,” required to be pronounced guilty. Thus, in a CJ system saturated with cases, plea bargains become a mechanism for prosecutors and defense attorneys to bypass trials. For defendants, the fear of incarceration and the unpredictability of juries or judges create the conditions of coercion that might persuade defendants to prefer plea deals over
In the formal criminal justice process, there are important decision makers that decide whether to keep the offender in the system or dismiss the suspect with no future consequences. Suppose a law was set in place
When comparing and contrasting COMPSTAT and Community Policing one will find that both are quite similar in purpose, yet somewhat different in how information is obtained and who is accountable for results. COMPSTAT is a statistics driven model of policing. The data that is collected by law enforcement agencies is utilized to allocate resources to specific problems in an effort to address them quickly. This is not much different than intelligence led policing, which is becoming the latest trend within law enforcement. Agencies that utilize the COMPSTAT model hold their commanders accountable for statistical data showing no change or an uptick in crime in a specifically identified hotspot.
Criminology Case Study: Meredith Kercher Name Academic Institution Author Note Class Professor Date TABLE OFCONTENTS1 CASE/OFFENDER 3 OFFENSE/CRIME 4 MOTIVATIONS/BACKGROUND 4 THEORY 5 VICTIMS 6 COSTS 7 ADJUDICATION/DISPOSITION (PROSECUTION/SENTENCING) 7 CONCLUSION 8 REFERENCES 10 Criminology Case Study: Meredith Kercher