CAN YOU DO THIS FOR ME DUE 5/18/2020
replies of 150250 words each in response to 2 other classmates threads; you must also provide at least 1 “scholarly” reference in support of each of your replies . The scholarly references and scriptures you incorporate in your initial posts and both replies must come from outside the class . That is they can NOT come from the class, i.e. the textbook or scriptures listed in the assignments/PowerPoints. You must go out and search for them by yourself.
Responding to a classmates post requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward. Thus, the response post is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon initial posts to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced in the initial posts. As such, reply posts that merely affirm, restate, or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous post(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions. Remember to provide at least 1 “scholarly” reference in support of each reply.
submit all replies by 10:59 p.m. (CST) on Monday of the same module/week.
REPLY #1
Lauren Bresnock
DB1 Collapse
It is my opinion that the focus of the criminal justice system is generally more criminal rights based. I say this but also understand that restorative justice is gaining in popularity and it is likely to see a major shift within the next ten to fifteen years. Communities are allowing the victim to be more involved which aligns with restorative justice. Currently the criminal rights focus is more prevalent. The Constitution is always a hot topic because a violation of the constitution could end up having a criminal case thrown out which does not provide justice for the offender or the victim. Careful focus on the offenders inalienable rights are more concerning as to not hurt the case in any way. A few years ago, my dads truck was stolen from his property. The offender was a classmate of mine who left his own vehicle in my parents driveway (I know, right?). While the police were searching the vehicle a brown paper bag of drugs was found. That charge got dismissed as the windows of the vehicle were down and anyone could have placed the drugs in that vehicle. The charge would have been a violation of the offenders right to avoid self-incrimination.
I think these two competing ideas can certainly be harmonized if done correctly. The victims or victims families of a crime want punishment and justice. Part of that justice could be the offender facing what they have done not just in a court room, but in a setting that puts them face to face with the victim or victims family. If the offender does not really care, that type of justice may not be entirely effective, but it can be healing for the victim or victims family. According to Ward and Langlands, Offenders ought to be held accountable but they also should have the chance to turn their lives around. A cornerstone of this process is the recognition and protection of their human rights by the community and its criminal justice agencies (2008, p.370). Offenders and victims both deserve justice, but that justice can be served, and the offender has the chance to do good and be better than they were. I believe the idea of justice is ever changing depending on who is being asked but as stated in the bible, Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the LORD your God is giving you (Deuteronomy 16:20, NIV). Justice for the offender and the victim must be met in order to begin restorative functions.
References:
Deuteronomy 16:20 – Follow justice and justice alone, so that you m… (n.d.). Retrieved May 15, 2020, from https://www.biblestudytools.com/deuteronomy/16-20.html
Ward, T., & Langlands, R. L. (2008). Restorative justice and the human rights of offenders: Convergences and divergences. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13(5), 355-372. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2008.06.001
REPLY #2
David Franks Justice
During my 23 years in law enforcement, I have been exposed to many different cases and situations that I see as defining my beliefs for the focus of criminal justice, restorative justice and criminal rights. Every case I worked whether as a patrol officer or deputy has given me a feel for how the system works as it relates to individuals, the procedures and the final outcomes. Knowing how to navigate through the system makes law enforcement officers successful in their job, but it also helps gain an understanding as to why things happen the way they do.
The focus of Criminal Justice is the part where a person is arrested, charged with a crime and enters into the court system. It is made up of law enforcement, the judges and lawyers. Criminal justice is the building of a case for probable cause, preparing a case for court, presenting the case to a jury and the sentencing or dismissal by the jury or judge. All the components must work together to be successful, not only for a conviction, but to see that the person is given due process and a fair trial. However, there is always the conflict between the three parts of the courts and how they look at the law and the system as a whole. Law enforcement officers may find that the courts do not understand the job that is done in making the arrest and the fact that cases are dropped or plead out after lengthy investigations. Their interpretation, involvement and feelings of justice lead police officers to feel that they judge matters of guilt and evidence differently from public prosecutors and judges. (Terpstra & Kort, Dec 2016, p. 16)
The focus of restorative justice, to me, is an alternative to the court system where the accused and the victim, along with a moderator, can decide what type of sanctions can be assessed without actually putting the offender into the justice system. The restorative process and sanctions are guided by the philosophy that, whereas the criminal act is bad and worthy of condemnation, the offender is not (Saulnier & Sivasubramaniam, Fall 2015, p. 513) This process would be done in a pre-trial type hearing where the agreement between the parties is made and the offender would have to abide by the agreement or be moved into the justice system.
The focus of criminal rights would be based on the right-based system where the rights of individuals would be set out in the US Constitution, in the Bill of Rights. By protecting the rights of the accused, the criminal justice as a whole can ensure that a persons due process rights and privacy rights are not violated and there is less chance of a false conviction or a case being overturned on appeal. According to these experts, the authors of the Bill of Rights were codifying a specific list of hard-fought and proudly won procedures to protect private persons against government excesses. (Samaha, 2018, Chapter 2-7a)
For all three to be harmonized, the three have to coincide and work through step by step and have an understanding by all those involved. Judgement will again be founded on justice, and those with virtuous hearts will pursue it. (Psalms 94:15, NLT) The criminal justice system is necessary to process and enter the person into a system. At the beginning of the process is where restorative justice can have a place versus retributive justice for the offender. Overall, the research indicates that endorsement of restorative justice is the result of a complex array of factors; the presence of some motivation to punish an offender does not necessarily preclude endorsements of restorative procedures. (Saulnier & Sivasubramaniam, Fall 2015, p. 526) If the restorative does not work between all parties, then the person would enter the justice system and have to go through the courts and the trials. Criminal rights are always upheld within the entire process, whether it be restorative or retributive, every person that s arrested has particular rights that must be upheld throughout the processes which ensures that no one is mistreated and the accused can at least feel that he/she was treated fairly and that justice was upheld.
References
Samaha, J. (2018). Criminal Procedure (10th ed.). Retrieved from https://ng.cengage.com/static/nb/ui/evo/index.html?deploymentId=56883717216512854006024274&eISBN=9781305969049&id=800682300&snapshotId=1748461&dockAppUid=16&nbId=1748461&
Saulnier, A., & Sivasubramaniam, D. (Fall 2015). Restorative Justice: Underlying Mechanisms and Future Directions. New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 18(4), 510-536. https://doi.org/doi:10.1525/nclr.2015.18.4.510
Terpstra, J., & Kort, J. (Dec 2016). Police officers trust in criminal justice. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 47, 12-20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2016.05.001
Recent Comments