Introduction
On the Wednesday the 5th of August 2015, I attended the Brisbane District Court for approximately 3 hours. This essay outlines on the observations that where made that day and critically reviews the components of crime control and the due process models, which these findings represent. I will then go on to draw upon my observations guided by academic literature, which will provide an overview of both models. This essay however will dispute that the governing model for what I observed on the 5th of August at the courts was both the due process and crime control models of the criminal justice system.
The Observed Court Hearings
On Wednesday the 5th of August 2015, I attended the Brisbane District Court, in which I …show more content…
It has been found that these models are used in difference sectors of the CJS, these being that it can be assumed that police and governing bodies tend to use crime control model, where as courts tend to lean towards the due process model. (Daley et al, 2006). The courts tend to use the due process model as it has less faith in the reliability and actions carried out in the early stages of the criminal process and puts greater reliance on formal fact finding as well as an empathise on the rights of the individual and their presumption of innocence. This model also is concerned with the power of the state illegally depriving its citizens of their rights and believes in examining the state powers. Where as the crime control model on the other hand is mainly focused on public order and has faith in the early crime control actors, such as police. This also differs from the due process model as it also assumes that persons in power, practise their discretion by using the law to guide their actions with a degree of inaccuracy, which is acceptable. (Marmo et al, …show more content…
This trial predominantly focused on the faith of early prosecutors, as the trial was mainly based around police evidence that was gathered by a team from the Queensland Crime Commission. The importance of having faith in early prosecutors such as police is that they are key enforcers of public order, and without their presence citizens wouldn’t be able to experience their liberty. They are also key stakeholders in controlling crime within society, as they are able to apprehend and convict those who break the law. The police also use their presence in society to suppress crime and overall represent the power of the state .The police are also seen a persons within society who are meant to uphold the law, therefore should be trusted in the crime control model of the criminal justice system (Marmo et al, 2012). This trust is also seen in the courts as police are usually are called upon to supply evidence. This was viewed in the second trial, when police where called upon to show evidence that a defendant was at a certain location where an illegal event occurred. The evidence the police supplied to support their testimony where time, logs from the event as well as pictures, video, as well as there own eyewitness accounts. This was then cross examined by the defence for a short period of time. However there statements provided
On the Wednesday the 5th of August 2015, I attended the Brisbane District Court for approximately 3 hours. This essay outlines on the observations that where made that day and critically reviews the components of crime control and the due process models, which these findings represent. I will then go on to draw upon my observations guided by academic literature, which will provide an overview of both models. This essay however will dispute that the governing model for what I observed on the 5th of August at the courts was both the due process and crime control models of the criminal justice system.
The Observed Court Hearings
On Wednesday the 5th of August 2015, I attended the Brisbane District Court, in which I …show more content…
It has been found that these models are used in difference sectors of the CJS, these being that it can be assumed that police and governing bodies tend to use crime control model, where as courts tend to lean towards the due process model. (Daley et al, 2006). The courts tend to use the due process model as it has less faith in the reliability and actions carried out in the early stages of the criminal process and puts greater reliance on formal fact finding as well as an empathise on the rights of the individual and their presumption of innocence. This model also is concerned with the power of the state illegally depriving its citizens of their rights and believes in examining the state powers. Where as the crime control model on the other hand is mainly focused on public order and has faith in the early crime control actors, such as police. This also differs from the due process model as it also assumes that persons in power, practise their discretion by using the law to guide their actions with a degree of inaccuracy, which is acceptable. (Marmo et al, …show more content…
This trial predominantly focused on the faith of early prosecutors, as the trial was mainly based around police evidence that was gathered by a team from the Queensland Crime Commission. The importance of having faith in early prosecutors such as police is that they are key enforcers of public order, and without their presence citizens wouldn’t be able to experience their liberty. They are also key stakeholders in controlling crime within society, as they are able to apprehend and convict those who break the law. The police also use their presence in society to suppress crime and overall represent the power of the state .The police are also seen a persons within society who are meant to uphold the law, therefore should be trusted in the crime control model of the criminal justice system (Marmo et al, 2012). This trust is also seen in the courts as police are usually are called upon to supply evidence. This was viewed in the second trial, when police where called upon to show evidence that a defendant was at a certain location where an illegal event occurred. The evidence the police supplied to support their testimony where time, logs from the event as well as pictures, video, as well as there own eyewitness accounts. This was then cross examined by the defence for a short period of time. However there statements provided