Within the criminal justice system, occupational subcultures may possibly be “merely an adaptation to ‘the job in reality’ vs. ‘the job on paper,’” but they are also definitely representative of some issues within their job’s responsibilities, tasks, and/or expectations that should be concerning to us all. This is concerning because, given the fact the criminal justice professionals have the capability to limit the rights of individuals, there should be little to no discrepancy in how the job is on paper and in reality. Unfortunately, major aspects of police subculture found by researchers include stereotyping, a belief that the public is the enemy, and catching the “bad guy” at any and all costs (Pollock, 2014, p. 117). These subcultures
…show more content…
118-119). Pollock comments on research done by multitudes of people, surmising that the majority of police officers acting this way were not acting selfishly, but believing that the ends justify the means – any unethical or illegal actions are justified because it leads to convictions against allegedly criminal individuals (Pollock, 2014, p. 119). The justifications of “legal technicalities” impossibly complicating their jobs and “believed” guilt of the offender, however, does not (or, rather, should not) trump the constitutional right to due process. Correctional officers beating inmates rather than writing them up to send them a message instead of forcing them to stay in jail longer is their own version of this “noble cause corruption.” They are trying to make the prison system go more smoothly for both themselves and the inmate for the rest of their time there by, supposedly, teaching them a lesson. Prosecutorial misconduct can occur similarly, for “the good of the people” if a prosecutor was to hide evidence potentially favorable to a defendant that they believe to be “guaranteed guilty,” so as to avoid “wrongful dismissals.” Allowing these professionals to wildly throw around the weight of their power, impacting the freedoms of anybody they choose is worse than simply “unethical.” It is unconstitutional; it tears about the foundation of our country’s legal
118-119). Pollock comments on research done by multitudes of people, surmising that the majority of police officers acting this way were not acting selfishly, but believing that the ends justify the means – any unethical or illegal actions are justified because it leads to convictions against allegedly criminal individuals (Pollock, 2014, p. 119). The justifications of “legal technicalities” impossibly complicating their jobs and “believed” guilt of the offender, however, does not (or, rather, should not) trump the constitutional right to due process. Correctional officers beating inmates rather than writing them up to send them a message instead of forcing them to stay in jail longer is their own version of this “noble cause corruption.” They are trying to make the prison system go more smoothly for both themselves and the inmate for the rest of their time there by, supposedly, teaching them a lesson. Prosecutorial misconduct can occur similarly, for “the good of the people” if a prosecutor was to hide evidence potentially favorable to a defendant that they believe to be “guaranteed guilty,” so as to avoid “wrongful dismissals.” Allowing these professionals to wildly throw around the weight of their power, impacting the freedoms of anybody they choose is worse than simply “unethical.” It is unconstitutional; it tears about the foundation of our country’s legal