History of Criminal Justice Essay

The modern criminal justice system has evolved since  ancient  times, with new forms of  punishment, added  rights  for  offenders  and victims, and  policing  reforms. These developments have reflected changing  customs, political ideals, and economic conditions. In ancient times through the middle Ages,  exile  was a common form of punishment. During the  Middle Ages, payment to the victim (or the victim’s family), known as  wergild, was another common punishment, including for violent crimes. For those who could not afford to buy their way out of punishment, harsh penalties included various forms of  corporal punishment. These included  mutilation,  branding, and  flogging, as well as  execution. Though a prison,  Le Stinche, existed as early as the 14th century in  Italy, incarceration  was not widely used until the 19th century. Correctional reform in the United States was first initiated by  William Penn, towards the end of the 17th century. For a time,  Pennsylvania’s criminal code was revised to forbid  torture  and other forms of cruel punishment, with  jails  and  prisons  replacing corporal punishment. These reforms were reverted, upon Penn’s death in 1718. Under pressure from a group of  Quakers, these reforms were revived in Pennsylvania toward the end of the 18th century, and led to a marked drop in Pennsylvania’s crime rate. Patrick Colquhoun,  Henry Fielding  and others led significant reforms during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. [19] Definition Criminal justice  is the system of practices and institutions of  governments  directed at upholding  control, deterring  and mitigating  crime, or sanctioning those who violate  laws  with criminal penalties and  rehabilitation efforts. Those accused of crime have  protections  against abuse of investigatory and prosecution powers. The criminal justice system consists of three main parts: (1)  Legislative  (create laws); (2) adjudication (courts); and (3)  corrections  (jails, prisons, probation and parole). In the criminal justice system, these distinct agencies operate together both under the  rule of law  and as the principal means of maintaining the  rule of law  within  society. Policing The first contact an  offender  has with the criminal justice system is usually with the  police  (or  law enforcement) who investigate the suspected wrongdoing and make an  arrest, but if the suspect is dangerous to the whole nation, a national level  law enforcement agency  is called in . When warranted, law enforcement agencies or police officers are empowered to use force and other forms of legal coercion and means to effect public and social order. The term is most commonly associated with police departments of a  state  that are authorized to exercise the  police power  of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility. The word comes from the  Latin  politia  (â€Å"civil administration†), which itself derives from the  Ancient Greek   , for  polis  (â€Å"city†). The first police force comparable to the present-day police was established in 1667 under King  Louis XIV  in France, although modern police usually trace their origins to the 1800 establishment of the  Marine Police  in  London, the  Glasgow Police, and the  Napoleonic  police of Paris. Police are primarily concerned with keeping the peace and enforcing  criminal law  based on their particular mission and jurisdiction. Formed in 1908 the  Federal Bureau of Investigation  began as an entity which could investigate and enforce specific federal laws as an investigative and â€Å"law enforcement agency† in the United States;[10]  this, however, has constituted only a small portion of overall policing activity. [11]  Policing has included an array of activities in different contexts, but the predominant ones are concerned with  order maintenance  and the provision of services. [12] Courts Courts of Law The courts serve as the venue where disputes are then settled and justice is administered. With regard to criminal justice, there are a number of critical people in any court setting. These critical people are referred to as the courtroom work group and include both professional and non professional individuals. These include the  judge,  prosecutor, and thedefense attorney. The judge, or magistrate, is a person, elected or appointed, who is knowledgeable in the law, and whose function is to objectively administer the legal proceedings and offer a final decision to dispose of a case. In the U. S. and in a growing number of nations,  guilt  or innocence (although in the U.S. a jury can never find a defendant â€Å"innocent† but rather â€Å"not guilty†) is decided through theadversarial system. In this system, two parties will both offer their version of events and  argue  their case before the court (sometimes before a judge or panel of judges, sometimes before a jury). The case should be decided in favor of the party who offers the most sound and compelling arguments based on the law as applied to the facts of the case. The prosecutor, or district attorney, is a  lawyer  who brings charges against a person, persons or corporate entity. It is the prosecutor’s duty to explain to the court what crime was committed and to detail what  evidence  has been found which incriminates the accused. The prosecutor should not be confused with a  plaintiff  or plaintiff’s counsel. Although both serve the function of bringing a complaint before the court, the prosecutor is a servant of the state who makes accusations on behalf of the state in criminal proceedings, while the plaintiff is the complaining party in civil proceedings. A defense attorney counsels the accused on the legal process, likely outcomes for the accused and suggests strategies. The accused, not the lawyer, has the right to make final decisions regarding a number of fundamental points, including whether to testify, and to accept a plea offer or demand a jury trial in appropriate cases. It is the defense attorney’s duty to represent the interests of the client, raise procedural and evidentiary issues, and hold the prosecution to its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense counsel may challenge evidence presented by the prosecution or present exculpatory evidence and argue on behalf of their client. At trial, the defense attorney may attempt to offer a  rebuttal  to the prosecutor’s accusations. In the U. S. , an accused person is entitled to a government-paid defense attorney if he or she is in jeopardy of losing his or her life and/or liberty. Those who cannot afford a private attorney may be provided one by the state. Historically, however, the right to a defense attorney has not always been universal. For example, in  Tudor  England criminals accused oftreason  were not permitted to offer arguments in their defense. In many jurisdictions, there is no right to an appointed attorney, if the accused is not in jeopardy of losing his or her liberty. The final determination of guilt or innocence is typically made by a third party, who is supposed to be disinterested. This function may be performed by a judge, a panel of judges, or a  jury  panel composed of unbiased citizens. This process varies depending on the laws of the specific jurisdiction. In some places the panel (be it judges or a jury) is required to issue a unanimous decision, while in others only a majority  vote  is required. In America, this process depends on the state, level of court, and even agreements between the prosecuting and defending parties. Some nations do not use juries at all, or rely on theological or military authorities to issue verdicts. Some cases can be disposed of without the need for a trial. In fact, the vast majority are. If the accused confesses his or her guilt, a shorter process may be employed and a judgment may be rendered more quickly. Some nations, such as America, allow  plea bargaining  in which the accused pleads guilty,  nolo contendere  or not guilty, and may accept a diversion program or reduced punishment, where the prosecution’s case is weak or in exchange for the cooperation of the accused against other people. This reduced sentence is sometimes a reward for sparing the state the expense of a formal trial. Many nations do not permit the use of plea bargaining, believing that it coerces innocent people to plead guilty in an attempt to avoid a harsh punishment. The entire trial process, whatever the country, is fraught with problems and subject to criticism. Bias  and  discrimination  form an ever-present threat to an objective decision. Any prejudice  on the part of the lawyers, the judge, or jury members threatens to destroy the court’s credibility. Some people argue that the often Byzantine rules governing courtroom conduct and processes restrict a layman’s ability to participate, essentially reducing the legal process to a battle between the lawyers. In this case, the criticism is that the decision is based less on sound justice and more on the lawyer’s eloquence and  charisma. This is a particular problem when the lawyer performs in a substandard manner. The jury process is another area of frequent criticism, as there are few mechanisms to guard against poor judgment or incompetence on the part of the layman jurors. Judges themselves are very subject to bias subject to things as ordinary as the length of time since their last break. [13] Manipulations of the court system by defense and prosecution attorneys, law enforcement as well as the defendants have occurred and there have been cases where justice was denied. Interpol The  International Criminal Police Organization  (ICPO), widely known as  INTERPOL,[3]  is an  intergovernmental organizationfacilitating international police cooperation. It was established as the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC) in 1923 and adopted its telegraphic address as its common name in 1956. Its membership of 190 countries provides a budget of around â‚ ¬60 million through annual contributions. The organization’s headquarters is in  Lyon, France. It is the second largest  intergovernmental organization  after the  United Nations  by  member states. In 2011, the Interpol General Secretariat employed a staff of 673 representing 93 member countries. [1]  Its current Secretary-General is  Ronald Noble, a former United States  Under Secretary of the Treasury for Enforcement. Succeeding  Khoo Boon Hui, its current President is Deputy Central Director of the French Judicial Police  Mireille Ballestrazzi. In order to maintain as politically neutral a role as possible, Interpol’s  constitution  forbids it to undertake any interventions or activities of a political, military, religious, or racial nature. [4]  Its work focuses primarily on public safety,  terrorism,  organized crime,crimes against humanity,  environmental crime,  genocide,  war crimes,  piracy, illicit  traffic  in  works of art,  illicit drug  production,drug trafficking,  weapons smuggling,  human trafficking,  money laundering,  child pornography,  white-collar crime,  computer crime,intellectual property crime  and  corruption. Interpol’s headquarters are located in  Lyon, France. Corrections Offenders are then turned over to the correctional authorities, from the court system after the accused has been found guilty. Like all other aspects of criminal justice, the administration of  punishment  has taken many different forms throughout history. Early on, when civilizations lacked the resources necessary to construct and maintain prisons,  exile  and  execution  were the primary forms of punishment. Historically  shame  punishments and  exile  have also been used as forms of censure. The most publicly visible form of punishment in the modern era is the  prison. Prisons may serve as detention centers for prisoners after trial. For containment of the accused, jails are used. Early prisons were used primarily to sequester criminals and little thought was given to living conditions within their walls. In America, the  Quaker  movement is commonly credited with establishing the idea that prisons should be used to reform criminals. This can also be seen as a critical moment in the debate regarding the purpose of punishment. Punishment (in the form of prison time) may serve a variety of purposes. First, and most obviously, the incarceration of criminals removes them from the general population and inhibits their ability to perpetrate further crimes. A new goal of prison punishments is to offer criminals a chance to be rehabilitated. Many modern prisons offer schooling or job training to prisoners as a chance to learn a vocation and thereby earn a legitimate living when they are returned to society. Religious institutions also have a presence in many prisons, with the goal of teaching ethics and instilling a sense of morality in the prisoners. If a prisoner is released before his time is served, he is released as a parole. This means that they are released, but the restrictions are greater than that of someone on probation. There are numerous other forms of punishment which are commonly used in conjunction with or in place of prison terms. Monetary  finesare one of the oldest forms of punishment still used today. These fines may be paid to the state or to the victims as a form of reparation. Probation  and  house arrest  are also sanctions which seek to limit a person’s mobility and his or her opportunities to commit crimes without actually placing them in a prison setting. Furthermore, many jurisdictions may require some form of public or community service as a form of reparations for lesser offenses. In Corrections, the Department ensures court-ordered, pre-sentence chemical dependency assessments, related Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative specific examinations and treatment will occur for offenders sentenced to Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative in compliance with RCW 9. 94A. 660. Execution or  capital punishment  is still used around the world. Its use is one of the most heavily debated aspects of the criminal justice system. Some societies are willing to use executions as a form of political control, or for relatively minor misdeeds. Other societies reserve execution for only the most sinister and brutal offenses. Others still have outlawed the practice entirely, believing the use of execution to be excessively cruel or hypocritical. History of criminal law The first civilizations generally did not distinguish between  civil law  and criminal law. The first written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians. Around 2100-2050 BC  Ur-Nammu, the  Neo-Sumerian  king of  Ur, enacted the oldest written legal code whose text has been discovered: the  Code of Ur-Nammu although an earlier code of  Urukagina  of  Lagash  ( 2380-2360 BC ) is also known to have existed. Another important early code was the  Code Hammurabi, which formed the core of  Babylonian law. Only fragments of the early criminal laws of  Ancient Greece  have survived, e. g. those of  Solon  and  Draco. [2] The similarly significant  Commentaries  of  Gaius  on the  Twelve Tables  also conflated the civil and criminal aspects, treating theft or  furtum  as a  tort. Assault and violent  robbery  were analogized to trespass  as to property. Breach of such laws created an obligation of law or  vinculum juris discharged by payment of monetary compensation or  damages. The criminal law of  imperial Rome  is collected in Books 47-48 of the  Digest  After the revival of  Roman law  in the 12th century, sixth-century Roman classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction between criminal and civil law in  European  law from then until the present time The first signs of the modern distinction between crimes and civil matters emerged during the Norman  of England. The special notion of criminal penalty, at least concerning Europe, arose in Spanish Late Scolasticism (see  Alfonso de Castro), when the theological notion of God’s penalty (poena aeterna) that was inflicted solely for a guilty mind, became transfused into canon law first and, finally, to secular criminal law. [6]  The development of the  state  dispensing  justice  in a court clearly emerged in the eighteenth century when European countries began maintaining police services. From this point, criminal law had formalized the mechanisms for enforcement, which allowed for its development as a discernible entity. Objectives of criminal law Criminal law is distinctive for the uniquely serious potential consequences or  sanctions  for failure to abide by its rules. [7]  Every crime is composed of  criminal elements. Capital punishment  may be imposed in some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes. Physical or  corporal punishment  may be imposed such as  whipping  or  caning, although these punishments are prohibited in much of the world. Individuals may be  incarcerated  in  prison  or  jail  in a variety of conditions depending on the jurisdiction. Confinement may be solitary. Length of incarceration may vary from a day to life.