Tag: Criminal Justice

Wrongful Convictions and How they Affect the criminal Justice System


The effectiveness of the criminal justice system is dependent on its accuracy; that is, its ability to convict those who are guilty and vindicate the innocent. However, despite numerous reforms, the criminal justice system still faces the challenge of wrongful convictions. The growing prevalence of wrongful convictions is negatively impacting citizens’ trust in the criminal justice system. This paper explores how wrongful convictions have affected the criminal justice system and how they can be prevented.

Read also Wrongful Convictions In United States Of America

What is Wrongful Conviction?

Wrongful conviction refers to the miscarriage of justice whereby the criminal justice system convicts and punishes a person for a crime that he/she did not actually commit. Notably, a wrongful conviction can occur in both criminal and civil cases (Garrett, 2020). According to Garrett, a conviction qualifies as wrongful when: (1) the convicted individual is factually innocent of the charges and (2) when the conviction is characterized by procedural errors that violate the convicted individual’s rights.

How Wrongful Convictions have impacted the Criminal Justice System

            Over the years, the criminal justice has wrongfully convicted numerous individuals; this is evident in the rate of exonerations in the past decades. For the past three decades, in the US, more than 2500 people have been exonerated. Notably, each exonerated person spent an average of 8 to 10 months for a crime they did not commit (“Wrongful Convictions”, 2021). Wrongful convictions undermine two key aspects of the criminal justice system’s legitimacy. To start with, if an individual is wrongfully convicted, he/she is punished for an offense they did not commit while the actual perpetrator goes free. Secondly, they cause public confidence in the criminal justice system to decline (Garrett, 2020). Thus, wrongful convictions undermine the legal value of the criminal justice system and public trust in the system.

Players that can Ensure Wrongful Convictions do Not Occur

            The five players of the criminal justice system include community, law enforcement, prosecution, courts, and corrections. Besides corrections, the other four can use ethical behavior/practice to prevent wrongful convictions. The community can use ethical behavior to ensure wrongful convictions do not occur avoiding false accusations and eyewitness misidentification. Sometimes people accuse others of committing a crime without evidence or purposely misidentify individuals as criminals (Garrett, 2020). The law enforcement pillar involves policing. Police should ensure their work is undergirded by ethical practices. Police should, therefore, ensure that their work is free of misconduct such as tampering with evidence and tunnel vision approaches such as profiling.

The prosecution can ensure wrongful convictions do not occur by cross-examining evidence and witnesses to ensure accuracy. Notably, cross-examining evidence also entails ensuring that is free of forensic errors. Weak prosecution considerably increases the probability of wrongful conviction (Garrett, 2020), (Norris et al., 2019).  Lastly, courts should ensure that appropriate procedures are observed during trials. It is also important for the courts to educate individuals serving as jury about the importance of being impartial and making decisions based on evidence provided and not personal feelings towards the issue or person under trial (Norris et al., 2019). Therefore, by upholding ethical behavior/practice, community, law enforcement, prosecution, and courts can ensure wrongful convictions do not occur.

Code and Mechanisms to Enforce Ethical Behavior

There are various codes and mechanisms for enforcing ethical behavior in law enforcement that can ensure wrongful convictions are overturned. Firstly, enforcing the best practices proved to reduce the probability of wrongful convictions. This includes having mechanisms that promote best practices in eyewitness identification, interrogation procedures, informant operations, and evidence storage and preservation (Likos, 2021). Secondly, learning from error by using the organizational accident model. According to Likos, the organizational accidental model allows law enforcement agencies to review errors as system-wide weaknesses as opposed to single-cause mistakes. This facilitates systems thinking which is relatively more effective in rectifying errors. Lastly but equally important, improving law enforcement procedures by using knowledge acquired from wrongful convictions. Reviewing wrongful convictions can produce useful information that can help in investigating crimes and making arrests (Russell, 2018). The objective of the code and mechanisms should be to streamline law enforcement to ensure only the guilty are convicted.

Read also Analyzing Unethical Behavior In Criminal Justice – The United States v. Jerry M. Bell, Darryl M. Forrest, and Dustin Sillings

Read also Ethics and Professional Behavior in Administration of Criminal Justice


To sum up, wrongful conviction punishes the innocent while the guilty are goes free. Consequently, wrongful convictions adversely impact the criminal justice system by undermining the value of law and diminishing public confidence. However, various players within the criminal justice system including the community, law enforcement, prosecution, and courts can use ethical behavior/practice to prevent wrongful convictions. Moreover, enforcing the best practices, learning from error by using the organizational accident model, and improving law enforcement procedures by using knowledge acquired from wrongful convictions can help in the combat against wrongful convictions.

Read also When The Use of Professional Discretion Cross Ethical Boundaries in Law Enforcement

Restorative Justice Conferencing is a ‘soft option’ with Limited Value in the Criminal Justice System

Restorative Justice Conferencing is an invaluable addition with a great deal of benefits to the criminal justice system in Victoria. As a comparatively ambitious undertaking, restorative justice is implemented as a direct response to key fundamentals identified by victims and society at large. Restorative justice introduces a fresh approach starkly different to traditional justice process such as imprisonment in espousing the need to address victim’s expectations while transforming reprobates (Larsen 2014). Additionally, it also presents an exclusive opportunity for the victim and offender to meet albeit in a controlled environment with the aim of discussing the offence in questions and its accompanying effects on both parties. Cumulative gains resulting from full implementation of restorative justice to the criminal justice system also include its direct impact on recidivism rare.

Read also Innovative Justice Methods to Reduce Recidivism – Victoria

Australia currently grapples with a 46.4% recidivism rate which represents an existential treat to the Department of Correctional Services (Sentencing Advisory Council 2015). At the core of restorative justice is its focus on the “process” rather than outcomes during the implementation phase. Offenders are given an opportunity to acknowledge wrongdoing and, therefore, less likely to reoffend on account of the complete shift in perspective occasioned by Restorative Justice Conferencing. Druz (2016) opines that restorative justice processes create a sense of satisfaction in contending parties since mediation programs present a degree of fairness. This particularly allows victims to develop suitable coping strategies and ultimately end up being contented while avoiding feelings of contempt for the offenders in question. 

Read also Use of Restorative Justice Processes for Domestic and Family Violence

Restorative Justice Conferencing makes it possible for both parties to also transform their perspective the problems being addressed before regarding it as a foundation for the development and implementation of productive solutions in the future. Moreover, victims are empowered through the opportunity to come face to face with offenders, restoring their self of confidence and safety.  Restorative justice is now a common feature in many domestic and family violence; addressing deficiencies within the Victorian criminal justice system while fostering empathy.

American Criminal Justice and Racist Myths of Black Criminality

Has the American criminal justice system ever to your satisfaction acknowledged or confronted the system′s links to and existence as a legacy of racist myths of black criminality?

The American justice system has continually and perpetually propagated a legacy ingrained on injustice against people of color and has failed to respond satisfactorily to the continual presence of anomalies that hinder the attainment of pure justice for people of color particularly African Americans.  Despite the presence of overwhelming research recommendations for improvement, anomalies still exists in the American justice system that shape the perspective of court authorities, police and jurors about the treatment of African Americans. This paper will attempt to disprove the “mythical” nature of black criminalization and show the overt racism that exists within the American criminal justice system by examining stages such as arrest, prosecution and sentencing in order to show that the justice system has not acknowledged its links to a legacy of racism and black criminality and will continue to remain adamant in confronting these allegations and instead hide behind unreliable data sources and the use of outdated and racist categorization of individuals.

Read also The Struggle for Blackness, Black Consciousness and Black Empowerment in South Africa

According to Heather MacDonald, the allegations of black criminalization against the American criminal justice system are based on myth. She posits that the high rate of African America incarceration can only be attributed to their persistent involvement in behavior of criminal nature and not discrimination from the justice system which is seven times that of non-Hispanic Americans representing 50% and 40% of all robbery and violent crime arrests respectively. Additionally, she is of the opinion that parity has been established between race of offenders who commit crimes involving aggravated assault and the resultant arrests which shows there has been no discrimination. Moreover, she found that African American had a lower chance of being prosecuted and a significantly lowered chance of being convicted after an arrest is made and concluded that the differences in criminal offending among racial population is the only explanation for the high proportion of African Americans in the prison population.

Read also Why Prison Population is Increasing in the United States

As can be seen from the evidence presented by this paper, several holes in reasoning will emerge when one tries to defend the American Justice system’s shift from its perpetual legacy of black criminality. For instance, the leniency posited by MacDonald only occurs at later stages of the system when an attempt is being made by jurors and prosecuting authorities to correct an inappropriate arrest. African American are likely to be profiled due to during traffic stops in incidences of individual discrimination and more likely to be arrested on vagrancy laws than whites based on contextual discrimination. This is due to the disparities in the American social system the place minority communities on the lower end of the scale when it comes to education, employment, access to health care and good housing/shelter.

Read also Racism Against African Americans in Portland

The justice system has continuously used these racial demographics to enforce racist laws on the American population that focus on black criminality. For instance, the application of racially a racially neutral factor such as employment status in the decision to grant bail has the result of denying bail to African Americans since they are incredibly and disproportionately represented in the unemployed segment of the population. The key to this racist legacy is the result, the result of institutionalized racism which is founded on the overt racism enshrined in the American justice system. The presence of de facto (not in law) practices that get codified through overt racism and get approved by mechanisms that are available in law. The criterion to grant bail to employed offenders since their absence from work would lead to greater public loss is not racist but the result of it is racist. This is why the Justice system will never satisfactorily respond to racist myths about black criminality, because the law is not made to result in injustice for a minority even if it often does.

Read also Empowering African Americans – Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois

However, there seems to be certain de jure anomalies as well as de facto practices where racial minorities are often treated more harshly and others where they are treated more harshly especially when consideration of the relationship between the offender and the victim. These anomalies show the way that the law and its application is structured to enhance black criminalization and devalue people of color. For instance, African American are more likely to be arrested when the crime/offense is committed against a white individual than when the crime involves an African American/minority member against another minority member.

Read also RUA Course Project SOCS 350N – African Americans’ Overrepresentation in Prisons

Historically, an African American committing a violent crime against his fellow African American was considered normal behavior during the ages of slavery and this assumption is still in practice to this date. In its response to the racist myths of black criminality the American Justice System has provided statistics based on data that is unreliable, of low quality and containing racist categorizations. In 2008, for instance, the use of outdated categorization of “whites” versus “non-whites” that had previously been prohibited by the OMB succeeds in inflating the proportion of incarcerated non-Hispanic whites to 56% against 46% of African Americans. The assumption made by these statistics is that all people who are not African Americans are white. This supposition that includes other racial minorities such as Hispanic Americans as white succeeds in showing that the number of whites in prison is higher than that of African Americans, which is not the case.

Heroin Addiction In United States and its effects on Criminal Justice System


This paper aims to examine the drug abuse problem in the United States and its effects on the criminal justice system with a particular focus on heroin addiction. This paper will provide a scope of the heroin abuse problem, an illustration of the effects of heroin addiction on the individual and broader social systems and its correlation to and impact on the criminal justice system. An examination of the deleterious effects of current drug control policy, their motivation and adverse consequences for the American society will be provided as well as an exploration of an alternative strategy that can make existing systems more effective.

Read also Relationship between Pain Medication and the United States’ Heroin Addiction

Problem statement

Drug and substance abuse has been on the rise in the United States, in spite of numerous, often radical initiatives by law enforcement to counter drug trafficking, distribution, and drug-related crime. According to the annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), 494, 000 Americans were current users of heroin which is slightly higher than percentages observed in a similar survey conducted in 2015. The incidence of heroin use disorders displayed little improvement from previous years. An estimated 652,000 Americans had a heroin disorder while an average of 220 people tried heroin for the first time every day.

Read also Heroin Epidemic Substance Abuse in Dayton, Ohio – Evidence-Based Solution

According to Jiang et al. (2017), heroin addiction and its associated factors result in a total cost of $51.7 billion for American society. The presence of an overwhelming number of heroin addicts and users in the United States is arguably the main contributor to the presence of large networks of well-financed drug trafficking organizations in Latin American nations (Bagley, 2012). The estimated annual revenue for the drug industry in the United States is as high as $60 billion. Thus, the United States has been and remains the most significant single market for illicit drugs in the world.

Read also Heroin Epidemic in West Virginia – Research Paper

Effects of heroin addiction on social systems

The effects of drug usage and consumption on social systems can are traced back to the role of heroin abuse and addiction in the disintegration of the family unit and with it, the supervisory role of the parent upon the child. Drug usage in America can be traced back as early as the 19th century. Illicit drug use probably presents a vicious cycle through generations of drug users and their children. Low economic status can lead to increased drug usage, and drug abuse is responsible for reduced economic productivity among users. It is, therefore, accurate to posit that most users might come from low socio-economic backgrounds. In the absence of financial resources, crime and prostitution might present themselves as lucrative ventures to sustain the addiction. These ventures would bring with them high possibilities of arrest or pregnancy.

Read also Comparison of Major Classifications of Drug Actions on the Human Body

Children born to parents battling drug addiction often lack parental support and moral direction and are thus increasingly vulnerable to peer pressure. In the absence of parental authority and proper health education, they are likely to venture into drug usage. Drug usage and/or addiction at a young age results in impaired short term memory, tracking ability, emotional and social development, reduced cognitive efficiency and decision making abilities and constant preoccupation with acquiring the drug (Newcomb & Locke, 2005). The interaction of these effects often leads to poor academic performance.

To offset the low self-esteem caused by poor academic performance, consumption of more drugs will be necessary, which may lead to absenteeism and eventual dropping out.  As an adult, the presence of a highly competitive labor market makes it impossible to find meaningful employment. The frustration caused by being unemployed necessitates the consumption of more drugs. Lack of adequate finances to purchase the drugs results in ventures into prostitution/crime. Thus, a vicious cycle that is likely to affect generations will have been completed.

Read also Four Categories of Street Drugs and an Example of Each

Effects on the individual

The risk of mortality heroine drug consumption is high. Most heroin users acquire a lifetime preoccupation with acquiring the drug which culminates only in death. Heroin addiction brings about an increased risk for acquiring HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B and C particularly in Injection Drug Users (IDUs) and users who engage in risky behavior after drug use (Coyne & Hall, 2017). Addiction brings about adverse health impacts including insomnia, constipation, lung disease, depression, and anti-social disorders, sexual dysfunction, damage to the mucosal surface due to repeated snorting and scarred and collapsed veins from repeated injections (Newcomb & Locke, 2005). These complications require comprehensive treatments to meet all the patients’ needs which places an incredible financial and emotional burden on friends and relatives (Jiang et al. 2017)

Read also Legalization of All Drugs Sample Argumentative Essay

Effects of heroin abuse on the criminal justice system

Drug and substance abuse affects the criminal justice system through its succinct relation to crime. Drug users often get arrested for the use and possession of controlled substances. Drugs may also later the user’s behavior significantly as to trigger or necessitate involvement in crime Lack of financial resources to support their addiction may necessitate criminal acts such as robbery, burglary, and theft. Individuals involved in the illicit drug trade often engage in violent behavior during turf wars, and disagreements over payment delays. A significant proportion of offenders within the criminal justice system are battling drug and substance abuse disorders. Drug treatment programs have become a typical and essential feature of the American prison system.


The national drug policy has taken particular precedence in the criminal justice system since the ‘war on drugs’ was declared in the 1970s by the Reagan administration. Central in its agenda was to initiate preventive measures to the drug trade. These included alcohol and drug prohibition, reducing initiation into drug use and overall drug abuse (Coyne & Hall, 2017). In the late 20th century and early 21st century, drug law enforcement activities had risen considerably. The proportion of arrests for drug-related offenses rising from one in fourteen to one in eight of all arrests. Current national drug initiatives aim at reducing the adverse consequences of drug use through prohibitive strategies.

Less formal responses have necessitated an overemphasis on drug law enforcement over prevention and treatment (Caulkins et al., 2005). Voters and politicians perceive the drug problem as a moral failing deserving of punishment rather than a health problem deserving treatment despite significant research showing the correlation between addiction and an array of biological, socio-economical and psychological factors (Caulkins et al., 2005). Informal political discourse often criticizes drug users and offenders, assigns blame to foreigners, recommends interdiction of drug smugglers and fails to consider alternative strategies that may reduce the burden of addiction on the American population (Caulkins et al., 2005).

Effectiveness of drug control policies

The results of these initiatives have been mixed. While cocaine consumption has been on the decline, heroin consumption may be on the rise (Caulkins et al., 2005). Although no drug is yet to enjoy the kind of lucrative market shares enjoyed by cocaine, heroin and marijuana, several drugs have been introduced into the market over the years that threaten such dominance (Caulkins et al., 2005).

While there is a need for preventive measures to the illicit drug problem, prohibitive rules, and drug law enforcement have created an array of challenges for the criminal justice system and the society at large. Increased law enforcement attention to low-level drug offenders has diverted federal and state resources from other criminal offenders and led to a dramatic increase in index crimes (Coyne & Hall, 2017).  The passage of legislation such as the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 have created harsher sentencing guidelines for drug offenses. Today, nearly half of all inmates in federal prisons were arrested and incarcerated on drug-related charges. Furthermore, the abolition of parole, expansion of minimum sentencing makes sure that drug offenders spend more extended periods in prison than ever before (Coyne & Hall, 2017).

While the severity of the punitive movement has increased, the severity of charges have not reduced (Coyne & Hall, 2017). Thus, elaborate sentencing guidelines and vigilant efforts towards arrests and incarcerations are wasted on street dealers, couriers, and low-level assistants while major drug king-pins remain undeterred (Coyne & Hall, 2017).  Three-quarters of all drug offenders in state prisons are non-violent offenders. 60% of all crack-cocaine offenders in federal prisons were only involved in low-level drug activity. In fact, if justices were allowed more discretion in drug sentencing 125,000 inmates in state prisons would qualify for non-custodial correction (Coyne & Hall, 2017).

Drug control initiatives have failed to make drugs unattractive by increasing the price of any established drugs through a reduction in drug supply to the country (Coyne & Hall, 2017).  While drug enforcement agencies boast of significant increases in the number of drugs impounded each year, drug smugglers have discovered alternative ways to bring more drugs into the country and kept supply and demand factors constant.

The ineffectiveness of national drug policy is further demonstrated in its failure to recognize the utility of treatment over preventive and prohibitive measures. A distinct correlation has been drawn between offending criminal behavior and drug use (Caulkins et al., 2005).  In 2004, more than half of inmates in state prisons had engaged in drug and substance abuse in the month preceding their arrest. Another significant proportion had committed crimes to subsidize an active addiction (Coyne & Hall, 2017).

Federal and state governments spend 56% of the drug control budget on drug law enforcement, including prison expansion, 29% on treatment, and 18% on prevention (Caulkins et al, 2005). This resource imbalance means that inmates battling drug disorders often receive little to no treatment during incarceration. Reentering society with an active addiction, coupled with the difficulties encountered by drug offenders as they try to transition back to the community, may have contributed to the increased rates of recidivism observed among drug offenders (Mauer & King, 2007).

Adverse consequences

Close to three-quarters of the prison population in the United States is composed of members of minority groups. African Americans are the most severely affected demographic, taking up 37% of all arrests for drug offenses and 56% of prison inmates convicted on drug charges despite having a minimal 13% share of the total American population. The rate of imprisonment for African Americans is over seven times that of Caucasian Americans. Drug usage in the United States (69.2% whites, 12.8% African American, and 14.4% Hispanic) generally reflects racial proportions (Mauer & King, 2007). Thus, racial disparities in arresting and sentencing can only be explained by an overlap of policy, practices, and decisions such as the concentration of drug law enforcement on inner-city areas where the majority of these communities reside, robust racially disparate drug law enforcement and harsher sentencing. (Mauer & King, 2007). The interaction of these factors results in members of minority communities being arrested and imprisoned for ridiculous periods even when an examination prevailing circumstances may have resulted in less severe sentencing.

Furthermore, stricter prohibitive laws on heroin use have generated restrictions on clean needles and syringes (Coyne & Hall, 2017). In many states, it is illegal to buy and sell needles or syringes without a prescription. Policymakers desired to make it difficult for users to inject heroin. However, they have only succeeded in encouraging the reuse and sharing of needles among users and increased transmission of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis. Additionally, restrictive laws have increased the amount of tainted, highly potent drugs circulating in the black market, and exacerbated the frequency of drug-related illness and overdoses (Coyne & Hall, 2017).

Alternative responses

Current policy considerations should aim at reducing consumption. Drug enforcement may present an often elusive promise of removing drugs from the streets. However, the fractioned and local nature of drug markets makes it impossible for any enforcement strategy to do so. Arrested sellers can easily be replaced, and local operations cannot simply be crippled by interdicting king-pins.

An evaluation of the drug court programming found that significant cost reductions could be achieved when all inmates with a history of drug abuse received drug abuse and treatment. It costs much less to treat a heavy user than to incarcerate him/her or a seller (Caulkins et al., 2005). According to the RAND analysis of the drug abuse problem, expanding treatment services for drug-related disorders is likely to reduce crime 15 times more that mandatory sentencing. Additionally, spending $1 million on treatment would minimize drug consumption by as much as 100kg while spending the same amount on incarceration only reduces consumption by 13kg (Caulkins et al., 2005). Moreover, drug treatment initiatives may attack the drug supply chain directly by lowering demand. While the effects of treatment and prevention may be gradual, and necessitate long term investments in individual users (Caulkins et al., 2005), they present long term solutions that should reduce the level of drug usage in the population by focusing on consumption rather than enforcement.


The proportion active heroin abusers is growing steadily within the American population. Although drug law enforcement actively seizes significant amounts of heroin entering the United States, increased supply quantities render these short term victories redundant. Meanwhile, federal policymakers continue to push for harsher penalties that will put members of minority communities in prison and keep them there. Apportioning blame and incarcerating users and low-level dealers are unlikely to solve the addiction problem. There should be more support for policies that increase funding for treatment and prevention to reduce demand. When Americans are not actively using heroin and other illicit drugs, robust drug enforcement will have better chances of attacking and closing supply channels.

Insanity Defense In Criminal Justice

Insanity defense is one of the ways used by defendants during criminal cases. The approach is one of the oldest defense approaches but is not commonly used in the United States. Insanity defense refers to an affirmative defense in criminal cases whereby the defendant argues that he or she cannot be held liable for their crimes due to mental/psychiatric problems during the time of the act. In this regard, the defendant must prove elements of mental problems for them to convince the jury.

Read also Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments

Insanity defense is classified into four different categories. First, irresistible impulse is a defense in which the defendant argues that they cannot be held liable for their actions due to inability to control their emotions/impulses (Brown, 2018). Another defense is the Durham rule, a rule by which the defendant is deemed not guilty for their actions due to a mental illness/defect (Brown, 2018). The M’Naghten Rule supports every defendant who is assumed to be unaware of right or wrong due to a defect of reason when committing a crime (Brown, 2018). Lastly, the model panel code is whereby the defendant is argued to have a diagnosed mental disorder and cannot understand the criminal nature of his/her actions. The most common insanity defense applied by the States is the M’Naghten Rule. However, it is also rarely used as only about 1% of criminal cases in the States apply insanity defense and the success rate of this defense is considered to be less than 25% (Simon, 2018).

Read also Case of Jesse James Arrested for Killing Police Officer

 The process of assessing the defendant’s insanity begins with a psychiatrist determining whether he or she has adequate training, skills, and knowledge. Then, specialist reviews the relevant information and records related to the defendant’s mental history. The psychiatrist will interview and conduct analyzes on the defendant to obtain the nature of their mental fitness before and during the time of the crime. Further, he or she will provide the findings to the court to be used during the criminal case. A psychologist can be used as an expert witness during an insanity defense since he or she is given the responsibility to provide light on the psychiatric science and clinical knowledge in a given criminal case involving insanity defense (Meynen, 2016). In this regard, as an expert witness, the psychologist’s role is to educate and clarify to the court on psychiatric issues related to the case. 

Read also Difference Between Evaluations of Competency and a Plea / Verdict of Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity

In conclusion, insanity defense refers to cases when the defendants aim to prove mental problems during the time of the crime. The approach also involves the use of a psychologist to provide evidence of either presence or absence of mental problems during a crime. Although the approach was common in the U.S., its use has gone down over the years due to low success rate.  Therefore, it is the duty of the defendant to prove beyond reasonable doubt on presence of mental problems during the time of the crime.

Social Media, Body Cameras and Dash Cameras Altering Safety and Professionalism of Criminal Justice Professionals

Describe how social media, body cameras and dash cameras are altering the safety and professionalism of criminal justice professionals

Technology and innovation now play a major role within the criminal justice system. Its permeation within this sphere now means that it is capable of altering the safety and professionalism of criminal justice specialists. Although social media has been hailed globally as a novel innovation, it is a double-edged sword with far-reaching consequences. The advent of smartphone technology and the internet now allows citizens to record their encounters with law enforcement officers during routine stops (White & Malm, 2020).

This allows them to record real-time video of their interaction while making sure that the officer is made fully aware of this fact ensuring that all their actions are within legal bounds. On the other hand, individuals may also make recordings with malicious intent, posting them online and painting the officer in question in negative light. In such a scenario, the public may know little about the facts surrounding the case and proceed to openly castigate the officer. Such bias is now common across the United States and may, inadvertently, turn the public against law enforcement officers and even jeopardize their safety. Enraged motorists have been known to record traffic police during routine stops and even going as far as posting their name, badge number and address online. Such behavior complicates police work and may even put their lives in danger.

Correspondingly, body worn cameras (BWCs) and dash cameras are capable of affecting criminal justice professionals while on duty. These devices were initially introduced to hold suspects and law enforcement officers accountable for their actions (Moriarty, 2017). Generally, police officers have been known to apply the rules of professional conduct when their BWCs and dash cameras are turned on to provide appropriate evidence before a court of law. Major precincts across the United States are currently employing this technology to uphold standards of the criminal justice system and the integrity of officers.

Challenges Facing the Criminal Justice System in America in the Next Five Years – CJUS 330

Identify the three (3) most important challenges facing the criminal justice system in America in the next five (5) years. Describe why the challenges you have chosen should be of greatest concern to those working/ seeking to work in the field of criminal justice.

The criminal justice system grapples with a myriad of emerging challenges, chief among them being the danger posed by the Information Age, racial strife and overcrowding within state penitentiaries. The information Age marked a new era featuring the rise of the internet and permeation of social media platforms across varying spectrums of life. Although viewed by many as a positive development, social media is now identified as a major challenge facing the criminal justice system. Individuals have been known to abuse their freedom of speech while conversing with others online before going on to invoke the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (III, 2010, p. 34). 

Read also Challenges to the U.S Intelligence Community Next Decade

Court proceedings require a great deal of resources during trial and the period leading up to final deliberations. Any action detrimental to this process may result in wasted resources with negative implication. For instance, citizens are currently capable of recording their encounters with law enforcement officers and posting them on various social media platforms. A seemingly simple action such as posting a video recording of the defendant before their day in court ultimately affects the entire fidelity of the process. Furthermore, it may affect the juror’s opinions since they would be influenced by external factors as opposed to legal instructions provided by the presiding judge. This type of bias, thus, goes a long way in influencing juror’s stance before the final verdict is given. Similarly, the racial tensions witnessed within the United States poses an immediate threat to the criminal justice system. Individuals from minority groups now have a deep distrust for law enforcement agencies due to a sudden rise in cases linked racial profiling.

Read also Comparison of Criminal Justice Systems – United States, Canada and Saudi Arabia

According to Hucklesby & Wahidin (2013), racial tensions impede the entire criminal justice system and the gains made within the past decade (p.34). It is for this reason that experts suggest community policing as viable alternative bound to improve relations across the board.  Also, the United States has the highest incarceration rate globally at 716 per 100,000 of its population (Prison Policy Initiative, 2019). Overcrowding is typical within state penitentiaries struggling to manage this ever-growing number. Although significant resources are allocated towards the management of these populations, numbers keep swelling posing a threat to the efficacy of the criminal justice system. Lengthy sentencing policies have resulted in a high incarceration rate, with a sizeable number of jails and prisons functioning well beyond their carrying capacity.

Comparison of Criminal Justice Systems – United States, Canada and Saudi Arabia

Canada, Saudi Arabia and United States have different history and culture, thus leading to difference in criminal justice system in the three countries. For example, history and culture of Saudi Arabia was founded in Islamic region which is totally different from those of Canada and the United States. Although, Canada and the United States have history and culture stemming from their colonies, they differ significantly.

Brief description of history and culture of each country


            Analysis of Canadian history and culture showed that government at municipal, provincial/territorial and federal level shared an intertwined culture. The cultural policies are influenced by investment opportunities, foreign trade, multicultural society, Canada’s two official languages, social benefits, economic growth, national and regional interests and perception of public good (Nunn, 2012). Studies have showed that Canada’s cultural fabric has been influenced by several factors including diverse Aboriginal cultures, official linguistic duality (English and French), a distinct blend of multicultural demographics, ubiquitous proximity to U.S., the high cost of production and limited economies of scale as well as small and geographically dispersed population. These are the historical and cultural perspectives that have shaped the criminal justice system of Canada.

Saudi Arabia

            The analysis of history showed that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the original homeland of the Arab people and of Islam and it occupies most of the Arabian Peninsula. The historical and cultural identities of Saudi Arabian people represent principally the Arab and Muslim (Fadel, 2013). The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a contemporary state whose national culture is connected to the dynasty of Al Saud and it forms the basis of geographic and state’s cultural setting. The constitution of the country was derived from Islam which is the Koran and Islamic law (Sharia). The ruler is the custodian of the constitution and the citizens sees him as the symbol of the state’s policing, administrative and technical functions.

United States

            United States is a nation that was formed built on immigration from other countries. As a result, the United States is one of the most culturally diverse countries globally. The history of the United States showed that nearly every region of the world is represented. This makes the United States the most culturally diverse nation in the world. Although the most evident culture is the English due to colonization that began in early 1600s, Asians, Africans, Latin Americans and Native American have shaped the history and culture of the United States. All these historical and cultural factors have shaped the criminal justice system of the United States.

How culture has impacted the development of criminal justice system in the three countries

            Canada criminal justice system operates on principles and processes stemming from civil and common law histories. From the cultural perspective, the Canadian criminal justice system has incorporated international conventions and it strived to respect for the separation of powers between judicial, executive and legislative arms of government as well as commitments to balance the needs of offender and victims. Although the criminal justice system in Canada was meant to be a just and fair to all Canadian citizens, analysis showed that the justice system targets Aboriginal population unfairly. Statistics showed that Aboriginal population represent the higher number of people incarcerated. This means that the culture of the Aboriginal people does not work in datum with current criminal justice system. Analysis showed that Aboriginal people have practiced distinct cultural entities from the mainstream culture. As a result, the culture of the mainstream society has influenced the criminal justice system work against the Aboriginal people culture.

            The criminal justice system in Saudi Arabia stemmed from the Islamic and Sharia law. The basic system clearly states that the Kingdom’s Constitution are the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Hamoudi, 2014). Further analysis showed that Islamic culture has great influence on the Saudi Arabia criminal justice system because the basic system clearly stipulate that the roles and objectives of the state is to enforce and protect the principles of Sharia and Islam respectively. The other cultural influence on criminal justice system in evident from the fact that the basic systems confirms the monarchial system of the state. For example, it reaffirms principles of government such as equality, consultation and justice of citizens under Islamic Sharia.

            In the case of the United States, the criminal justice system was founded on common law. The structure and design of the criminal justice system of the United States was majorly borrowed from the English version due to colonial historical perspective. As stated earlier, United States the most diverse culturally with majority of the region being represented. However, the European has greatly influenced the criminal justice system of the United States. For example, recent statistics showed that law enforcement agencies have killed and arrest African American more than any other racial group in American society. Similarly, judicial system has handed convicts more African American than any other racial group in the society. As a result, correctional facilities hold high number of Africa American both at the state and the federal level as compared to other racial groups.

Recent changes

            Canada and United States reformed the criminal justice system to ensure that minority groups access a just and fair justice system. This include incorporating the cultures from the minority by bringing onboard majority of them. These reforms have changed the criminal judicial system in these two countries (Rodriguez, 2016). For example, the law enforcement officer found discriminating minority groups are interdicted and prosecuted. The main objective of these reforms is to minimize unfair and biases in the criminal justice system. In Saudi Arabia, some of the proposed reforms on basic system is to eliminate penalties that are against human rights such as death penalty. Due to these changes on the criminal justice system, it has influenced greatly on the culture of the people it serves.

The legal issues

            Some of the issues that have raised concern in the criminal justice of the three countries are the issues affecting significant groups such as youth, minority groups, women, aging and ailing offenders. The other issues relate to maintaining fairness such as access to legal aid, plea bargaining, wrongful convictions and victims (Perrin, et al., 2016). These issues majorly affect Canada and United States criminal justice system. One major issue that affect the criminal justice system of Saudi Arabia is the award of minimal penalty. Analysis showed that most of these issues impacted the culture of the people it serves. For example, the crime rate in Saudi Arabia is very low due to maximum penalty given to the convicts

The role of the politics            

The development of the criminal justice system in Canada and United States was influenced by politics. This because the legislative arm of government in the two states have the authority to legislate and changes law in the constitution. However, the development criminal justice system in Saudi Arabia had minimal influence from the politics because basic system was founded on Quran and Sharia. 

Comparison of Criminal Justice Systems – United States, Canada and Saudi Arabia

The criminal justice systems vary from one country to the other, with some drawing the structure of their legal systems from those of other countries. Having knowledge of the criminal justice systems of countries is critical to the understanding about their relevant differences as well as the similarities that exists between them. According to (Siems, 2012) justice system comparisons must involve three countries to allow for determination of the differences and similarities. In this paper, a summary of the policing model, the judicial structure and corrections systems and the legal traditions of the United States, Canada and Saudi Arabia will be undertaken.

Read also A Comparison of the U.S and Canadian Justice Systems

The United States

The Policing Model

            Police organizations in various countries are rooted in the historical background and the socio-cultural developments. In the U.S, the police are organized on federal, state and local basis. Law enforcement is decentralized, with federal authorities dealing with violation of federal laws, while state and county authorities deal with violations of state and local laws.

The Judicial Structure and Correction Systems

            The U.S is a federal system with the federal government and the individual state governments. According to (Hatch & Hatch, 2011) the United States has three levels of government, the federal, state and local governments. The country’s judicial system is based on these three levels of governments with each having legislative, executive and judicial branches. Consequently, there are federal, state and local courts. There corrections system consists of the probation authority, the jails, community corrections, prisons and the paroling authority.

The Legal Tradition

            The U.S legal is rooted in the common law tradition that was brought England. However, within the country’s a state legal system can be found civil law traditions, for example the Louisiana that is based on civil law owing to the state being French and Spanish territory. The common law relies on statutes and court precedence.

Influence of Culture on the Development of the Country’s Legal System

            The development of the United States legal system was influenced greatly by the culture. Founded on Christian faith, the protestant culture influenced the formation and execution of laws in the U.S. According to (Harr, Hess, Orthmann & Kingsbury, 2016) the public schools in the U.S provided the agenda for social reforms that led to formation of denominational colleges. However, the beginning of 1830’s saw the challenge of the protestant faith with migration of Catholics, Jews, Muslims and even Hindus, which further influenced the U.S legal system.

Read also Restorative Justice Policies and Potential Future Criminal Justice Policy Evolution


Policing Model

            The Canadian police system is both complex and unique, comprising of three levels. We have the federal, municipal, provincial/territorial policing under the federal, municipal and provincial governments respectively (Conor, 2018). Depending on where the citizens live, there are various police services that are available depending on the location. Those people who live in Quebec and Ontario are served by municipal or provincial police officers, people living in western and Maritime Canada are serviced by municipal or Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), while Labrador and Newfoundland are under the provincial police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and RCMP for rural policing.

The Judicial Structure and Correction Systems

            The Canadian Judicial system can be considered as unitary, consisting of a single judicial system that makes interpretation of both the provincial and federal laws. According to (Morton, 2009) the Canadian judicial structure consists of the section 92 courts, superior or section 96 courts (trial and appeal courts) and the Supreme Court of Canada. The country’s correction systems are under executive and can be categorized into pre-trial, pre-sentence and post-sentence services (Ekstedt & Griffiths, 2013, pp. 7). Once an individual is found by a judge to be guilty, they are placed either on federal, provincial or territorial correctional programs, depending on the nature of their offence (Correctional Service Canada, 2008).

The Legal Tradition

            The Canadian legal tradition is largely based on the British common law tradition (Department of Justice, 2017). However, there is a civil law tradition, which arose owing to the French territory that was established in Quebec. Under the civil tradition, the Canadian judges liberally and strictly interpret laws under the circumstances of that particular case.

Influence of Culture on the Development of the Country’s Legal System         

            Canada has a unique history having been under the French and English colonies. Traditionally, the people of Canada have long respected individual rights as long as the actions of other do not infringe on other people’s rights (Burrows, 2005). This greatly influenced the current federal structure.  The founders of Canada also rejected the forced cultural coercions as they encountered differences as they arose due to British and French occupation. As a result, the legal system remains a product of the British, French and traditional influences.

Saudi Arabia

Policing Model

            The Saudi Arabian police force is typically a centralized one, having singular line of command that arises from the King. The country’s public security police have a responsibility of general policing throughout the country having authority from Shariah and executive orders. According to (Dammer & Albanese, 2013) the police are further divided into Special Investigative Police (SIP) or “Mubahith” and the Regular Police. The regular police fall under the directive of ministry of interior, while SIP fall under the Director of Public Safety.

The Judicial Structure and Correction Systems

            Saudi Arabia is predominantly an Islamic nation, which follows the Shariah law (basic law). According to (Bowen, 2008) Quran is the official constitution of the country and the court system is complex. The lowest courts are the qadis or judges, who make rulings on minor criminal and civil cases based on Shariah law and Saudi Traditions. The next court levels are high courts, presided by 2-3 qadis. Above the high courts are two courts of appeal, based in Riyadh and Mecca and having same powers (pp. 14). After a high court decision, one can lodge an appeal personally to the king. Saudi Arabia does not use prisons as conventional sentencing resource owing to tendency for other forms punishments such as corporal punishment. However, (Dammer & Albanese, 2013) asserts that there are prisons, which are under the Interior Ministry.

The Legal Tradition

            Islamic nations such as Yemen and Saudi Arabia were less influenced by western law traditions. According to (Merryman & Pérez-Perdomo, 2007) in the Islamic nations, even those rule by western countries such Lebanon and Algeria colonized by French, they experienced a vigorous revival of their religions emphasizing on Islamic legal traditions. As a result, the legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on the Sharia law, an Islamic law that was derived from Sunnah and Quran traditions of Prophet Mohammad.

Influence of Culture on the Development of the Country’s Legal System         

            The legal system of Saudi Arabia is influenced largely by the country’s traditions and Islamic culture. All cases are determined according to Shariah law and Saudi traditions.


The components of the criminal justice system vary from one country to the other. Many of the individual country legal systems have been influenced by their initial culture and culture inherited from their colonial powers. Although, most of the legal traditions resemble those of former colonies, the Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia held firm to their traditions and Islamic Shariah law.

Scientific Methods of Research Inquiry In Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice Research Methods Assignment Instructions

Identify and describe five scientific methods of research inquiry and how you would apply them to a research Project. Be sure to provide examples. Develop a hypothesis focused on the professional practices of criminal justice practitioners.

An example of a hypothesis would be: You could propose a hypothesis that focuses on whether law enforcement is better equipped to handle terrorism post 9/11 or whether airline safety has improved since the attacks of 9/11, etc.

Then select two methods of inquiries and how you would apply them to your hypothesis to reach a conclusion.

Scientific Methods of Research Inquiry In Criminal Justice

Research provides a way in which problems are understood, helping to inform policy decisions and thus providing solutions to the problems under consideration (Kleck, Tark, & Bellows, 2006). Regardless of the type of research, for objective answers to be provided and to inform appropriate policy decisions, research must be conducted in a certain way. The scientific method of research provides techniques for inquiring phenomena to make objective conclusions.

Read also Criminal Justice and Security Management Researches Warranting the Utilization of Mixed Methods Research

Scientific Methods of Research Inquiry

 Research process often begins with an inquiry about particular phenomena. Inquiry refers to the rational process of seeking the truth or ending a doubt (Dantzker & Hunter, 2005). Scientific research inquiry can be explanatory, descriptive or predictive. In performing scientific research inquiry, a number of methods can be adopted.

            The first method of scientific research inquiry is the process of problem identification. According to (Vito, Kunselman, & Tewksbury, 2008, p. 8) research inquiry process begins with the identification of the concern, and the subsequent test of the statements that surrounds it. The common ways in identification of the problem are through the induction and deduction. According to the authors, induction involves the use of information collected to make observations and provide a proof that a problem exists. The deduction process involves the use of a theory to explain a research problem and providing a solution to its. An example of problem identification is a research on local gang crimes in the neighborhood. The identification of the problem can be done using local police crime records. The police records can help to determine the problem for study. For instance, the records can reveal a prevalence of armed robberies. The technique will provide a way of inquiring into the nature of the problem.

            The second method of scientific inquiry is asking of a question. The purpose of asking a question is to define the problem or issue under investigation. According to (Dantzker & Hunter, 2005) asking a general question is the best way of starting an inquiry into the issue under study. Asking questions can be done with the help of W’s and H’s. The questions can take the form of “how” “why” and “why”. For example, a research on drug trafficking can begin with the question: “why does drug use occur, for what purpose and how is it being done?”. Such questions are critical in narrowing down to specific research topic on the issue.

            The other method of scientific research inquiry is the hypothesis. A hypothesis is a proposed solution to a problem, a supposition that is made on limited evidence, which serves as a starting point for problem solution. It acts as a tentative guess on what the outcome would actually be. For hypothesis to be considered scientific, it must have the ability to be supported or refuted in a carefully crafted observation or experimentation (Weisburd, Mason, Fairfax, & Britt, 2014). In addition, a well stated hypothesis should include a prediction and must be tested severally for different types of scientific researches.

            Hypotheses are of two types, for every null hypothesis; there is a corresponding alternative hypothesis (Weisburd, Mason, Fairfax, & Britt, 2014, p. 129-132). Hypothesis testing can be used in the study of attitude towards support among the probation officers in the correctional faculties. Since hypothesis is tested on two samples, the first step is to ask general questions. For example, are experienced criminal justice officers more supportive than those who do not have prior experience? Is there any major difference in the levels of support between the experienced rehabilitation officers and those who do not have prior experience? More testable hypotheses would be:

H0: Probation officers with prior experience are less supportive compared to those without prior experience.

H1: There is no statistically significant difference in the attitude towards support from the experienced rehabilitation officers and those without prior experience.

            The third scientific method of research inquiry is the use of experiment. Experimentation is the process of conducting a test to prove and receive an outcome. According to (Blakstad, 2008) experimentation provides an opportunity where the scientific hypothesis is tested. The author further notes that the process of experimentation is achieved through a manipulation of the independent variable of the research phenomena. With a formalized hypothesis, variables to be tested will be determined. The process of repeated testing of variables through experimentation will provide information on whether to reject or accept the proposed hypothesis.

            For example in the hypothesis; H0: Probation officers with prior experience are less supportive compared to those without prior experience, the variables could be the levels of support and experience of the probation officers. Making several experiments that involves the two variables will give an outcome that will test the hypothesis. The results of the experiments will inform the decision to discard or adopt the hypothesis.

            The fourth method of scientific research is the data analysis. Data analysis refers to the process of organization and review of quantitative or qualitative information collected for the purposes of review. Data represents the research information collected during the experimentation by varying the study research variables in the field. For the purposes of demonstration of data collected in the research process, graphs, charts and even pictures are often used. According to (Dantzker & Hunter, 2005) data analysis is often performed with the help of computers and software programs such as the SPSS. The results of data analysis are given in form of statistical representations.

            For example, the data about the attitudes of rehabilitation officers in the correctional facilities could be represented in form of graphs or pie charts. The data on the levels of experience and the levels of support among the officers can be collected and the results represented in form of graphs. This would provide an overview of the correlation between the levels of experience and the nature of support from rehabilitation officers in correctional centers.

            Lastly, the research conclusion provides another method of scientific research inquiry. Conclusions refer to the results of the outcomes of the experiment and the analysis of data. Conclusion is often derived after the completion of the research process. It will show how the experimented and data analysis match with the research hypothesis. After the experiment has been completed, a summary of the results (conclusion) will either show whether the hypothesis was proven or not. For example in the research on the experience and levels of attitude among the rehabilitation officers, the conclusion could be that indeed experience does affects the nature and level of support towards the incarcerated individuals.

Example of Hypothesis for Criminal Justice Professional Practice

African-American offenders are more likely to become repeat offenders once they are released, compared to the white Americans. To determine whether to accept or reject the hypothesis, an experiment will be conducted among the prisoners released from prison. The variables to be chosen will be the number of white and African-American prisoners released over five years. The data will be analyzed using data analytic techniques such as statistical representations and conclusion drawn on whether to reject or accept the hypothesis.

Restorative Justice Policies and Potential Future Criminal Justice Policy Evolution


            In many countries, restorative justice emergence under different forums including justice system, academia and activism workplace. The concept of restorative justice is described as an alternative means of settling disputes. These include new criminal justice system founded on the principles of restoration to the communities, offenders and victims living in our society(Walgrave, et al., 2013). The process involves the diversion from the formal court process, to alternative means of ensuring similar court decision are observed throughout the process such as from arresting, pre-sentencing and prison release. The restoration of justice is aimed at improving the justice system of the country(Edwards, 2015). It is applicable in child/family welfare protection, criminal justice and juvenile justice cases. Studies have shown that restorative justice incorporates informal justice, transformative justice and reparative justice among others.

Read also Restorative Justice

The Change of Criminal Justice Policies in the Past 30 Years

            In the last three decades criminal justice has evolved because many practices and programs have been implemented under the restorative justice rubric. Initially, restorative justice focused on bringing victims and offenders to the table to try and strike a deal for resolving the conflicts(Acton, 2015). The moderated meeting adapted the traditional mediation models. Progressively, the mediation meetings incorporated friends, families and professional of the parties as well as other stakeholders who have access to the community resources(Ferguson, 2015). Criminal justice policies that have evolved over the past three decades includes prisoners’ rights and alternatives to prisons, conflict resolutions, victim-offender reconciliation programs, victim-offender mediation, victim advocacy, family group conferences, sentencing circles and other practices. The objectives of these policy changes is to minimize the punishment of offenders through incarceration and if possible to abolish prison and jail terms.

Read also Creating and Implementing An Agency Policy on Ethics In A Criminal Justice Agency

            Some professionals and scholar have argued that offenders are victims of gender and racial discrimination, impoverished communities and societal neglect which could be avoided by eliminating these virtues in the society. The need to create a caring community that conclusively addresses the issues affecting victims and offenders gained momentum in 1980s. Based on legal principles of criminal justice system, formal legal process was receiving growing concern of disillusion with adversarial adjudication and fact-finding(Walgrave, et al., 2013). Therefore, negotiation was considered the appropriate alternative option because it is less centralized. In addition, restorative justice focuses on restoring the right relationship between the victim’s and offenders’ parties. Through, the incorporation of religious institutions and principles, the policy of victim-offender reconciliation program was introduced in United States. The objective was to boost close working relationship and cohesion in the society.

The Factors that have Led to Change in Criminal Justice Policy

            Many factors led to change in criminal justice policy of which some of the factors have been discussed in the above paragraph. Some of the factors included that in early criminal justice system, it was focused on punishing the offender and neglecting the motivation aspect on the part of offenders. Past criminal justice system emphasized on compensating the victims and sentencing the offender(Walgrave, et al., 2013). Professional and scholar found out that it was not just enough to compensate the victim, rather it was important to identify factors that motivated the offenders to commit the crime. As a result, restorative justice emphasized on identifying the motivational factors at the community level in order to eliminate them in the society. The second factors was the increasing number of prisoners in the United States in late 1980s and early 1990s. The growing number of incarceration made the justice department to establish an alternative option of dispute resolution. As a result, restorative justice focused on introducing alternative option of resolving conflicts without relying on incarcerations.

            The third factor that led to change in criminal justice policy was the need to reconcile the victims’ and offenders’ parties as a means of creating cohesiveness in the society. Restoration justice intended to achieve this through negotiation and the sense of creating a caring community as well as establishing the right relationship among all the communities living in the society(Zernova, & Wright, 2011). The forth factor was eradicate aspect of discrimination and inequality in the society. Considering that the judicial system is perceived to be free, impartial and fair to all people in the society, legal professionals and scholar argued that formal judicial system is characterized with adversaries relating to fact-finding and adjudication process.

The Importance of Restorative Justice to the Future Criminal Justice

Critical analysis of various justice models including rehabilitative, retributive and restorative justice models indicated that the overall outcome of justice system is to punish the crime, treat the offenders and repair the harm. The comparison of these three justice models indicated that restorative justice is superior in the future over the other models. This shows the importance of restorative justice in the future in relation to progressiveness in the justice system(Ferguson, 2015).

Read also Concept and Purpose of Restorative Justice and Restitution

Some of the important aspects of restorative justice include moving beyond oppositional caricatures of justice, address the relationship between consequentialism and retributivism to restorative justice, it gives less promises and use more accurate terms. However, it is important to incorporate restorative justice with the current practices in the formal justice system.

Get Up 50% Discount on Your First OrderUp To 50% Off Your First Order Due in Less Than 48 Hours

Grab this first time Discount, and save up to 50% on your first Order Due in Less Than 48 Hours.