"Assess the effectiveness of the criminal justice system as a means of achieving just (1 Viewer)

[strawberries122]

Just finished the criminal investigation process, and need to write an essay for this so I've got the detail required if in case it shows up in the trials or the HSC exam.

I'm a bit stuck on what to write though. So far, I've thought of a few points
-The maximum period which is 4 hours protects the individual rights of suspects and can be effective in achieving justice for them as they can't be forced to sit for hours and hours where the police keep on questioning and interrogating them, and tiring them out to the point that they will say anything or sign anything just to leave
-The right of a juvenile offender to have a responsible adult present with them also protecting the individual rights of suspects/young offenders as children can often be vulnerable, may not realize if their rights are being breached by police, may not realize that they may be incriminating themselves with what they say, an responsible adult can ensure that proper guidelines are adhered to by police.
-In the period of interrogation, where the interview must be recorded for both the police and the suspect - so in case, the police tamper with the recording to incriminate the suspect, the suspect has a back up to show what the truth really is - again effective in achieving justice for suspects.

I don't even know if these are remotely right. Any ideas?

EDIT: Criminal investigation process, not criminal justice system.

 

[4025808]

Re: "Assess the effectiveness of the criminal justice system as a means of achieving

If you're assessing effectiveness, you'll need these criteria:

- Accessibility
- Equality
- Enforceability
- Efficiency
- Reflection of Societal values

Think of some ideas and you could possibly match it up to those criteria (that's the way I did this, iirc)

I have some ideas below:

* The fact that in court, you are believed to be innocent before proven guilty. This is better because it protects the rights of suspects from being falsely accused of committing a crime.
* Note that juvenile offenders have full anonymity, meaning that nothing can be revealed to the public. This improves the rights of the offender, also allowing them to restart their lives without living in shame.

You'll need to think of arguments against as well, in order to stay balanced. I will provide a few below:

* Whilst the law represents an ideal picture of the suspects rights, the suspect may not completely understand the law. As a result, the police can manipulate the evidence to make a conviction. As a result, this can really harm people who are mis-informed of the law and belong in the lower IQ spectrum.
* Terrorist laws are particularly representative of the above point.

I'll try to add more if I have time.

 

[wogboy23]

Re: "Assess the effectiveness of the criminal justice system as a means of achieving

Criminal trial process, you say?
I like essay questions like this, because if you have a holistic understanding/snapshot of the syllabus itself, you can methodically insert the corresponding sections with which to construct a seamless essay honing in on the question.
Just a suggestion on how to go about it :-

Police powers - under the Crimes Act and Law Enforcement (Police Powers and Responsibilities) Act emphasise the difficulties surrounding police discretionary powers - yet this is balanced somewhat by warrants acting as judicial safeguards against police abusing their powers - eg. warrants for a more 'legally enacted' investigation process, phone taps or surveillance - but also warrants to reinforce police search powers of 'search and seizure' with 'reasonable force' and on 'reasonable grounds.' However, despite the Crime Act enshrining the police having the ability to 'search, seize and detain things', and the police acting as a separate executive arm to the Government, many argue that police still violate and 'step boundaries' - this prejudice of the 'rule of law' is highlighted statistically by police targeting up to 75% of children, telling them to 'move on' as well as the highly disputed shaking of hair, tongue swabs eg. as part of their investigation

The cases set out for investigation themselves also to some extent dispute the efficacy of the criminal trial process - i.e. police only undertake cases they feel sustain sufficient resources and severity/indictment - as can be seen in R v Munster (2009). - However, processes of arrest do support the criminal trial process - as suspects or the accused can only be questioned after they are accused, after which sufficient evidence is gathered and fingerprint/DNA technology in accordance wit the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) - this effectiveness is upheld by police gathering witness testimonials and physical or 'real' evidence such as posters, charts and as seen in R v Campbell (2010), police, with the assistance of ballistic and sociologic experts, found that the branch had snapped adjacent to the body fallen 50m from Sydney Olympic park. - This idea of 'beyond reasonable doubt' is, conversely, questioned as some DNA evidence admitted in court can be seen as inadmissible, thereby undermining the legal investigation and trial processes, and questioning the legal maxim, "innocent till proven guilty"

The interrogation process - suggests a sense of justice and equity with police interrogation being no longer than 4 hours, yet this can be judicially extended with a court-approved warrant allowing for an additional 4 hours, thereby also keeping in-line police discretionary powers. Also, for minors, as the St George River Case (forgot the name exactly, but was in 1999) parents or guardians must be notified and have the caution (legal rights) signed, with an interview friend also allowed to be present. -Also, after this methodical process is carried out, (with intoxication/phoning times taken into account), the notion of bail and remand is discussed - bail would be granted as a conditional release of the accused with the issuance of a summons (legal document outlining where and to which charges the accused must meet) - yet enshrinement of justice within this final process of the criminal investigation process before the accused is trialled, is remand. Remand, as placement in custody, further clouds the maxim of "innocent till proven guilty"

Hope this helps - there are several other points I have neglected, but this is a decent start.