Criminal Justice System: Innocent Until Proven Guilty
“Innocent until proven guilty”, one of the most well-known quotes heard in media coverage on some of the highest profiled cases trial in the United State Courts System. Acquiring the comfort to know that everyone is assumed innocent until evidence proves otherwise can only be done knowing that all evidence would be collected to the fullest of the law and in the best upheld standers of the court system. The integrity of the evidence is what balance’s out the outcome of all criminal cases and the integrity of the first responder as well as that of the police department. If anything everyone present at a crime scene is responsible during the collected evidences. From the moment it was discover until the scene is cleared. Identifying evidence has it challenges because evidence can be everything within the proximity of a crime scene or many miles or continents away. Distance and jurisdiction alone is difficult to uphold and control. Properly identifying, collecting, and processing the evidence is what makes a
…show more content…
criminal case solid or weak. The courts outcome count on the proficiency of the police department investigation team to bring in evidence that will convict a defendant.
The police department is in charge of collecting the evidences and if not done properly anyone can get away with murder.
When not done properly the integrity of the Criminal investigation dept. gets discredit. The can have a ripple effect and the departments and other criminal can use this as “Questionable” work ethics practices in their precinct. The evidence need to be supported by affidavit. In the high profile case of O.J. Simpson an ex-football player that turn actor things just work in his favor. He was accused of a double murder. The victims were his ex-wife and her current lover. The collection of evidence was challenge and so was the preserving of evidences two of the most important part of any criminal case. This case is a perfect example of a witty defense attorney, and a reckless police department first responder’s team. The public depends on the opportunity to defend themselves, but when doing so the evidence presented should also uphold the
Law. The possibility of police culture may have been present in this instant. The presences of an active code of silences were very present in this investigation as the defense’s points out. Mr. Simpson’s attorney validated to the point that someone was or must have been “sloppily collecting and poorly handled evidences” (Today, 1996). No first responder should be that careless with their job or was this purposely commit. This would always surface as a rumor. One this is certain tampering with evidences is a felony offence. Somehow it was fascinating to see the accusations in the O.J Simpson case the defense attorney not only able to question the rendering of the DNA results, but also as unreliable. The evidences were so discredited that he imprints doubt and blame the persons responsible of tampering with evidences (Times, 1994). This discredits the Police Department and the Correctional System heavily.
Nevertheless, if the police did or did not conspired against Mr. Simpson, his defense attorney was able to convince the jury that the Police Dept. did in fact handle carelessly and irresponsible the evidences. This is a respectable example of why it is so imperative to preserve evidence properly, collect such evidence appropriately, and used appropriate scientific tools that would maintain the quality and truthfulness of such evidences. Everyone in The United States of America has the right to be proven guilty and should be assumed innocent. This criminal case played out in front of hundreds of American homes as it was broadcast on Television. If it was asked to anyone if O.J. Simpson is guilty, people would probably say yes, but everyone including the court system known that Mr. Simpson is innocent because he was not proven guilty.
criminal case solid or weak. The courts outcome count on the proficiency of the police department investigation team to bring in evidence that will convict a defendant.
The police department is in charge of collecting the evidences and if not done properly anyone can get away with murder.
When not done properly the integrity of the Criminal investigation dept. gets discredit. The can have a ripple effect and the departments and other criminal can use this as “Questionable” work ethics practices in their precinct. The evidence need to be supported by affidavit. In the high profile case of O.J. Simpson an ex-football player that turn actor things just work in his favor. He was accused of a double murder. The victims were his ex-wife and her current lover. The collection of evidence was challenge and so was the preserving of evidences two of the most important part of any criminal case. This case is a perfect example of a witty defense attorney, and a reckless police department first responder’s team. The public depends on the opportunity to defend themselves, but when doing so the evidence presented should also uphold the
Law. The possibility of police culture may have been present in this instant. The presences of an active code of silences were very present in this investigation as the defense’s points out. Mr. Simpson’s attorney validated to the point that someone was or must have been “sloppily collecting and poorly handled evidences” (Today, 1996). No first responder should be that careless with their job or was this purposely commit. This would always surface as a rumor. One this is certain tampering with evidences is a felony offence. Somehow it was fascinating to see the accusations in the O.J Simpson case the defense attorney not only able to question the rendering of the DNA results, but also as unreliable. The evidences were so discredited that he imprints doubt and blame the persons responsible of tampering with evidences (Times, 1994). This discredits the Police Department and the Correctional System heavily.
Nevertheless, if the police did or did not conspired against Mr. Simpson, his defense attorney was able to convince the jury that the Police Dept. did in fact handle carelessly and irresponsible the evidences. This is a respectable example of why it is so imperative to preserve evidence properly, collect such evidence appropriately, and used appropriate scientific tools that would maintain the quality and truthfulness of such evidences. Everyone in The United States of America has the right to be proven guilty and should be assumed innocent. This criminal case played out in front of hundreds of American homes as it was broadcast on Television. If it was asked to anyone if O.J. Simpson is guilty, people would probably say yes, but everyone including the court system known that Mr. Simpson is innocent because he was not proven guilty.