Women and Rape
Daizhawright96
bpdf.pdf
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
Students,
Identified below is information which may assist you in relation to the required writing assignment in your respective course. This includes 1) an outline, 2) an example, 3) submission guidelines, 4) a student/topic listing, and 5) a grading rubric.
Outline
Section Submission sections and dates Sections I/II – 3/30/2020 Sections III/IV/V – 4/6/2020 Sections All sections – 4/20/2020
Supporting evidence refers to in-text citations as required by APA guidelines.
Example
Introduction
The wrongful conviction of youth is not only threat to justice, but a commonly understudied phenomenon in the study of juvenile justice. Moreover, studies suggest that the number of wrongfully convicted youth may increase due to the confidential nature of the juvenile court system in the United States (Bob, 2020). According the National Registry of Exonerations, the number of youth who have been wrongfully convicted and exonerated continues to increase since 1989 (National Registry of Exonerations, 2020). The purpose of this paper is to identify the role of faulty witness identification, official misconduct, and inadequate legal defense in association with wrongful youth convictions in the United States. In addition, this paper will also include information related to the main points of emphasis, a counter argument, and a conclusion which includes policy implications and areas of further research.
Cover Page I. Introduction (5-6 sentences) II. Statement of interest (2 sentences)● Statistical evidence (1-2 sentences)● Thesis statement (1 sentence) ● Summary statement (1 sentence)● Body (28 sentences)III. Claim/main point (7 sentences)●
Supporting evidenceo Claim/main point 2 (7 sentences)●
Supporting evidenceo Claim/main point 3 (7 sentences)●
Supporting evidenceo Counter-argument (7 sentences)●
Supporting evidenceo Conclusion (7 sentences)IV. Policy (4 sentences)● Areas of further research (3 sentences)● BibliographyV.
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
Body
Main Point 1 – Faulty Witness Identification
There is debate in the academic and legal communities as to how many people are wrongfully convicted at trial by juries. Disparate estimates have ranged from 3% to 10% of criminal convictions, but there seems to be a consensus that eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions (Wells & Seelau, 1995). Of the 40 cases of wrongful convictions studied by Wells et al. (1998), they found 90% of the subjects in the sample were wrongfully convicted due to eyewitness misidentification. Just as police can foster an environment for eliciting false confessions, critics have claimed detectives can influence a victim to pick a person from a photo lineup by subtlety suggesting to the victim which suspect the detective believes is responsible for committing a crime (Phillips, McAuliff, Kovera, & Cutler, 1999; Garrioch & Brimacombe, 2001; Greathouse & Kovera, 2009; Kovera & Evelo, 2017). Beyond policing practices, the traumatization that victims experience can make it difficult to recall specific details of a crime because of the malleable and fallible nature of memories. The difficulty victims experience with recalling offender characteristics may frustrate detectives who then influence them to choose a suspect based on subtle suggestions. Research has found that witnesses often make mistakes when trying to identify suspects (e.g., cross-racial identifications), even though they are confident in their ability to accurately recall criminal events and correctly locate suspects from a photo lineup (Wells & Loftus, 2003).
Main Point 2 – Official Misconduct
Research has identified evidence predicated on fraudulent science and ultimately presented to juries as a cause of wrongful convictions (Turvey, 2014), thereby calling for the regulation of forensic laboratories across the United States and holding prosecutors accountable for misleading juries based on erroneous scientific evidence (Giannelli, 2006; Gershman, 2003; Scheck, Neufeld, & Dwyer, 2000). Police officers can also engage in office misconduct by profiling groups based on race, such as young black men, and hold racist beliefs that certain groups share a criminogenic disposition. For example, the differential involvement hypothesis states minorities commit more criminal acts, whereas the differential enforcement hypothesis explains minorities experience more arrests and wrongful convictions because of discriminatory practices employed by the police and courts (Piquero & Brame, 2008). Consequently, the way in which minorities experience wrongful convictions may be a function of a racist criminal justice system rather than an unreliable interpretation of scientific evidence. Furthermore, of the 250 cases of wrongful convictions studied by Garrett (2011), 77 involved claims of prosecution concealing evidence from defense, 19 involved claims of police misconduct due to unlawful searches and seizures, and 8 involved claims of law enforcement destroying or tampering evidence. This same researcher discovered 185 cases of wrongful convictions where forensic evidence played a significant role in conviction. For example, 75 of the cases included microscopic hair comparison, 20 included fingerprint comparison, 7 included bite mark comparison, 6 included shoe print comparison, and 1 included voice comparison. Indeed, these forensic techniques and their ability to make connections between suspects and crime scenes and victims were thought to adhere to rigorous scientific methods; however, the landmark publication by the National Academy of Sciences placed significant doubt on the empirical validity of certain forensic techniques.
Main Point 3 – Inadequate Legal Defense
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
A significant moment in legal history was the Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright which ruled criminal defendants have the right to counsel in felony trials. However, having a right to legal counsel does not guarantee suspects will receive effective counsel who advocate tirelessly on their behalf. Indigent defendants, for example, often must rely on public defenders who may be unprepared to provide sound legal advice due to incompetence, limited resources, and large caseloads. Research has shown that exonerated individuals were more likely to have been indigent, thereby not having the means to hire a private attorney. Consequently, most exonerees either had attorneys appointed by the courts or public defenders (Garrett, 2011).
The Innocence Project has reported disturbing behaviors exhibited by attorneys whose inadequate legal defense led to wrongful convictions, such as sleeping in the courtroom, lawyers being disbarred immediately after concluding a death penalty case and neglecting to show up for hearings. The Innocence Project cites several claims of ineffective counsel made by defendants, such as failing to present defense witnesses, failing to investigate, failing to interview witnesses, and failing to consult experts on forensic issues. Of the 250 cases of wrongful convictions studied by Garrett (2011), 93 involved instances of prosecutors using forensic experts who provided testimony that was ultimately determined to have been unreliable, invalid, and unscientific. The faulty forensic testimony was exacerbated by defense attorneys who failed to question the reliability and validity of the forensic experts’ scientific claims.
Counter Argument – False Confessions
In contradiction to the impact of official misconduct, inadequate legal defense, and faulty witness identification, studies indicate that false confessions might bear more influence in explaining why youth are wrongfully convicted. False confessions have been described as the second leading cause of wrongful convictions (Kennedy, 2015). In fact, studies provide an estimate that approximately 25% of wrongful convictions are the result of false confessions (Drizin & Leo, 2004). Juveniles are notorious for having a greater risk of falsely confessing to crimes (Owen-Kostelnik, Reppucci, & Meyer, 2006). When considering false confessions, juveniles have been found to be wrongfully convicted at higher rates compared to adults (Gross et al., 2005). Of the 250 DNA exonerations studied by Garrett (2011), 40 of the false confessions included 14 exonerees who were mentally disabled, 13 who were juveniles, and 3 who were mentally ill. Drizin and Leo (2004) found that within a sample of 125 wrongful convictions, juveniles comprised 32% of the false confessions.
Conclusion
To prevent or minimize the likelihood of wrongful youth convictions, documented research which identifies significant factors may lead to specific policies or procedures. This includes oversight committees of legal professionals such as the American Bar Association. Several local government offices have adopted measures designed to investigate and resolve claims of wrongful convictions. Commonly referred to as integrity units, these organizations of attorneys are charged with the role of pursuing justice by working with non-profit organizations the Innocence Project.
Areas of further research related to this topic include the study of wrongful youth convictions among other legal professionals and individuals. This includes judges as well as the parents of youth who have been wrongfully convicted. It is only through the advancement of
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
this topic through research will significant legal and systemic changes begin to surface in the United States.
Bibliography (References)
Submission Procedures
The aforementioned sections will require the following format and procedures:
Word document ●
APA Format●
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
Course ID Number Enrollment Key CJ 207 24244171 000207 CJ 400 24244259 000400 CJ 480 24244221 000480
Student/Topic Listing
Name (Last Name, First Name Initial) Topic Rape Intimate Partner Abuse
Evidence of plagiarized content may result in the student receiving a zero for their assignment grade; thus, students are required to submit their assignment to Turnitin.
o
Turnitin Information:●
Please use the following information for submission of required assignments to Turnitin:
o
Long1. Miller2.
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
Human Trafficking Female Genital Mutilation Juvenile Delinquency Female Offenders – Drugs Processing of Female Offenders Female Incarceration Supervision of Females – Prison Sexual Assault Stalking Female Offenders – Property Crime Female Offenders – Violent Crimes/Murder Sentencing of Female Offenders Women Professionals in CJ System – Police Women Professionals in CJ System – Legal Women Professionals in CJ System – Prison/Probation Female Offenders – Gangs Supervision of Females – Parole Supervision of Females – Probation
Any student who does not see their name is required to notify their instructor via email.
Murray/Allen3. August/Woods4. Evans5. Minnis6. Morgan 7. Snow8. Edmond9. Ingram10. Mobley11. Collins12. Sharpe13. Montgomery14. McAdams15. Brown, J. 16. Gilbert17. Roland18. Jeffries19. Brown, A./Smith 20.
W iti I f ti CJ 480 R h E D W bb
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
Writing Information CJ 480 – Research Essay Dr. Webb
t g o at o CJ 80 esea c ssay ebb
Grading Rubric Criteria 90-100/4 80-89/3 70-79/2 60-69/1 59 and below Score Adhering to the provided submission instructions
Student exceeds the expectations in all required submission instructions.
Student meets the expectations in all required submission instructions.
Student meets the expectations in most of the required submission instructions.
Student meets the expectations in only a few or one of the required submission instructions.
Student fails to meet the required expectations in all the required submission instructions.
Adhering to the provided content instructions
Student exceeds the expectations in all required content instructions.
Student meets the expectations in all required content instructions.
Student meets the expectations in most of the required content instructions.
Student meets the expectations in only a few or one of the required content instructions.
Student fails to meet the required expectations in all the required content instructions.
Grammatical and spelling errors
No errors are identified.
Minimal errors identified. (2-3)
Minimal errors identified. (3-5)
Minimal errors identified. (5-7)
Excessive amount of errors identified.
Organization and clarity of thought
Student exceeds the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in most of the required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in only a few or one of the required parts of the assignment.
Student fails to meet the required expectations in all the required parts of the assignment.
Adhering the required APA guidelines
Student exceeds the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in most of the required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in only a few or one of the required parts of the assignment.
Student fails to meet the required expectations in all the required parts of the assignment.
Claims in the manuscript include logical and credible evidence; this includes providing valid evidence (i.e., research articles, etc.) as justification for identified claims
Student exceeds the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in all required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in most of the required parts of the assignment.
Student meets the expectations in only a few or one of the required parts of the assignment.
Student fails to meet the required expectations in all the required parts of the assignment.
Content in the document is consistent with information that has been previously published or submitted.
As a result of submitting the assignment to ‘Turnitit’, similarity level is identified between 0-5%.
As a result of submitting the assignment to ‘Turnitit’, similarity level is identified between 6-10%.
As a result of submitting the assignment to ‘Turnitit’, similarity level is identified between 11-15%.
As a result of submitting the assignment to ‘Turnitit’, similarity level is identified between 16-20%.
As a result of submitting the assignment to ‘Turnitit’, similarity level is identified above 20%.
Total
