Final Paper

Literature review

Wrongful conviction is not only common in United States but in almost all countries across the globe. The criminal justice system is responsible of distinguish between the innocent and the guilty whenever a crime occurs but sadly this role has not been entirely handled to its perfection (Redlich, & Shteynberg, 2016). There have been a lot of challenges within the criminal justice systems implemented in different countries when it comes to telling without doubt that in deed the person being prosecuted is the guilty one in order to avoid convicting innocent people. Many people are aware of these challenges and have taken advantage of them to conceal crime while sending innocent people to prison. According to Green (2017) the depth of wrongful conviction in the United States criminal justice system stands at 50%. This is to mean that just the same way it is possible to convict guilty people the innocent people can equally be accused in a manner they cannot prove their innocence.

As noted in a research article by Denov, & Campbell, (2005) though making use of Canada proves that wrongful conviction has extremely painful experiences for the victims and their families. According to ex-convicts who strongly claim that even if they served a jail sentence they were innocent of the crime they were accused of, they claim that they are unable to overcome the feel of unfairness (Huff, 2004). Many ex-convicts claimed that in prison there is a lot of bitterness that can easily compel an innocent person to revenge after being released to somehow compensate the bad feeling. The research also noted that with increasing number of innocent people in different prisons, the issue has been talked about publicly (Denov, & Campbell, 2005). The media has also addressed the issue but the challenge is that the government has done limited or nothing to change the situation. Leaving the issue unresolved has only created room for more innocent people getting victimized and serve long jail term as the culprit remain free committing more crimes and framing many other innocent people (Redlich, & Shteynberg, 2016). it is a trend that victims claims the government needs researching and implementing a system that would filter things out to have the issue at least addressed to a good percentage.

According to a research conducted by Gross, Possley, & Stephens (2017) in the United States, wrongful conviction is an ancient practice that has been practiced intentionally at first and this is the reason why the modern day criminal justice system is marked with massive challenges of irregularities (Green, 2017). The research found out that in the ancient days when racial discrimination was rampant, the criminal justice personnel for instance the police could point out the guilty party based on race, ethnicity, religion, and many other factors instead of working towards identifying the real culprit (Denov, & Campbell, 2005). For instance in the case where the police would be alerted of a crime taking place like burglary, fraud, assault, rape, or even murder and would get people of different races, the one of minority race would get accused and arrested completely being denied a chance to defend oneself. The research found out that in the 80s and 90s, 80% of prisons in different American states were comprised of people from minority races particularly African American (Huff, 2004). Of 80% approximately 50% would be innocent of the crime accused of a situation that led to total overcrowding in American Prisons. The research concludes that it is this specific trend that pushed America to its current state of having a relatively high percentage of wrongful convictions.

In a different research by Redlich, & Shteynberg, (2016) many people after being arrested and charged in court while innocent mostly do not even find the reason of pleading not guilty. The innocent serving a jail term claims that wrongful convictions are so intense in the United States such that it becomes completely hard for one to represent one-self and get heard. In most cases, the police, attorneys, and the prosecutor appears like they have already taken side thereby acting like the accused has been found guilty leaving completely slim chances that an innocent person can use to liberate one-self (Redlich, & Shteynberg, 2016). On the other hand, the culprit who mostly happens to be well connected tends to bribe either the members of public or law enforcers and get away with the crime. This is to mean that whenever an innocent person is involved, the culprit is never even known or mentioned in the case making it hard for the accused to proven that indeed he/she never committed the crime being accused of and hence have to take up the judge’s verdict.

According to Huff (2004) there have been massive efforts put in place by the judiciary in regards to the criminal justice process. The overall purpose of the efforts have been establishing and implementing an effective criminal justice process that does not jail the innocent but rather the culprits. However, only a slight level of success that stands at 10% has been achieved as compared to innocent people incarceration in the 80s and 90s and the current state. According to a research by Denov, & Campbell, (2005) it has been noted that not all people within the criminal justice system are committed at attaining accuracy and effectiveness of the process thereby allowing malpractices to creep in. At the same time, there have been instances members of public taking part in criminal justice process have also confused the criminal justice system by confidently offering false witness (Huff, 2004). This is to mean that some people who are wrongly convicted are not entirely the criminal justice system fault but failure on the society through failing to apply morals and ethics (Denov, & Campbell, 2005). For instance, there are instances where culprits easily frame an innocent person as being the culprit and some people who even not at the scene are paid to witness thereby misleading the jury.

In an article by Huff, (2004) entitled “Wrongful convictions: the American experience. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice” it is evident a lot of people in Canada and United States have suffered in prison, others death sentence and others forced to pay fines they know nothing about as a result of wrongful convictions. Huff notices that wrongful convictions can go to dangerous extents and even the efforts put in place to create necessary awareness are never granted ample attention and effective action by the justice system (2004). Of importance to notice is that there are a lot of innocent prisoners in all prisons across United States and Canada with the main challenge being that they continue to threaten the safety of members of public (Denov, & Campbell, 2005). This is because whenever one innocent person is sent to prison means there are one or more criminals roaming freely posing threat to human life and property. The author hence claims that members of society since they contribute to wrongful convictions requires assisting in setting records straight by making sure they do not offer false witness. Additionally, in the case an innocent person is suspected to be in prison, he/she should be granted a chance to sir his/her version that could probably offer a lead to trace the real culprit.

In a 2019 research by Norris, et al., many innocent people in America and across the world are convicted of crimes they have not convicted. As the cases of wrong conviction increases, the criminal justice system is trying to develop strategies necessary to prevent the increase of wrongful convictions. One of the identified strategies is reforming the forensic and criminal justice process to make it completely technologized and advanced such that any false information would be detected before the final verdict is given (Denov, & Campbell, 2005). Additionally, avoiding hastened sentencing would go a long way in granting the jury a chance to differentiate between witnesses and participants telling the truth from those telling lies. It is believed that with the use of advanced technology that America currently celebrates

For over two decades, technology has completely advanced and the American Criminal Justice has been in the fore front to embrace it. Technological methods, tools, and systems have been put in place to help improve the criminal justice system. In a research by Gudjonsson, (2021) almost 80% of Americans believed that the application of advanced technology in the criminal justice system would bring wrongful convictions to less than 10% from the current 50%. Nevertheless, nothing much have been noted to have changed for the better since the same technologies are wittily used to conceal crime and instead make another person to appear in person like he/she was the one committing the crime (Gudjonsson, 2021). As a matter of reality, technology has empowered criminals to eliminate any information collected through the systems that can implicate them and instead place another innocent person to replace them. the technological evidences of images and finger prints among others makes it even harder for an innocent person who has only been planted after a crime has taken place to proof his/her innocence leading to wrongful convictions.

According to Norris et al., (2019) many people in the United States have no trust with the criminal justice system in place. Members of public feel that it is any time an innocent person can be picked from the street, get accused of a crime, and get imprisoned. For instance members of public claimed that there are innocent people whom get trapped and have illegal drugs planted on them as the real culprit try to escape and such people are treated as drug dealers. Others have found themselves being accused in possession of illegal firearms without their knowledge and many other sorts of crime (Norris, & Mullinix, 2020). The fact there is no way that the original owner of the drugs or illegal arms can be identified and brought to book, many feels that they are just lucky not to be in prison. To support this claim, Green (2017) states that many are instances when the prosecutors since they must have a valid and strong argument in court have been caught poaching and coaching witnesses. This is a practice that also communicates lack of morals and ethics in the criminal justice system causing high rate of wrongful convictions. Moreover, it is from such malpractices that criminals are encouraged to commit crime and bribe criminal justice personnel to have another innocent person charged.

On a positive tone Norris, & Mullinix, (2020) in a research noted that the United States government has been taking key considerations of public opinions on wrongful convictions. The fact that the number of the directly and indirectly affected has been on the rise is something that has made the voice of victims to get louder and heard by many. Different tactics have been in the last few years been established with intentions of identifying the real crime culprits and vindicating the innocent. Nevertheless, the efforts are only on trial levels and a lot need to being done to reverse this ancient practice that has caused millions of people pain, misery, and even death (Norris, & Mullinix, 2020). All the same, the government calls for all parties involved in the process to practice morals, ethics, and professionalism. It is through joint efforts that wrongful convictions can be put to an end or at least brings the percentage to a manageable level of 10% and below.

References

Denov, M. S., & Campbell, K. M. (2005). Criminal injustice: Understanding Canada’s causes, effects, and responses to wrongful conviction. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(3), 224-249.

Green, B. A. (2017). Prosecutorial Ethics in Retrospect. Geo. J. Legal Ethics, 30, 461.

Gross, S. R., Possley, M., & Stephens, K. (2017). Race and wrongful convictions in the United States.

Gudjonsson, G. H. (2021). The science-based pathways to understanding false confessions and wrongful convictions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 633936.

Huff, C. (2004). Wrongful convictions: the American experience. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 46(2), 107-120.

Norris, R. J., Bonventre, C. L., Redlich, A. D., Acker, J. R., & Lowe, C. (2019). Preventing wrongful convictions: An analysis of state investigation reforms. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 30(4), 597-626.

Norris, R. J., & Mullinix, K. J. (2020). Framing innocence: An experimental test of the effects of wrongful convictions on public opinion. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 16(2), 311-334.

Redlich, A. D., & Shteynberg, R. V. (2016). To plead or not to plead: A comparison of juvenile and adult true and false plea decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 40(6), 611.