Law and Justice

Posts Tagged ‘Justice’

From Law and Order to CSI lots of folk have became enthralled with the arena of people and law enforcement. These forms of shows have opened a giant field of interest in the criminal justice field of study.

An education in criminal justice might be the portal to several different job opportunities that you have been trying to find. Criminal justice is a stepping stone to several other career selections such as paralegal, lawyer, customs officer and many more.

Events from 9/11 to university shootings have led straight to an increase in the interest of criminal justice. However DNA test have set many free that have been wrongly detained. This trend has led straight to the need for highly qualified and trained individuals in the criminal justice world. If you have been looking to aid in making changes in this world, then a criminal justice role is where you must be. If you’re hunting for a career that will really make a difference, consider criminal justice. This field will be a great fit for those who are dedicated to serving their country.

You’ll learn a broad range of topics from forensics, info of the way in which the court system works, ethics in the criminal justice field, policing and plenty more. You may also learn a broad scope of the legal system that’s's taught in this program. From family law, business law, criminal law, property and other such elements. There’s much to be absorbed in this field of study, from how wise men behave, to understanding the forensics behind the crime as well as all the laws that govern our country and society. Courses are also offered in constitutional law, criminology and forensic science, including crime scene scenarios that introduce you to criminal investigation and crime scene preservation. Although this is a grueling field to step into it is highly rewarding both in the college room and in the job front.

Through this program, you’ll learn a good range of data that may be employed in many various work environments, including presidency offices such as customs officers and immigration.

Other fields that are open to you who have finished the criminal justice program is in forensics or psychology.

Whatever the requirement is the world of criminal justice is massive and has many branches. From govt to self job there’s significant opportunity.

Attending Criminal Justice University

Incoming search terms:

www thetexascriminallawattorneys com (7)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-criminal-attorney (2)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/index html (2)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-dui-lawyers (1)

The chaos and fear of the 9/11 attack generated a wave of sheer panic amongst all the citizens of U.S. It was not an anticipated incident and the terror and desperation created from it will never be wiped out from our minds. There has been a great upsurge for the criminal law studies in the nation lately. The study of crime, criminals and justice system constitutes the gist of a criminal justice program. This thrilling and satisfying career can be obtained by studying the criminal justice associate degree programs which have been provided by a number of accredited universities and colleges.

Criminal law associate degree leads the students in to a new world of Cops, Courts, and Corrections. An associate degree would help any individual to procure entry-level jobs in paralegal services, court administration, victim services and corrections. An associate degree program in criminal law can also be defined as a stepping stone to other advanced studies in the same field as in the bachelor’s program and finally the law school program.

Associate degree in Criminal Law has been provided by different universities and colleges with a wide-variety of different subjects and topics. Most of the universities and colleges require the applicants to have a GED or High School Diploma in order to enroll for a criminal justice associate program. Liberty University Online is among the top ten online colleges and has been successfully providing a degree of Associate’s in Criminal Justice. The Remington College Online has carefully designed two distinct Associate degree programs in criminal justice. One is an Associate’s in Criminal Justice and the other one is the Associate’s in Paralegal Studies. University of Phoenix online

is widely popular all over the nation as the premier university committed towards the welfare of the students by preparing them for a profession in crime law and provides the Associate of Arts in Criminal Law program for the students. Everest College Online and Everest University Online provide a set of different associate degree programs in criminal law. Both the organizations offer a Criminal Justice Associate’s Degree and also another unique program called the Criminal Investigations Associate’s Degree. Keiser University offers special programs in the field of Criminal law like the Associate’s in Criminal Law, Associate’s in Homeland Security and Associate’s in Paralegal Studies, which mostly covers all the basic areas of the crime justice studies. Many other colleges and universities who also provide different criminal justice associate degrees are the Florida Tech University, Herzing University, Jones College, Kaplan University, Rasmussen College, Westwood College and so on.

Criminal law associate degree programs have become exceptionally famous and have been declared so in October 2007. Increasing hazard to homeland security and enforcement of severe criminal prosecution laws has inundated the number of correction officers and also paralegals and legal researchers. Hence, an associate degree in criminal law has turned in to a wonderful career line and also the first step towards a fine future.

Incoming search terms:

www thetexascriminallawattorneys com (7)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-criminal-attorney (2)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/index html (2)everest university (1)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-dui-lawyers (1)

Different people choose different types of careers. It is very important to make sure that you choose your career according to your interest. Interests of people vary and this is the reason why the choice of career also varies from one person to the other. There are lots of people who are interested in becoming a judge.

They want to take up a career in law. But you must always remember that becoming a judge is not at all easy. There are certain judges who are appointed while there are others who are elected.

The most important thing that these people should have in their minds is justice. The judge is the actual head of the court and he needs to preside over the proceedings and finally he needs to give the verdict in the case.

He must make sure that he provides equal justice to all. If you are a resident of United States then you must aim to become the judge in the United States. The legal systems practiced in different countries usually vary from each other.

The procedure to become the head of the court depends on the legal system of that particular country. In the United States there is the common law which is followed in the legal system. But before you become the head of court you need to become an attorney.

The attorney needs to go through some more training to become the judge. But the rules are different in places where the legal system follows the civil law. If you really want to become the judicial head then you must be very serious with your studies and training.

Other than this, the judge must also have extensive knowledge. He also needs to be impartial in any case. He must go through the hearing and then provide a verdict which is right for both the sides.

If you are interested in the legal career then you must be ready to sacrifice a lot of time which you could have spent with your family. The professional must always make sure that he does not bring personal feelings and emotions while giving verdict to the case.

These people must also be ready to work for long hours. The judges in the United States are appointed according to the laws present in the articles of the constitution. The judges are appointed on the consent as well as the advice of the president of the United States.

These people can also be removed with the help of the impeachment procedure. There are certain courts present in the United States where these people do not require a particular qualification for the post. Always try to choose you career very carefully.

Incoming search terms:

www thetexascriminallawattorneys com (9)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-criminal-attorney (3)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/index html (3)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-dui-lawyers (2)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-criminal-lawyers (1)

Because our family courts are not setup to protect the rights of litigants but a so-called ‘higher good’, it’s ripe for distributing injustice and persecution – mostly to fathers and their children. This article explains why.

Thomas Jefferson stated that trial by such a jury is the only anchor yet known to man to hold the state to the principles of the constitution so as not to leave the protection of the individual solely up to the government or judicial elites.

It’s through the jury that ‘the people’ participate in the judicial process and rein in unconstitutional or unreasonable laws and judgments of the state. Without the protection of a jury trial, tyranny will surely reign.

*Our most fundamental rights are in jeopardy in family court for doing no wrong:

At stake are your right to parent your child, to control and choose your income and profession, your right to maintain your professional and driver’s licenses, your right to have or maintain your passport and travel as you see fit. These rights are guaranteed by the constitution.

*What about the ‘best interest of the child’ – isn’t that ‘a greater good’?

Greater goods are part of dictatorships and tyrannies. The greatest goods of republics are peoples’ constitutional rights which includes the protection of ‘due process’. Supreme Court case laws states that the ‘best interest of the child’ resides in a ‘fit’ parent – not the state.

*How are fundamental rights at stake?

Because if the family court judge assigns you to be the noncustodial parent, you lose your parenting rights to your children (i.e. to support them directly, live with them, and direct their lives) and then you’re forced by the court to pay the mother whatever the judge says – amounts that will impoverish most fathers. If you don’t pay regularly and pay it all, you’ll go to jail without a trial.

*What do you have to do wrong to be assigned the noncustodial status?

Nothing! Fit parents – overwhelmingly fathers – have their constitutional rights denied by judges assigning them as noncustodial parents.

The judge – as representative of the state – invokes his ‘illegal’ right to take away constitutional rights of fit fathers for the ‘best interests’ of the children. Best interest determinations are only to be invoked when there are no fit parents.

*The family court setup prevents protection of father’s constitutional rights:

The family court doesn’t allow a trial with a jury. It only permits ‘bench’ trial which means that the judge is both judge and jury for you. So you’re denied the protection of the people from the legal elites and special interest groups that feed off the injustice that the family courts produce.

*Why doesn’t the family court protect a father’s constitutional rights?

Because when you eliminate the natural protections – like a jury – you leave judicial elites in power. More power means a more corruptible system. That’s human nature.

The family court and its affiliates have seized on a ‘greater good’ excuse such as ‘best interest of the children’ and ‘safety of women’ to forego constitutional law and protections for fathers.

*Special interest groups influence on the family court setup and actions:

A host of legal and court-assisting persons and organizations have a strong financial interest in keeping the family court set-up as it is. They together can be called the Divorce and Domestic Violence Industry (the DDVI).

The DDVI is made up of the judges, lawyers, GALs, mothers/women, probation/family service officers, psychiatrists, sociologists, visitation centers, battered women’s shelters, the abuse industry, women’s advocates, the state’s department of revenue (DOR), the federal government’s child support enforcement division…and more! Let’s consider where some of these entities find their financial interest in the family court setup.

The DDVI have interest in:

* Setting larger child support orders.

Both the court and DOR/CSE(child support enforcement (agency)) receive federal incentive payments. Court-DOR (Department of Revenue) agreements send some DOR money to the Court systems. County jails make money by more inmates – who are court-created deadbeat dads.

* Making abuse allegations more easily allowed.

Visitation centers and lawyers benefit by this as well as do Battered Women shelters and Batterers Groups. Incidentally, battering is relatively rare; accusations are very common.

* Aggravating parental exchanges and unequal allotment of rights – as the court imposes.

This makes lots of money and job security for lawyers, family services officers, psychologists, GALS, parenting class coordinators, women’s groups, and affiliated VAWA organizations who receive some $5 Billion over 5 years.

The DDVI, taken together, is a powerful lobby and participant in the rule-making process. They’re not about to favor any change – however fair – that will undermine their positions, benefits, or money and power they’ve accumulated.

Incoming search terms:

flash factory los angeles web design (1)

We already mentioned intelligence. Remember in the article: How Do We Account for Instinct? we divided it up into two broad categories, one of which we call instinct and the other a type of decision-making ability? We grouped the lower forms of animals into the first category and humans into the second. Other creatures, we allowed, appear to operate using a combination of instinct and “thinking.”

But, of course, it is really more complicated than that. People have instincts too. The sexual drive, a mother’s love for her offspring, and a basic desire to survive are undeniable human instincts. Each of these traits are shared to one degree or another with animals. However, we seem to have something more than mere instinct.

Somehow or another we find ourselves with a moral sense of right and wrong. We feel as though we know somethings are right and others are wrong. But then again, is what we consider right and wrong merely a subjective whim? Or is it possible that there might be a real, honest-to-goodness, objective standard for good behavior?

Some people claim there’s no fixed standard for decent behavior. It varies over time and from one culture to another. Different civilizations and different ages have had very different ideas on morality, they say. And they seem to have a point.

Manners and Styles

Certainly manners, styles, and dress codes change over time. The past half century has seen considerable change in the United States. In 1960, most women worked in their homes raising children. They usually wore dresses, and those dresses were of a certain conventional length.

Men were expected to be the breadwinners. They wore their hair short and rarely had facial hair. Children addressed grownups as “Sir” or Ma’am” and in general were taught to be deferential to adults. Unless you were well acquainted, it was Mr., Mrs, or Miss whatever their last-name-was. Times have changed!

Much of what passes as normal behavior nowadays would have been socially unacceptable just thirty years ago. And it works both ways. Many of the things our ancestors did in the past would not be tolerated today. A few hundred years ago, capital punishment was the approved punishment for crimes ranging from petty theft to treason. Witches were hung or burned. And slavery was by and large considered an acceptable practice.

Moral Principles

Obviously some of the things our forefathers believed are social taboos today and vice versa. However, that’s not the whole story. While some values can and do vary, others evidently do not. In his book, Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis points out that if you take the trouble to compare the moral teachings of ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, Babylonians, Hindus, Chinese, Greeks, and Romans, you will be struck with how much they have in common with each other and with us today.

Fair play, unselfishness, courage, faithfulness, honesty, and truthfulness have always been admired, whereas treachery, murder, robbery, theft, and rape have always been condemned. Men have disagreed over whom you should be unselfish to – just your family, your country, or to everyone.

But none have advocated putting yourself first. Some cultures have allowed more than one wife, but none allow you to have just any woman you want.

Golden Rule

The most universal concept of all is also the most basic. We call it the Golden Rule. Most moral teachings state it in a negative form such as “Never do to others what you would not have them do to you.” This fundamental rule of conduct turns up in rabbinical Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism.

We also see it in Greek and Roman ethical teachings and even in Old Norse proverbs. Jesus Christ turned it around and put it in its positive form two thousand years ago. “Do to others what you would have them do to you.”

Is any other type of morality possible? Lewis challenges us, “. . . think what a totally different morality would mean. Think of a country where people were admired for running away in battles, or where a man felt proud of double-crossing all the people who had been kindest to him. You might as well try to imagine a country where two and two make five.”

The Moral Law

It sounds like the rule of right and wrong, the moral law, or whatever you want to call it, exists on two separate levels. One is arbitrary. Fashion, convention, or taste sets the tone for acceptable behavior on this level.

Then we see another moral level beyond the trends of society. Here we find a permanent core of values. These fundamental guides for human behavior seem to be deeply ingrained in mankind and are not swayed by time and place circumstances.

Everyday conversation suggests that most of us at heart believe in a real right and wrong. Take arguments for example. People young and old, educated and uneducated, often say such things as: “Come on, you promised.” “Hey, you broke in line ahead of us. That’s not fair.” “Why don’t you help me? I helped you when you needed it.”

C.S. Lewis tells us that remarks of that sort don’t just mean that the other fellow’s attitude doesn’t happen to please the speaker. There is something else involved. The one who makes the complaint is appealing to a certain standard of behavior which he expects the other person to know about.

And usually he is right. The other man rarely replies, “I don’t give a hoot about fairness.” No. He makes out that what he’s doing isn’t really unfair after all. He claims to have some special excuse which lets him off the hook for not living up to his promise this time, or for breaking in line, or for not helping you on this occasion.

It looks as though both sides really agree there is a law or rule of fair play. Quarreling means trying to show the other person is wrong. What’s the sense in trying to do that unless both sides agree as to what is right and wrong. Just as in basketball, to paraphrase Lewis’ example, there’s no sense in saying a player committed a foul unless there is an agreement on the rules of basketball.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Thieves cannot excuse themselves saying they didn’t know stealing was a crime. Murderers can’t get away with murder, claiming they didn’t know murder was wrong. The underlying idea is that all citizens are expected to understand that stealing and murder are wrong.

Can you imagine an attorney in a request that the case be dismissed against his client, saying, “No judge, I don’t think my client should be held responsible for murdering his wife and six children. After all, the defendant doesn’t have a law degree. Why should we expect him to know all the finer points of the law?”

On the other hand, lawyers do try to excuse their clients by pleading “temporary insanity.” Doesn’t that let the cat out of the bag? What they are saying is that for one reason or another, the accused was momentarily mentally unbalanced and didn’t understand he was committing an act which all of us know to be wrong. Had the defendant been sane at the moment, he would have recognized and upheld the same Rules for Right Conduct that all the rest of us sane people do.

They seem to be affirming that criminal codes are based on certain moral truths. In fact, federal and state criminal laws wouldn’t make sense unless there were a real standard of decent behavior which the “sane” criminal knows as well as we do and ought to have practiced.

Sometimes right and wrong are so obvious, no one seriously questions it. After World War II, Germany was widely denounced for their war crimes. But as Lewis observes: “What was the sense in saying the enemy were in the wrong unless Right is a real thing which the Nazis at bottom knew as well as we did and ought to have practiced?”

Earlier we asked, is our idea of right and wrong a subjective whim or a real objective standard for good behavior. Evidently it is both. Manners, styles, clothing, and opinions on any number of subjects vary over time and location.

Then again virtues such as courage, faithfulness, and honesty have always been praised. Likewise, vices such as treachery, murder, and theft have been universally condemned.

Civilizations throughout history have reflected these eternal values. And they are still with us today. Much of what we think, much of what we say, and much of what we do would be utter nonsense if there were not a true moral standard of right and wrong.

Now if we can agree that there really is an objective standard of right and wrong, we can go on to our next question. Namely where does this standard come from? Some say mankind invented the moral code because civilization couldn’t function without basic rules for getting along. Through education, they passed these rules for right living on down from one generation to the next.

Others say the same Outside Source which designed the human body also produced the moral code as a guide for our behavior. The moral law was imprinted in humans much the same as instinct. Who’s right?

Before we take up that question, let’s first consider an entirely different subject – mathematics. Math, as we know, is based upon certain objective truths. Algebra, calculus, and trigonometry are all derived from solid mathematical principles which have been around long before mankind discovered them.

And if we somehow lose knowledge of them again, those principles would still be there awaiting future generations to rediscover them. Therefore, we can say that mathematical truths exist separate from any human knowledge of them.

Notice we say such things as: Pythagoras discovered the principles governing the right-angled triangle. Or Descartes discovered the principles behind analytical geometry. We don’t say they “invented” the principles. They were already there. In the same way we speak of people discovering other scientific facts.

In 1781, William Hershel discovered the planet Uranus, and in 1930. C. Tombaugh discovered Pluto. Uranus and Pluto have probably been around as long as our own planet. They would still be there even if we had never learned of their existence.

Bearing that in mind, let’s return to the moral law. The most reasonable assumption is that individuals down through the centuries discovered and rediscovered certain fundamental truths of right and wrong. They didn’t invent them any more than Pythagoras invented the principles governing the right-angled triangle or William Hershel invented Uranus.

The moral law for decent behavior was already there. Men and women merely looked into their own hearts, their own conscience, and there they found a bundle of “oughts.” “Oughts” such as: I ought to keep my promises, even if I would rather not. I ought to tell the truth, even if it makes me look like a fool. I ought to finish my assigned duty, even though I would rather do something else. I ought to remain true to my spouse, even if I am attracted to another. I ought to be honest, even if it would be easy to cheat. I ought to treat the other fellow the same way I would like to be treated, even if I think he is a jerk.

Apparently, none of us made up this moral code of “oughts.” Sometimes it would be rather convenient if they would just go away. But they don’t. They continue to press in on us whether we like it or not.

One thing more, if man created the moral law himself, we would expect to find each society and each civilization developing their own set of basic principles. Our clue is that they did not. While they came up with widely different customs, conventions, and manners, every civilization, past and present, discovered the same bundle of inconvenient “oughts” to direct their lives. Isn’t that curious?

It looks very much like the Outside Source is behind all of it. What does the moral law tell us about this Outsider? Obviously, he’s not a create-’em-and-let-’em-run-amuck sort of being. He’s not a neutral, hands off, passive creator. Instead we find a Moral Agent who has loaded the dice trying to influence our thinking.

Freedom of Choice

He implanted basic instincts in us much as he did the animals. But he gave us something other creatures apparently didn’t receive. This Moral Agent programmed a series of “oughts’ into us to guide our behavior. Clearly, he wants us to keep our promises, tell the truth, do our duty, remain faithful, be honest, and to do to others the same way we would have them do to us.

Notice though, however much the Moral Agent wants us to act in a certain way, he does not force us. He allows us free choice. We can chose to obey the moral law, or we can reject it.

Justice

Before we leave the moral law, I would like to draw your attention to an enigma. Our natural desires in life seem to be satisfied by one means or another. We thirst; water quenches our thirst. We hunger; food quenches our hunger. We want sex; our mate quenches our desire. Our human nature appears to be in close harmony with what life has to offer; so much so, it looks like someone planned it that way.

Give them a desire, then give them a way to satisfy it, seems to be the idea. It keeps us busy doing the things that Whoever-made-us wants us to do. And it all works well, up to a point. Then we run into something that doesn’t quite pan out.

Deeply embedded in our conscience we find a penchant for justice or fair play. We are not neutral observers; we are moral creatures. We want the good guys to win. We like happy endings. And we cheer when good triumphs over evil.

About the only place that happens, however, is at the movies, old movies at that. Real life isn’t nearly as accommodating. In fact, life often seems inherently unfair.

Consider the following: One baby is born to wealth, another to poverty. One is born to a family that loves him, another to a family that abuses him. One is aborted, the other is not. I don’t need to tell you, there is nothing fair about any of that.

Fortune seems to smile on some and frown on others. We see geniuses, and we see idiots; women with great beauty, and women who are downright ugly; people with many talents, and people with no talents at all; and those who are healthy, and those who are sickly or physically deformed. What’s fair about that?

Let’s take it a step further. Some people are endowed with good looks, sound nerves, wit, charm, and a pleasing personality. Popularity and admiration come fairly easy for them. They fit in naturally wherever they go. They don’t need to work at it. It’s a gift. They are the blessed. They are life’s winners.

At the other end of the totem pole, it’s an entirely different story. There we find the homely, dull, slow-witted, timid, warped, lonely people or the passionate, sensual, unbalanced people. By no choice of their own, many are born into homes filled with hatred, petty jealousies, and constant bickering. Others are tormented by sexual perversions or nagged by an inferiority complex. No matter how hard they try, they don’t fit in anywhere. They are life’s losers – unappealing, unloved, and often the object of ridicule and jokes. These folks will be quick to tell you, “life is unfair.” And they are right.

Notice, what we have mentioned so far are traits and circumstances over which we have little or no control. What about those things over with we do have control? Do we find fairness there?

Some people work long and hard, day in and day out, sunup to sundown. Others do nothing they are not forced to do. Both live out their seventy or so years and die. Memory of both soon fades away. All they had, whether plenty or little, is left to someone who did not work for it. Somehow that doesn’t strike us as fair either.

And what of the honest, the faithful, the kind, and the generous? Do they not meet the same fate as the hypocrite, the unfaithful, the cruel, and the greedy? Death overtakes them all, good or bad. And soon they are forgotten. Certainly, that’s not fair. Where are the scales of justice?

But it is even worse than that. You and I know that as often as not, it is the bad man who prospers while the good suffers all kinds of afflictions. The bully wins, and the weak pays the price. The cheater gets off scot-free, while the innocent is accused. Crime all too often does pay. The criminal really does get away with murder. His victim suffers the loss. Justice is stood on its head.

We know life is full of injustices. No one denies it. They spring up everywhere. Our sense of fair play tells us something is fundamentally wrong. Something is out of kilter. We long for a world turned right side up. We want those who have been forced to suffer to receive their just compensation.

We want those who have benefited others to receive their just reward. We want those who have abused others to receive their just punishment. Anything less would be a travesty of justice.

Our True Home

Why then, are we given a longing for justice and forced to live in an unjust world? Has the same Agent who provided so generously for all our other needs, created an elaborate hoax just to frustrate our desire for justice? Or could it be that this world is not our final destination?

Perhaps we were made for a better world, a world without death, suffering and injustice. We might find our ingrained sense of fair play to be in complete harmony with the reality of our true home.

Evolutionists have nothing to say about justice or fair play.

Questions to Consider:

1. If we are nothing more than the chance meeting of random atoms of matter, why are we concerned about justice?

2. One more question: If we are nothing more than the chance meeting of random atoms of matter, how did we ever acquire the intelligence to figure out that we are nothing more than the chance meeting of random atoms of matter?

Incoming search terms:

c s lewis moral law culture civilization (1)moral law as mathematical law (1)What allows us to know the moral law (1)

The University of Phoenix Online offers only two criminal justice and law enforcement programs, one undergraduate and the other graduate.

The Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice Administration is a four-year program that encompasses the subjects of policing, criminal law, and corrections, besides providing a broad outlook on the study of crime and justice in American society. The course is designed to groom professionals working in the field of criminal justice for administrative, supervisory, and leadership positions that demand a higher level of skill and responsibility. As a student of the BS degree in criminal justice administration, you will be educated in how to deal with human relations and resolve social conflicts, besides learning how to use the latest technology to detect, solve, and fight crime. Your work in a position of importance and reliability will involve working with subordinates, peers, and superiors. This program will inculcate in you the competence needed for interpersonal communication, administrative decision-making and personnel management. Professionalism on the job and the moral ethics that govern the profession are also dealt with in the curriculum.

The undergraduate course is a good stepping-stone for professionals in the criminal justice field who are seeking to advance their careers or branch into a diverse specialization. The course includes subjects like Organized Crime, Contemporary Issues in Criminal Justice, Skills for Professional Development, Introduction to Criminal Justice, Criminology, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Interpersonal Communications, Introduction to Policing, Criminal Court Systems, Introduction to Corrections, Juvenile Justice, Ethics in Criminal Justice, Cultural Diversity in Criminal Justice, Research methods in Criminal Justice, Organizational Behavior and Management, Criminal Justice Administration, Criminal Justice Administration, Criminal Justice Policy Analysis, Managing Criminal Justice Personnel, Futures of Criminal Justice, and an Interdisciplinary Capstone Course. Each course carries three credits.

The Master of Science in Administration of Justice and Security prepares undergraduate students and professionals in the criminal justice field for administrative roles in criminal justice and security programs. Promotions and transitions across the various areas of criminal justice like law enforcement, corrections, security, and court operations are easily facilitated if you have a master’s degree in a related discipline. This program will train you in problem-solving techniques in security and justice organizations.

The degree includes courses such as Survey of Justice and Security, Organizational Administration and Behavior, Management of Institutional Risk, Ethics in Justice and Security, Criminological Theory, Legal Issues in Justice and Security, Critical Incident Management, Cyber Crime and Information Systems Security, Public Policy Issues, Concepts of Physical and Personal Protection, Forensic Science and Psychological Profiling, and Program Development and Evaluation. Each course carries three credits.

The problem is: while the courses sound good what you will really get is more of management education rather than more of criminal justice education. If you are opting for UoP, be ready to expect a management orientation rather than a criminal justice orientation. The sharp focus on criminal justice is missing.

Incoming search terms:

www thetexascriminallawattorneys com (12)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/index html (5)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-criminal-attorney (1)www thetexascriminallawattorneys com/houston-dui-lawyers (1)

Justice is desired by each and every person in this earth. But as we all know that Justice delayed is Justice denied, so it’s a matter of concern that how many people actually get justice in due time. Well this is a very vague question as there is no specificity to it. However it lays down the basis of a very common problem that has plagued the Indian courts. Yes the term ‘plagued’ actually represents the current scenario of the Indian Judiciary. The problem of backlog of cases have been haunting the Indian courts for a long time and it is high time that we react to the situation and do something about it. Precisely speaking the criminal trials take much longer that what they are expected to take and what actually they take. Thus it is very necessary that some sort of system is adhered to so as to speed up the trial process and relieve the courts of heavy backlog of cases. Crimes happen almost everyday and with such a large population it is quite obvious that at least thousands of crimes are committed almost everyday throughout the country. And as the literacy levels and awareness among the people has increased so they refer their problems to the courts which is the only dispute resolution system and the only place where one can expect justice. Thus it is all the more obvious that with such a rate of criminal cases pooling into the courts the available workforce falls very short of the expectations. Apart from that there are several appeals which are preferred from the trials which furthermore increase the case numbers in the court. In such a scenario it becomes a matter of concern as to how to control the problem. One such solution or alternative through which this problem could be curbed is plea bargaining which is incorporated under the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code.

 

Plea Bargain – An Insight

 

Well the first question that comes to our mind is that what is plea bargaining actually. Precisely speaking Plea Bargaining refers to an agreement in a criminal case where the prosecutor offers the defendant with the opportunity to plead his guilt. In other words it means that an option is given to the criminal defendant to accept his guilt and avoid the trial proceedings which would be instituted against the accused as it happens in a normal trial proceeding. Now one might wonder that what benefit is the accused getting by accepting his guilt and by avoiding the trial proceedings. Well the answer to this is that in a plea bargaining case the accused is generally charged of a lesser charge than the original criminal charge and the punishment is also lesser which he would have got had he been charged of the original charge. Many a times it happens that the accused while sitting through a trial is convicted of a more serious charge and also of some additional charges which might be charged along with the original offence. Thus with the help of plea bargaining the accused can relive himself from risking his case of harsher sentences. On the other hand it is beneficial to the victim also as the victim gets justice quickly as the accused accepts his/her guilt. Apart from that the time of the court is saved from carrying out the court proceedings and fulfilling the court formalities. Moreover the time of the court is saved from establishing the guilt of the accused as the accused himself/herself accepts his/her guilt. Therefore a lot of money and the time of the court is saved. Thus we can note that with the help of plea bargaining one can really speed up the criminal court proceedings.

History of Plea Bargaining in India

 

The concept of plea bargaining has been introduced in the Criminal Procedure Code with the help of a Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005. This amendment act was passed by the parliament in its winter session. Chapter XXIA of the Criminal Procedure Code contains the requisite provisions of Plea Bargaining which is enforceable in India. Sections 265-A, 265-B, 265-C, 265-D, 265-E, 265-E, 265-F, 265-G, 265-H, 265-I, 265-J, 265-K and 265-L of the Criminal Procedure Code enumerates the provisions relating to Plea Bargaining.

 

However with everything mentioned above it would be quite wrong to say that the concept of plea bargaining is of recent origin. Efforts for dealing with the problem of over burdening of the criminal courts have been made much earlier. The 154th Law Commission, in order to reduce the delay in disposing criminal cases, brought forward the concept of plea bargaining and also recommended the introduction of plea bargaining as an alternative to deal with the heavy backlogs of criminal cases. After that the recommendations of the Law Commission were supported by the Malimath Committee Report. In its report, the Malimath Committee recommended that a system of plea bargaining be introduced in the Indian Criminal Justice System to facilitate the earlier disposal of criminal cases and to reduce the burden of the courts. To strengthen its case, the Malimath Committee also pointed out the success of plea bargaining system in USA. Accordingly, the draft Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2003 was introduced in the parliament. The statement of objects and reasons, inter alia, mentions that, The disposal of criminal trials in the courts takes considerable time and that in many cases trial do not commence for as long as 3 to 5 years after the accused was remitted to judicial custody.. though not recognized by the criminal jurisprudence, it is seen as an alternative method to deal with the huge arrears of criminal cases. The bill attracted enormous public debate. Critics said it is not recognized and against public policy under our criminal justice system. The Supreme Court has also time and again blasted the concept of plea bargaining saying that negotiation in criminal cases is not permissible. More recently in State of Uttar Pradesh V. Chandrika 2000 Cr.L.J. 384(386), The Apex Court held that It is settled law that on the basis of plea bargaining court cannot dispose of the criminal cases. The court has to decide it on merits. If the accused confesses its guilt, appropriate sentence is required to be implemented. The court further held in the same case that, Mere acceptance or admission of the guilt should not be a ground for reduction of sentence. Nor can the accused bargain with the court that as he is pleading guilty the sentence be reduced. Despite this huge hue and cry, the government found it acceptable and finally section 265-A TO 265-L have added in the Code of Criminal Procedure so as to provide for raising the plea bargaining in certain types of criminal cases. While commenting on this aspect, the division bench of the Gujarat High Court observed in State of Gujarat V. Natwar Harchanji Thakor (2005) Cr. L.J. 2957 that, The very object of law is to provide easy, cheap and expeditious justice by resolution of disputes, including the trial of criminal cases and considering the present realistic profile of the pendency and delay in disposal in the administration of law and justice, fundamental reforms are inevitable. There should not be anything static. It can thus be said that it is really a measure and redressal and it shall add a new dimension in the realm of judicial reforms.

 

Plea Bargaining – Relieving the Indian Criminal Courts

 

Quite clear from the above discussion the main object of Plea Bargaining is to reduce the risk of undesirable orders for the either side. Apart from this it is also helpful in clearing away the pending cases in the criminal courts. However it is also quite important to know that plea bargaining is not applicable to all the offences. It is only applicable to those offences for which there is a punishment for a period up to seven years. Further the provision of plea bargaining doesn’t apply to cases where the offence is committed is a socio-economic offence or else where the offence is committed against a woman or a child below the age of 14 years.

 

The concept of plea bargaining is very strong. It benefits both the victim and the accused at the same time and finally and the most important it benefits the court. There are two types of plea bargaining which helps the accused in confessing his guilt. One is Charge Bargain and the other is Sentence Bargain. In case of a Charge Bargain the prosecution allows the defendant to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to only some of the charges framed against him. This helps the accused to reduce the charges to a greater extent as the prosecution has a wide range of options to frame the accused of charges. Thus Charge Bargain helps the accused to negotiate with the prosecution and reduce the number of charges that the prosecution might have framed against him. In case of Sentence Bargain the accused is relieved of harsher and a higher sentence if the accused confesses his offence or pleads guilty. In this case the defendant is told in advance what his sentence would be if he pleads guilty. Thus with these two options of plea bargaining most of the cases could be resolved which are rotting in the criminal courts and which are waiting their turn to be disposed off in merits.

 

Shortcomings of Plea Bargaining

 

Though plea bargaining is a very positive concept and a welcome legislation for reducing the backlogs of the criminal courts in India, it too has some shortcomings. There are some inherent flaws inside this legislation which can be called as the drawbacks of plea bargaining. The first and foremost demerit of plea bargaining is its inapplicability to all the cases. As mentioned above it is inapplicable in cases where the offence relates to socio-economic offence and offences against women and children below 14 years. So the accused can take advantage of these loopholes and can harass the complete procedure of plea bargaining. Apart from that another drawback of plea bargaining is the involvement of the court in the plea bargaining process. Where the court is involved in the plea bargaining process the court’s impartiality becomes questionable. Also involving the victim in this process can invite corruption. There is a scope of huge amount of corruption in this regard. However the main and primary drawback of the plea bargaining process is the rejection of plead guilty application. In a case where the accused has confessed his/her offence and then the application of the accused is rejected then it would become very difficult for the accused to prove his innocence when normal trial proceedings would be instituted against him consequently.

 

Conclusion

 

Though there are some inherent problems and drawbacks associated with the provision of plea bargaining, it still remains a powerful weapon to combat the problem of heavy backlog of criminal cases in the Indian courts. It is very necessary that the shortcomings of the plea bargaining process are given a due though and solved accordingly. Most importantly in the case of rejection of the application of the pleading guilty of the accused; the rejection should be kept confidential so as to prevent prejudice to the accused. Apart from that it is an acceptable fact that the concept of plea bargaining will enhance the faith of the public in the criminal justice system and will help the Indian Courts to fight with the problem of backlog of cases.

Incoming search terms:

indian justice system (4)criminal justice system in india (4)indian criminal justice system (3)drawbacks of indian criminal justice system (3)Drawback of indian justice (3)malimath committee recommendations on plea bargaining (2)plea bargaining and indian justice (1)plea bargaining 265(a) crpc (1)new dimension of plea bargaining in india (1)malimath committee plea bargaining (1)

While they can get re-elected over and over, it is no sure thing. With the Supreme Court, the Justices serve for life. This gives them a unique opportunity to greatly influence society over a significant amount of time. Since they are not elected to the position, they also have more freedom to rule as they wish without concern for their poll numbers.

With the appointment of John Roberts as Chief Justice, the Supreme Court has recently been transformed for the foreseeable future. As Chief Justice, Judge Roberts controls much of the court through procedures. He can define the amount of debate on subjects while also picking which Justice will write the majority opinion on certain cases. It may sound simplistic, but these procedural elements go along way in deciding cases and laying out the specific legal rulings in them. In the case of Chief Justice Roberts, he has the opportunity to really define the law of the land for the next 20 to 30 years since he is only 52 years old.

So, who is John Roberts? He was born on January 27, 1955 in Buffalo, New York. He is a Roman Catholic and attended private Catholic school while growing up in an upper middle class family. He attended Harvard for both his undergraduate education and law school, obtaining the top rank in his class. In his professional life, he has worked in positions ranging from a law clerk for former Chief Justice Rehnquist to acting as Associate Counsel for President Ronald Regan.

Oddly, Chief Justice Roberts does not have much “time in the chair.” His first judicial position was on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2003. A scant two years later, he was nominated and confirmed to his current position. Now that is serious career advancement!

Philosophically, Chief Justice Roberts is considered to be a conservative. His decisions reveal him as a man that generally believes in government rights and a strict interpretation of the law. He appears, however, to also be a cautious man when it comes to changing the law. In practical terms, he seems to respect well established law and is more like to tweak it than seek a blanket change. In the case of Rowe v. Wade, the standard of most Supreme Court discussions, he seems unlike to support overturning it although he is probably interested in tweaking it.

The really interesting thing about Chief Justice Roberts is his age. He is so young, that we can expect to see him controlling and shaping the legal landscape for an extended time period. Let us hope he makes wise decisions!

Incoming search terms:

appointment of john roberts as chief justice (1)chief justice of 2010 profile (1)john roberts chief justice undergrad major (1)John Roberts justice profile (1)justice john roberts professional career (1)profile :: Justice 69 (1)