The formal criminal justice process.

 

 

Discuss the formal criminal justice process.
Select a criminal case that occurred within the last 3 years that involved a felony. Examine how this case utilized the formal criminal justice process.
Additionally, discuss the impact that this crime had on the victim.

 

 

 

Sample Solution

The formal criminal justice process

Criminal justice process consists of practices and institutions of government for upholding the social control, deterring crime and sanctioning the ones who have violated the laws, and imply criminal penalties. The process of criminal justice varies from one state to another and there are formal and informal justice processes. Formal process is the one that is true by law and it provides protection to each member of the society via punishment, conviction and rehabilitation. Criminal justice procedure consists of some steps. These steps include: the investigation and arrest, petrial activities, adjudication, sentencing, and corrections. The criminal justice process first begins with an investigation.

nds causally on the existence of other beings (e.g., our parents), God’s existence does not depend causally on the existence of any other being. Further, on Malcolm’s view, the existence of an unlimited being is either logically necessary or logically impossible. Here is his argument for this important claim. Either an unlimited being exists at world W or it doesn’t exist at world W; there are no other possibilities. If an unlimited being does not exist in W, then its nonexistence cannot be explained by reference to any causally contingent feature of W; accordingly, there is no contingent feature of W that explains why that being doesn’t exist. Now suppose, per reductio, an unlimited being exists in some other world W’. If so, then it must be some contingent feature f of W’ that explains why that being exists in that world. But this entails that the nonexistence of an unlimited being in W can be explained by the absence of f in W; and this contradicts the claim that its nonexistence in W can’t be explained by reference to any causally contingent feature. Thus, if God doesn’t exist at W, then God doesn’t exist in any logically possible world. A very similar argument can be given for the claim that an unlimited being exists in every logically possible world if it exists in some possible world W; the details are left for the interested reader. Since there are only two possibilities with respect to W and one entails the impossibility of an unlimited being and the other entails the necessity of an unlimited being, it follows that the existence of an unlimited being is either logically necessary or logically impossible. All that is left, then, to complete Malcolm’s elegant version of the proof is the premise that the existence of an unlimited being is not logically impossible – and this seems plausible enough. The existence of an unlimited being is logically impossible only if the concept of an unlimited being is self-contradictory. Since we have no reason, on Malcolm’s view to think the existence of an unlimited being is self-contradictory, it follows that an unlimited being, i.e., God, exists. Here’s the argument reduced to its basic elements: God is, as a conceptual matter (that is, as a matter of definition) an unlimited being. The existence of an unlimited being is either logically necessary or logically impossible. The existence of an unlimited being is not logically impossible. Therefore, the existence of God is logically necessary. Notice that Malcolm’s version of the argument does not turn on the claim that necessary existence is a great-making property. Rather, as we saw above, Malcolm attempts to argue that there are only two possibilities with respect to the existence of an unlimited being: either it is necessary or it is impo

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.