The Rights of Suspects

 

Write an essay addressing the topic below. Your essay should be 750 to 1,000 words, 5-7 pages (not including cover page and reference page), double-spaced, with a font size of 10 to 12 pt. Your paper should comply with APA. Refer to the Grading Rubric PDF(opens in a new tab) for essay grading standards. Submit your essay to your instructor.

In each of the criminal justice systems, describe the roles, duties, and responsibilities of those functions to ensure the rights of the accused are upheld and carried out. What are the implications if one or more of the functions fails to exercise these responsibilities? Use examples (such as case law) to demonstrate where a system failure has led to consequences and consider how society would operate if the Bill of Rights never existed.

The Rights of Suspects

In addition to protecting the personal freedoms of individuals, the Bill of Rights protects those suspected or accused of crimes from various forms of unfair or unjust treatment. The prominence of these protections in the Bill of Rights may seem surprising. Given the colonists’ experience of what they believed to be unjust rule by British authorities, however, and the use of the legal system to punish rebels and their sympathizers for political offenses, the impetus to ensure fair, just, and impartial treatment to everyone accused of a crime—no matter how unpopular—is perhaps more understandable. What is more, the revolutionaries, and the eventual framers of the Constitution, wanted to keep the best features of English law as well.

In addition to the protections outlined in the Fourth Amendment, which largely pertain to investigations conducted before someone has been charged with a crime, the next four amendments pertain to those suspected, accused, or convicted of crimes, as well as people engaged in other legal disputes. At every stage of the legal process, the Bill of Rights incorporates protections for these people.

The Fifth Amendment

Many of the provisions dealing with the rights of the accused are included in the Fifth Amendment; accordingly, it is one of the longest in the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment states in full:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

For purposes of this lesson, we will discuss what is perhaps the most famous provision of the Fifth Amendment which is its protection against self-incrimination, or the right to remain silent. This provision is so well known that we have a phrase for it: “taking the Fifth.” People have the right not to give evidence in court or to law enforcement officers that might constitute an admission of guilt or responsibility for a crime. Moreover, in a criminal trial, if someone does not testify in his or her own defense, the prosecution cannot use that failure to testify as evidence of guilt or imply that an innocent person would testify. This provision became embedded in the public consciousness following the Supreme Court’s 1966 ruling in Miranda v. Arizona(opens in a new tab), whereby suspects were required to be informed of their most important rights, including the right against self-incrimination, before being interrogated in police custody.

However, contrary to some media depictions of the Miranda warning, law enforcement officials do not necessarily have to inform suspects of their rights before they are questioned in situations where they are free to leave.

Miranda Ruling
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution(opens in a new tab) states that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against him or herself. Based on this right, the Supreme Court has determined that criminal suspects cannot be subject to custodial interrogations without first being informed of their constitutional rights to remain silent and to have defense counsel. When law enforcement takes a suspect into custody, the Miranda warnings must be given before any interrogation takes place.

The Miranda warnings are as follows:

You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Do you understand?
Anything you do or say may be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand?
You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future. Do you understand?
If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. Do you understand?
If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present, you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney. Do you understand?
Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present? (Miranda Rights, 2005)
As an additional review source, more information concerning the Miranda warnings can be found at Miranda Rights(opens in a new tab).

Sample Solution

The criminal justice system is the network of government and private agencies intended to manage accused and convicted criminals. The criminal justice system is comprised of multiple interrelated pillars consisting of the police/law enforcement, the courts, and corrections. These pillars are fashioned to support the ideals of legal justice. Law enforcement is the first pillar of the criminal justice system, because it is the system that individuals first encounter when they go against the law. Law enforcement is made up of the police officers, sheriffs, deputies, detectives, and government agents. The major tasks of the police include selectively enforcing the law, protecting the public, arresting suspected law violators, and preventing crime.

ation napalm when napalm was dropped into the Vietnamese wilderness consuming anybody/whatever interacted with it. In any case, we should recollect that this would just suit the more extravagant countries and those countries who are lower monetarily created nations probably shouldn’t participate in this conflict. In this manner we should consider what the most ideal way to go about war is. How might two countries or different countries move toward it in the future with the impact of mechanical technology unquestionably on the ascent?

With many individuals accepting that mechanical fighting is the best moral choice as with airstrikes it can deliver accuracy airstrikes on the adversary. Eventually professing to save lives anyway how do we have any idea about that these airstrikes will be “pinpoint” these assaults could be rather killing numerous honest individuals. As indicated by (Wright 2007)”these machines may not consider natural elements.” Will these robots anyway have the option to recognize harmed troopers or warriors who have given up? This again is another vital moral issue. Perhaps of the most normally posed inquiry about any kind of military hardware is,” what might occur assuming that it had a framework glitch?” The outcomes depicted by (Wright 2007),” would be devastating.” Although this is an extremely intriguing event it is vital to recall that the sky is the limit. For this reason there is a distinct component of hazard implied while utilizing robots. Despite the fact that there are consistent and thorough checks it’s memorable’s critical that all it can take is one failure to understand the situation to cause a catastrophe. A model would be the situation in South Africa. (Ball 2007) proceeds to say that the demise of 14 individuals was just brought about by a mechanical glitch… designs all around the world were paralyzed that this was brought about by basically a mechanical breakdown. At the point when we take a gander at the instance of robots to keep an eye on the foe. A few specialists portray working a robot as a “Game mindset.” This essentially implied that they accepted the administrator of these robots didn’t actually consider the harm that these robots can cause to individuals on the ground also called computer generated experience. One of the central points of contention with these individuals is that they accept the administrator of these robots were not prepared to the right level. An illustration of this could be one of the numerous assaults which happened in Afghanistan model a tactical robot dishonestly recognized non-warriors and killed 12 blameless regular people simultaneously. This again shows exactly how perilous a mental blunder these tactical robots can be regarding their effect. By and large to close I accept that the mechanical technology industry is quickly progressing and as of now leading to a considerable number of extra inquiries in the public eye of a non-military nature: model, would it be advisable for us to permit robots to care for the older and our kids? It at last will really rely on how the tactical utilize the innovation and how morally they will utilize it. The issue anyway for human activists is that the weaknesses of automated fighting unquestionably offset the benefits. A reasonable drawback is that the utilization of robots will just make war excessively simple and when utilized erroneously the results are so serious. Anyway as far as clear benefits when utilized accurately it can bring down passings on the ground. Assuming mechanical fighting is to be utilized actually I for one accept that the administrators need really preparing and just to utilize it when totally fundamental.

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.