Since the beginning of the nineteenth century, our justice system has vacillated between two distinct models. While both models seek to reduce crime, they differ in their approach. These two crime models were introduced by Herbert L. Packer. He described the two justice models as the “due process model” and the “crime control model. These models tend to divide the individuals that work in the criminal justice system (National State of Mind, 2005).
The due process model seeks to limit the powers of the government. It is focused on individual liberties and rights. It strives to decrease mistakes in the arrests and convictions of innocent people. The due process model has been referred to as an ‘obstacle course’. This is a slow but very reliable fact-finding process. It allows for the possibility of error. Due process, while having minimal efficiency operates, with little tyranny. This process insists on the elimination and prevention of mistakes (Neubauer, 2001).
The primary mission of the due process model is to help to prevent innocent people from being wrongfully convicted. This model strives to protect those who may be falsely accused. While this is true, there are still those who would argue that it does nothing for victims and their rights (Perron, 2005). A victim’s rights will not be restored if the wrong person is convicted.
In contrast, the crime control model attempts to protect the public. This is done at a cost, including harassment, arrest and even conviction of innocent people. This model can be thought of as an ‘assembly line’ (Neubauer, 2001). The crime control model is more tolerant of mistakes. The ideology of this model offers maximum efficiency but also maximum tyranny. This model produces a high rate of arrests and convictions. It operates with premium speed and finality. Facts are quickly gathered through interrogation as well as examination in the court room. The presumption of guilt allows for efficiency of this system. This model works to use fact-finding to either exonerate the suspect or enter a guilty plea (Neubauer, 2001).
Due process also focuses on limiting the power of the police and prosecutors. It is reliable. This model works to penalize the police and prosecutors by applying adequate pressure and strives to induce conformity within the model. It works for equality (Neubauer, 2001).
Law enforcement complains that the Fourth Amendment and due process limits their abilities to fight crime. This is not completely accurate, as there are new interpretations which can either expand or limit the police power. Much of the interpretation is made by the legal end ( Perron, 2005).
Also, the due process does not limit itself strictly to the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement must also consider other individual rights. Rights such as; a right to be innocent until proven guilty; a right to an attorney; a right against self-incrimination; a right to fair questioning and a right against arrest without probable cause. These rights are guaranteed to us in the Constitution (Perron, 2005).
Conversely, the crime control model seeks to increase the police and prosecutors’ power. This model is highly efficient (National State of Mind, 2005). The crime control model tolerates illegal arrest, unreasonable searches and even coercive interrogations. It gives the police and prosecutors much more latitude (Neubauer, 2001).
During Prohibition in the 1920s, the United States favored the crime control model. As the 1950s approached, attitudes had changed and the country began to embrace the due process model. The 1970s saw a return to the crime control model which has continued through the present (National State of Mind, 2005).
While the crime control model is efficient, by producing a large arrest and conviction rate it tolerates abuses to individual rights. It is important to protect society from crime, but one must look at how this is accomplished. In the crime model’s rush to sweep the streets free of crime, innocent individuals are often swept up in what this model is willing to tolerate. A model cannot really be bothered by mistakes.
The due process model is slower but it retains its strict reliability standard. This model maintains the integrity and fact-finding abilities of the police and prosecutors. While it is the considerably slower of the two models, I feel that it is by far the most reliable. It doesn’t encourage false arrest or an inappropriate trial. It is set up to proceed with caution in the arrest and prosecution of the correct individual. This model also preserves the rights of the individual as provided by the Constitution. I support the due process model. I believe that reliability and preservation of individual rights should outweigh a simply speedy and wide sweeping model.
REFERENCES
Chapter 3: The national state of mind on crime and punishment in the 1980s and 1990s
(2005). Retrieved on September 6, 2005 from
www.facts1.com/research/fo16chap03.pdf
Neubauer,D. (2001). Debating crime: Rhetoric and reality.
Wadsworth Publishing.
Perron,B. (2005). The Crime Controls and Due Process Models. Retrieved on
September 14, 2005 from www.defenseinvestigator.com/article10.html
