Prosecutorial Misconduct - Research Paper Example

Prosecutorial Misconduct Prosecutorial Misconduct Introduction Prosecutorial misconduct arises when the prosecutor fails to adhere to the standard codes of conduct when accusing the suspects. Prosecutorial misconduct is relevant to a criminal justice system since, failure to consider such misconducts in a court case can lead to the conviction of an innocent person rather than the guilty one. The prosecutors have powers in determining the accountability of a suspect of the crime committed in a court case. They usually work with the criminal investigators in search for facts about a crime and file a case against a suspect in a court of law. Then, in the proceedings of the case, a prosecutor presents legal facts to the judge aimed at convincing him or her to prove the guilty of the suspect (Lawless, 2008). In a court case, therefore, the prosecutor ought to apply some professional moral codes in his/her course of prosecutions. Sometimes, the prosecutors can fail to reveal evidence that proves the suspects’ innocence since their motives are always to convict the suspects. Prosecutorial misconduct has been witnessed in many cases where the suspects who are innocent serve sentences in prison whereas the guilty ones are left free. Prosecutors should be charged in law courts in case they act inappropriately like when they are discovered harassing the defendant. In case the defendant is mistreated by the prosecutor in or outside the courtroom, he or she can seek disciplinary action or file a civil suit against the prosecutor. In a court case, the trials against the suspect can be politically motivated and this means that, consideration of such misconducts is important in order to find justice in that case (Siegel, 2010). Personal review and comments on the relevance of professional misconducts in the criminal judicial system Prosecutorial conducts can arise from misconducts in the courtroom, failure to reveal the evidence that favors the defendant and harassment of the defendant. These behaviors ought to be stopped since many innocent persons have served imprisonments supposed to be served by others. The criminal justice system ought to put in place some measures to curb such misconducts because they not only oppress the victims but also contributes to the loss of public confidence in the judiciary system (Lawless, 2008). Imagine a businessman convicted of murdering his wife and the judge passes 20 years sentence in jail. After 15 years, police investigation reports are revealed showing that the DNA tests of bloody clothing found on the crime scene matches with another man serving life imprisonment for other murder cases. In such a case, it seems that, either the prosecutor failed to reveal the police reports in the court or may be harassed the defendant (businessman) when the case was proceeding. Therefore, the prosecutorial misconduct in this case, has caused pain to the businessman and the public will also lose their trust even in the proceeding trials in that court. Prosecutors enjoy immunity since they operate with discretion and the court system rarely overlooks their behaviors. There should be more reduction in the level of immunity that prosecutors enjoy and when they break the codes of ethics, they ought to be charged in a court of law. They ought to be held accountable of their misconducts but not overburdening the suspects only. However, in United States, the prosecutors can be fined or dismissed by the court if found with inappropriate acts in a case. Those prosecutors who act inappropriately ought to be punished because if not punished they would continue practicing more misconduct in the criminal justice system. For instance, if a prosecutor always wins to convict a suspect in the court, many people will report their cases in such courts in search for unfair justice against the suspect even if he/she is innocent (Falk, 2010). To some extent, the prosecutors usually have powers over the criminal justice systems since they can dismiss charges filed against the suspect, advocate for severe sentences to the suspect and appeal for leniency from the judge. These powers are subject to abuse and, as a result, prosecutors engage in misconducts. The criminal legal system is undermined by the prosecutorial misconducts in achieving justice. The law courts should consider the prosecutorial misconducts in their rulings in order to ensure that no innocent suspects are charged with crimes. Inspection on how the prosecutor’s conduct their investigations is carried out because sometimes prosecutors can be politically motivated to convict certain persons especially those with strong personalities (Siegel, 2010). For example, a famous Senator can be convicted of a rape case in a court of law aimed at lowering his dignity and reduction of his public confidence. It can be another fellow politician idea, who hires a prosecutor to convict the Senator in a court of law, in order, to criticize his behavior aimed at a political gain for a parliamentary seat. In a court case, the prosecutor ought to have witnesses of a crime in the courtroom to execute the suspect. The court should ensure that no improper dealings between the prosecutor and the witnesses such as bribery. The prosecutors can also misbehave in a courtroom, harass the defendant and mishandle the physical evidence that can favor the suspect with his/her defense. The prosecutorial misconducts are, therefore, relevant to the court in achieving delivery of justice to the people. These misconducts will determine the length of time taken for the final ruling of the filed cases. The fact that the prosecutor has the power to dismiss a case gives room for misconducts since he/she can be bribed to terminate the case. In this case, there is an unfair treatment to the witnesses for the benefit of the suspected criminal. When the prosecutor is suspected of harassing the defendant, the court should adverse its proceedings so as to allocate time for investigating the possible misconducts by the prosecutors (Gershman, 2009). Sometimes, during the trials, the court can realize that some of the witnesses from the prosecutor’s side do not deliver enough evidence, and terminate the trial to give ample time for investigations. The courts may allocate time for complaints’ hearings from the victims of prosecutorial misconducts and in case the prosecutor is found guilty, he or she can be fined or dismissed. Therefore, it is clear that, prosecutorial misconducts affect the court rulings and the courts ought to adjust to them in order to achieve justice for the welfare of the citizens (Gershman, 2009). Support for the fact that professional misconducts is relevant to the criminal judicial system The prosecutors are guided by the Standards of Conduct that require them to work in dignity in their professions. A prosecutor is bound to act in good faith like when conducting their search for proofs about a crime. He/she is not supposed to express his/ her personal animosity towards the defendant in the courtroom. A prosecutor should be punctual to appear in the court and should always respect the judiciary in his/her undertakings. However, the practices of the prosecutors are influenced by their relations with the court, witnesses, suspects and their defendants and the defense counsel. These affairs contribute to their misconducts in handling cases and this call for the court’s consideration of the misconducts (Weinreb and Weinreb, 2004). Since the criminal justice system should deliver justice to all people, prosecutorial misconduct, therefore, becomes relevant in the operations of the system. The reason as to why the criminal justice system has some professional misconduct is because both the judges and the prosecutors are entrusted to deliver justice through discretion. In the context of the paper, the misconducts of the prosecutors are emphasized on, but, the misdeeds of the judges also affect the criminal justice system. In a court case, prosecutors can become biased where they put their interests first and convict a suspect of a crime since they have powers. Misuse of these powers can make the final judgments not to achieve justice and, therefore, consideration of these misconducts is one of the requirements in the criminal justice system (Gershman, 2009). In conclusion, the code of conduct of the prosecutors ought to be controlled to ensure that justice is administered to all citizens. The officers in the court of law are expected to function in high levels of integrity and dignity in all their professional dealings. For this case, therefore, the prosecutors are guided by Standards Codes of Conduct which requires them to operate in good faith, respect the law and reveal the ultimate truth about a suspect. Additionally, he/she should be punctual in attending all the hearings and portray good behaviors during the court’s proceedings. However, the powers granted to the prosecutors can be misused leading to prosecutorial misconducts. Some of the prosecutorial misconducts occur when the prosecutors are investigating a suspect of a crime, when presenting the evidence to the judge and when the trials are ongoing. During investigations, the prosecutors can be bribed to use false evidence in filing cases on some people like in the case of politicians. During the trials, the prosecutor may fail to reveal evidence that will favor the suspect and his/her defendant. The prosecutors may also deliberately mishandle the physical evidence available which would have favored the defense team. When such misconducts arise in a court room the judges, therefore, needs to consider them in making their rulings. Usually, the prosecutorial misconducts arising leads to inspection of the prosecutors dealings and if found guilty they are charged or fined in a court of law. Therefore, the prosecutorial misconducts are relevant to the criminal justice system in administering justice to all citizens. References Falk, G. (2010). The American criminal justice system: How it works, how it doesnt , and how to fix it. Santa Barbara, Calif: Praeger. Lawless, J. F. (2008), Prosecutorial misconduct: Law, procedure, forms. Siegel, L. J. (2010). Introduction to criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Gershman, B. L. (2009). Prosecutorial misconduct. St. Paul, MN: West Group. Weinreb, L. L., & Weinreb, L. L. (2004).Criminal process. New York, N.Y: Foundation Press. Read More