While discussing the aims of the criminal justice system the focus will be on the courts. In order to do this, many areas of this justice system will be deeply analysed, and a conclusion will be drawn on the truth of the statement “The aims of the criminal justice system in England and Wales are always achieved by the courts”. The way the courts operate can result in positive and negative outcomes. Courts will evaluate all appropriate evidence in order to reach a decision and fulfil the aims of the criminal justice system of prosecuting the guilty and releasing the innocent. Initially, a discussion on the reasoning for the criminal justice system and especially the courts will be had, where we will investigate the importance in having such things and their impact they have on societal function. Further, the essay will progress into talking about the positives of the courts and how in fact they are working towards the aims set out for them. Showing the steadily decrease in crime rates through the decades. In contrast, it will them go on to addressed where the courts fail to meet these aims in certain instances and why the overall outstanding cases in courts are on the incline. Finally, a conclusion will be drawn from an overview of all given information to see the reliability of the positional statement in question.
The aims of the criminal justice system are to “enforce the laws in order to control social order and maintain the status quo” (Garland, 2016, cited in Hucklesby and Wahidin, 2013.) This means the justice system is there in order to provide people with rules of the right and wrong things to do, showing that consequences happen if you disobey the rules, this keeps the world civil and safe. The criminal justice system is there to “ensure: public protection; justice and the rule of law; public order; punishment; denunciation; victim service’s; and public confidence” (Compass.port.ac.uk, 2018.) these are just some of the influences the justice system has. The criminal justice system has different branches the main ones being Police, Prosecution, Courts, and Probation. These provide the means to prosecute and rehabilitate criminals into productive members of the society (Robinson and Cussen, 2017.) The Courts play a huge role in the system as they are the provider of justice, they are the decider of how one should pay for the crimes they commit in order to punish the individual while deterring others away from committing the same crime in fear of the same consequence. All cases will begin in the Magistrates’ court and once the severity of the case has been distinguished it will either remain in the Magistrates or it will be referred to the Crown court. Once in the Crown court it will either be the judge or a jury which decides on the appropriate conviction in order to punish the offence. The courts are monitored with yearly reports being produced by the government in order to check that they are running how they are supposed to run in an ethical and helpful manner serving justice as it should.
The courts play a big role in shaping life as we know it and despite its few flaws it still holds civilization together. Over many decades crime rates have been falling steadily (Ellis, 2018) showing how the criminal justice system and laws must be having the expected effect on society. It was found that by the end of 2017 crime rates had followed the decade trend and dropped by “9%” (Flatley, 2017.) Besides the rare cases mentioned below where justice is not achieved there is millions of cases where justice and punishment are achieved with the courts also helping victims and criminals alike to overcome the setbacks, they have faced to help bring them back together with a community they feel a belonging to. The Crown courts has the inclusion of normal everyday people in the jury which helps eliminate any bias that might take place this is another way the courts make sure that they are ensuring that the best decision is made on the conviction of offenders as evidence on juries has concluded that they more times than not they reach a fair decision.
There is evidence from investigations into the courts that have found that they do not meet the aims of the criminal justice system. A government investigation found that ‘many cases don’t make it to trail with 51,830 awaiting a hearing’ (House of Commons,2016) this shows how the rule of law is failing to be met, along with punishment and public protection meaning that the aims are clearly not being fulfilled. However, there is data from the ministry of justice which shows that this is not the case for all courts of law but only the magistrate’s court which has increased its outstanding cases by ‘2% from 291,400 to 296,800’ in just the space of year. On the other hand, the crown court where actually successful in reducing their rates by 6% (Ministry of Justice, 2018.) which is beneficial as these are the extreme cases that are being dealt with more efficiently. However, many of the delays and outstanding cases are due to factors that are related to the courts such as plea changes and the prosecution and the defence being unprepared (Open.justice.gov.uk, 2016) so the courts reliability shouldn’t be questioned without the evidence as to why these cases are currently outstanding because it would show how the problem is not the courts.
An article in the independent shines light on how the courts do not really serve the justice they should as the fees associated with them are leading to the innocent pleading guilty as there is a cheaper fixed cost in pleading guilty than if you lose the trail (Hough .M, 2015) also, in this article Phil Bowen highlighted on the fact that with the plea-bargaining leading to wrongful convictions this will then lead to the public trust decreasing which will only result in people’s willingness to obey the law declining and rates or crime increasing which means that not only is it failing to punish it will also start failing as being a deterrent as its starting to lose public confidence in it (Bowen. P, 2015.) This article is a prime example of how the courts are failing to meet any of the aims set by the justice system as this surcharge is only focusing on bringing money into the system rather that finding and prosecuting the guilty. The victim surcharge was made in order to compensate the victim however, the charge is more like a fine as its paid to the government, so has no benefit towards the victim personally. In contrast, this could be seen as another strategy of deterrence as it will show not only is there chance of a severe punishment for crimes but also there is a definite charge for using the courts. A spokesman from the Ministry of Justice said “offenders who use our criminal courts should pay for the cost of running them” as it’s the tax payers who pay for the courts to run its only right that the offenders themselves are made to pay extra as they are the reason they are needed. Also, the victim surcharge can be paid in instalments which is another way the courts are showing they are here to help as they are giving the offenders the possibility to pay what they owe as and when they can to avoid more legal implications.
The courts have many stories about miscarriages of justice where people have been wrongly convicted many times this happens because the courts are told only of a story and evidence from the police, prosecution and defence. But in some cases, such as the murder of Lynette White in 1988 three men were wrongly convicted. As after their conviction it was found that police had bullied, threatened and manipulated them into falsely confessing (Newburn, 2017) and even in recent years this has shown to still be taking place as the very famous documentary ‘Making a Murderer’ shows the case of Brendan Dassey who through leading questions and promise of safety confessed to a murdering Teresa Halbach with his uncle and was prosecuted and found quality even though there is no scientific evidence to say that he had any involvement, his whole case is based upon a false confession however he still remains in prison. These cases don’t only show a miscarriage of justice for the people wrongly imprisoned but for the victims whose murderer has seen no implications for the crime they have committed, which means justice has not been served. Also, it means that public safety is at risk because a highly dangerous person is free. A case closer to home is the widely known Hillsborough disaster where 96 Liverpool football fans were killed due to failings by emergency services, the deaths were blamed on the misbehaviour of the crowd however it was later discovered that the deaths were due to overcrowding and the police had tried to cover this up (Conn, 2016). It is believed that many of the victims will receive payouts from the police as compensation for what they have been put through. This shows that even with the courts trying to carry out the aims of the criminal justice system it is not going to be certain that the information they are provided is correct so misjustice is carried out unbeknownst to them and their best efforts. Also, when miscarriages of justices are found out every effort is made to make up for the mistake through compensation. When people are wrongfully imprisoned, they get a cash compensation in order to help rebuild the life that was wrongfully taken from them. This shows how the courts are willing to admit and pay for the mistakes they make and help provide the justice everyone deserves.
Through analysing the information above its apparent to see that even though the courts have some minor issues which can paint them as being underperforming or that they are failing these issues don’t take away from the fact that without the courts we would become uncivilised, as none of our actions would have any consequences and its these consequences that deter people from partaking in criminal behaviour. All the information above about were the courts aren’t reaching the aims can then be counter argued with a reason as of why that is happening, this ability to counter argue helps reinforce the validity of the positional statement in question. The courts are managing to rightly prosecute thousands each year and this helps to keep the rate of crime decreasing as it is removing the severe criminals from society and helping rehabilitate many others into functioning members of the society. The slight downsides of the courts are nowhere close to how beneficial they are as a whole at providing reassurance and justice and sticking to the aims set out by the criminal justice system. Therefore, in conclusion this evidence supports the claims that the aims of the criminal justice system in England and wales are always met by the courts.
Bibliography
Compass.port.ac.uk. (2018). Functions and Aims of the criminal justice system. [online] Available at: http://compass.port.ac.uk/UoP/file/ca5197e4-09f7-4d83-844b-323d9d240078/1/criminal_justice_IMSLRN.zip/page_03.htm [Accessed 1 Nov. 2018]
Conn, D. (2016). Hillsborough inquests jury rules 96 victims were unlawfully killed. The guardian. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/26/hillsborough-inquests-jury-says-96-victims-were-unlawfully-killed [Accessed 4 Nov. 2018].
Dugan, E. (2015). Court fees are a breach of human rights, says leading criminologist. independent. [online] Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/court-fees-are-a-breach-of-human-rights-says-leading-criminologist-a6669606.html [Accessed 2 Nov. 2018].
Ellis, K. (2018). Crime in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics. [online] Ons.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/yearendingjune2018 [Accessed 3 Nov. 2018].
Flatley, J. (2018). Crime in England and Wales – Office for National Statistics. [online] Ons.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/june2017 [Accessed 5 Nov. 2018].
House of commons (2016). Efficiency in the criminal justice system. [online] authority of the house of commons, p.5. Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/72/72.pdf [Accessed 1 Nov. 2018].
Hucklesby, A. & Wahidin, A. (2013). Criminal Justice. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University press, p.1.
Ministry of Justice (2018). criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales, January to March 2018. [online] p.1. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/720026/ccsq-bulletin-jan-mar-2018.pdf [Accessed 2 Nov. 2018].
Newburn, T. (2017). Criminology. 3rd ed. new york: Routledge, p.697.
Open.justice.gov.uk. (2016). Courts. [online] Available at: http://open.justice.gov.uk/how-it-works/courts/ [Accessed 4 Nov. 2018].
Robinson, S. and Cussen, T. (2017). The criminology and criminal justice companion. london: Palgrave, p.153.