The Crime Control Model and Due Process Model is a representation of two systems that are completely different from one another and are in competition with one another to be a priority in the functioning of the criminal justice process (Neubauer, 2001, p 12). “The Due Process Model” proceeds from the premise that protecting the rights of the individual is most important, whereas in the Crime Control Model” holds that reducing crime is the key value.” (Neubauer, 2001, 12) When comparing the two control models their opinions differ completely in reference to the causes of crime. Additionally when comparing crime control and due process models one need to remember, “Proponents of both models embrace constitutional values which are necessary to the kind of society in which American wish to live.” (Zalman, 2008) In the following paper, plea-bargaining and the three strikes law are chosen I will discuss the policies conflict, and crime control model versus the consensus and due process model. In addition answers will be given to questions about the effects on law enforcement, courts, differences between State and Federal and local polices, and how to see the effectiveness of these polices. Compare and Contrast of Policies
The use of plea bargaining is very controversial in the criminal justice system because of the fear that innocent defendants would take a plea and then the judge would impose unduly sentences (Neubauer, 2008, p. 20). Also the criticism focuses on the deterrent effect of the punishment itself. According to the crime control model, court hearings have eroded the deterrent effect of punishment (Neubauer, 2009, p. 20). “Not only is the problem serious, but there is evidence that it is getting worse, suggesting that, whatever deterrent effect the criminal justice system does have, its effectiveness in deterring crime may be decreasing over time.” (Barnett-Hagel, 1977) All though some believe plea bargains allow the guilty to escape with a lighter sentence therefore it weakens the adversary system because a person is innocent until proven and every defendant has the right to trial. Critics claim plea bargains are secret, sneaky arrangements that are often opposing to the individual’s will. Three Strikes Law
Many issues of the three strikes law have been unintended and caused very big impacts. In summary because of the wide scope of the provisions of California’s three-strikes law the result is long prison terms for less serious crimes (Brown, 2005). Among the 36,000 second-strikers, less than one-fourth were sent to prison for a violent offense (Brown, 2005). Second, prosecutorial discretion over charging and plea bargaining has resulted in very different application of the law between different jurisdictions within the state (Legislative Analyst Office, 1995). Also African-Americans make up 31% of inmates in the state’s prisons but 37% of offenders convicted under two strikes and 44% of three strikes offenders (Legislative Analyst Office, 1995). Comparing Plea Bargaining and Three Strikes Law
Even though each jurisdiction plea bargaining process varies, “from a highly adversarial system and setting to one in which the participants cooperatively seek “substantive justice” and from a court where only charges may be bargained because of set and mandatory sentencing policies to one that focuses on sentences because they are authorized to be indeterminate for most and almost all offenses (Hall, 2005).
Due Process Model
Even though the Due Process model is supposed to resemble an obstacle course the values are based upon reducing of crime and not always assuming law enforcement’s fact-finding is correct which is realistic because the model leaves lots of room for error. (Gioson, 2005) (Neubauer, 2001, p 13) Due process is said to assume automatically that the individual is guilty of the alleged charge before their case is even proven therefore within...