Essay Example on Identification of strangers is marred by mistakes Emanating








Identifying strangers Identification of strangers is marred by mistakes emanating from mental processes such as acquisition memory retention and retrieval of memory Acquisition memory is the insight of a situation when the relevant details are stored in the human mind Retention memory is the procedure of saving and retraining the information to the day it is required for retrieval Retrieval of Memory is a mental process that entails the moment when data acquired during the acquisition process is recalled for use in building a case and in the entire process of criminal investigation The three process play a critical role in the justification and therefore possess necessary consequences which may lead to an erroneous conviction Identification is dependent on various circumstances that interfere with the accuracy of perception The events are time available to observe the individual commotions attention during observation racial differences for the individual and the witness and the stress levels of the observer during the event Photo identifications unreliability Mugshots are bound to evoke emotions above being leading to conclusions The questions directed to the witness could also be distracting leading to wrong choices that may convict innocent suspects

At the point of committing a crime the defendant may have a different look to the one availed on the photo during the investigation The images may miss details that could be critical in the execution Justifications for the exclusionary Constitutional rights judicial integrity and deterrence are the main rationales around justifying an exclusionary rule The constitution protects its citizens against illegal arrests and forced confession By law every suspect has a right to access a lawyer in defense throughout the legal process Notable the fourth to the sixth and fourteenth amendment would be impractical devoid of the exclusionary rule Respect and honesty of the legal process are preserved by the rationale of judicial integrity limiting the cough from taking part in procedures outside the constitutional confines Crime control officers are bound to break the law during the daily process of building cases deterrence is vital in actualizing the process by abiding by the law Presently the U S supreme court houses justification through good faith Evidence gathered in good faith may be revealed to have been erroneous several years after a wrongful conviction The exception to the exclusionary rule The exclusionary rule has five exceptions namely collateral use cross examination tainted evidence inevitable and the defense by acts of good faith During preliminary proceedings bail and jury hearing collateral use is allowed Cross examination on the other hand may have a prosecutor use evidence gathered unlawfully which affect the ideal outcome of the proceeding Tainted evidence cannot be used in court unless the event at the moment indicates an existing relationship with officers There are cases where investigators break laws when accessing proof this information is covered by inevitable discovery

The exception of good faith entails professionals who act by guiding motivation of compliance with the laid amendments Subjective and objective test of entrapment There are two tests of entrapment are subjective and objective criteria The latter relies on potential contemplations on the state of mind of a defendant Objective tests avoid reliance on factors that motivated the offender but the involvement of an administration in the crime Subjective elements consider the suspect and motivation by the government The aspect of the defendant checks whether the offender had intentions to commit the crime only to be encouraged by the administration The second element answer the question whether the government created circumstances that catalyzed the situation Exclusionary rule and defense of entrapment There is no constitutional right to a defense of entrapment nor the exclusionary rule Formulation of counter remedies was controlled when the constitution intentionally omitted the provision to evade misuse of the clause from judges who may manipulate them to suit the cases at hand

Qualified immunity defense Qualified immunity defense ensures accountability among public officials tend to shield officials from liability and harassment in their line of work The test is not complicated for the officers since they are not liable for official deeds when subjected to objective legal reasonableness test measured through clearly established rules at the moment of the action Officers easily pass the test owed to their discretionary nature of their work The protection shields them from endless lawsuits State civil lawsuits Federal civil rights act and tort lawsuits are often applied to state officers State tort lawsuits sue individuals from damage emanating from issues such as false arrests assault malicious breakages among others On the other hand federal civil rights act allow a plaintiff to seek court intervention against law enforcement officers deputies and their heads for violation of constitutional rights Suing judges and prosecutors for damage Unlike judges prosecutors can be sued for damages Absolute immunity protects judges from such lawsuits but can only be voted out or impeached where the citizens find them to be acting in bad faith Prosecutors fall under functional immunity based on the interaction the prosecutor handled during the proceeding

Write and Proofread Your Essay
With Noplag Writing Assistance App

Plagiarism Checker

Spell Checker

Virtual Writing Assistant

Grammar Checker

Citation Assistance

Smart Online Editor

Start Writing Now

Start Writing like a PRO