Reference no: EM133516677
Murder in the Gym: Due Process Model by Dr. Sanchez (Chapter 1).
Back to the gym murder, the due process model would want to see all the formalized legal practices afforded to this case in order to hold him accountable for the shooting. If this man did not receive fair and equitable treatment, then the fear is this can happen to other cases and offenders. Therefore, due process wants the system to move through all the stages to avoid mistakes and ensure the rights of all suspects and defendants. If the man in the gym pled not guilty due to the reason of insanity, then he can ask for a jury trial to determine whether he is legally insane. The courts would then try the case and may present evidence to a jury, ultimately deciding his fate. The goal is not to be quick, but to be thorough. Because the Bill of Rights protects the defendant's rights, the criminal justice system should concentrate on those rights over the victim's rights, which are not listed. Additionally, limiting police power would be seen as positive to prevent oppressing individuals and stepping on rights. The rules, procedures, and guidelines embedded in the Constitution should be the framework of the criminal justice system, and controlling crime would be secondary. Guilt would get established on the facts and if the government legally followed the correct procedures. If the police searched the gym shooter's home without a warrant and took evidence then that evidence should be inadmissible, even if that means they cannot win the case.
1. Which of the two models of the criminal justice system do you think is the best way to handle the shooting at the local gym? Explain your answer.
2. Based on what you know about mass shootings in the United States, which model do you think is used when mass shooting suspects are captured alive? Give an example of a specific mass shooting case to justify your answer.
3. Discuss what the primary goal of the criminal justice system should be: to control crime, ensure due process, or both?.
4. Is there ever so much evidence against someone who has committed mass murder, that we should forgo the process and just lock the person away based on the obvious facts? Justify your answer either way.